[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 553-1073]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A joint resolution (H.J. Res 2) making further continuing 
     appropriations for the fiscal year 2003, and for other 
     purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from 
Alaska is recognized.
  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, because of the circumstances, I really 
don't have a prepared statement. I wish to outline for the Senate how 
we intend to proceed. We have been working for some time trying to 
obtain a process by which we could proceed to act on the 11 
appropriations bills for the fiscal year 2003 which were not completed 
by the end of the last Congress.
  I commend my good friend from West Virginia and his staff for 
assistance in working with us to work out this procedure. These bills 
that will soon be included in an omnibus amendment to this continuing 
resolution are familiar to the Senate. We worked on them throughout the 
last year. And I wish to say that to the best of my knowledge the 
components of this bill, except for one portion, were worked on on a 
bipartisan basis by the staffs of the 11

[[Page 554]]

subcommittees that handled these 11 bills. I can't say that there has 
been total agreement on the part of anybody as to what we have done, 
but we have proceeded to reduce the 11 bills that were involved to the 
amount of the President's request, which was $750.5 billion, plus an 
amount that is represented by a budget request for the fire items that 
are included in the bill of $825 million. In doing so, we come down 
considerably in many of these bills.
  But I point out to the Senate that the Government has been operating 
under the CRs that have been passed since October 1. All of the 
agencies affected by these bills have been operating on the basis of 
the 2002 appropriations level--the enacted level of funds for those 
agencies. If we do not finish these bills now, they will continue to 
act under the 2002 level until obviously we do something to take us 
down to the end of this fiscal year.
  I have taken the position that the sooner we can enact these 11 bills 
the better off all the agencies are, and the better off the Congress is 
because our job is to turn to the requirements of the law to deal with 
the fiscal year 2004 bills through the budget process and through the 
consideration of the 13 bills that we have in the Appropriations 
Committee through the individual subcommittees and get them done this 
year--God willing--according to the normal schedule and before 
September 30. We cannot do that if we labor over these bills 
intensively for a period of time.
  I am pleased to say that everyone concerned has been very 
cooperative, and, above all, the members of the Appropriations 
Committee on both sides of the aisle have worked hard to get us where 
we are today.
  The amendment that I will soon present contains not only that portion 
that I mentioned in terms of a series of bills but it contains the 
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and 
Related Agencies appropriations for fiscal year 2003. It provides 
budget authority for Agriculture, rural development, and the 
nutritional programs.
  There is in this bill $670.4 million--more than the President's 
request--and more than $1.1 billion more than 2002.
  I have a whole series of highlights on this bill. I don't want to 
take the time of the Senate to outline the individual ones. We will do 
that as we proceed on the bill. There are definitely needs for the 
programs for each of these items.
  The second bill we have is the Commerce, State, Justice and related 
agencies appropriations bill. Again, this is the recommendation of the 
subcommittee as adjusted by the process I just outlined. It is 
approximately $2.5 billion above the 2002 enacted funding level.
  These, of course, are a series of highlights. I may later ask to put 
them all in the Record as part of my opening statement. I want to 
review these outlines later. I do not make that request now.
  We also have the District of Columbia appropriations bill. It makes 
appropriations for the District of Columbia. It is an item that is 
substantially higher than the President's request. It is a total of 
$512 million in discretionary budget authority for the District of 
Columbia.
  We have the energy and water appropriations bill. It recommends 
$26.164 billion for 2003. It exceeds the President's request by $649 
million, and it exceeds the 2002 level by $900 million.
  We have the foreign operations bill among the 11 included in this 
amendment. This bill is $221 million below the President's request. It 
is also below the fiscal year 2002 level by $73.5 million.
  The Department of the Interior bill provides $19.18 billion in total 
discretionary budget authority--an increase of $641 million over the 
enacted level of 2002. It is $36 million over the President's budget 
request for 2003.
  The Labor-Health and Human Services bill deals with the President's 
request, which was $131.9 billion. This bill as recommended by my 
amendment will be $131.3 billion. The details will be in the items that 
I will put in the Record.
  On the Department of Transportation and related agencies, we 
recommend $64.6 billion for 2003. This is $9.4 billion more than the 
President's request of $55.2 billion. I do not have a figure above the 
2002 level. I will put it in the Record later.
  We have the Treasury and general government appropriations bill. This 
provision is in the bill at $34.5 billion. The President's request was 
$34.2 billion, and the 2002 level was $32.8 billion. This is another 
area where it is above the President's request.
  The last section is the section that deals with items that have been 
added to the 13 bills. One is to fund the election reform bill that was 
enacted in the last Congress. The maximum authorized level for that 
program for 12 months for fiscal 2003 was $2.35 billion. For the 
remainder of the bill, this amendment that I offer will fund election 
reform at $1.5 billion.
  For drought relief, we have set a target of $3.1 billion. The 
provisions of the bill as presented by the Agriculture Committee and 
others will adjust the mandatory programs in order to provide relief 
for the drought that has occurred.
  We also have a provision dealing with Medicare adjustments, dealing 
with physicians' payments and payments for rural hospitals. The total 
amount would be $1.6 billion. These items would be offset by a 1.6-
percent across-the-board cut on the other 11 bills.
  We have done our best to present to the Senate--I have, working with 
the members of the committee and their staffs--a bill to meet the 
requirements of the administration, to meet the requirements of the 
agencies, and to present a bill that can be taken to conference and 
worked out with the House in conference.
  Madam President, I point out, the House has not passed any bills. The 
House has passed this continuing resolution, to give us a House-passed 
bill, to return this bill to the House for their consideration. We are 
hopeful that the House will enact its own version and send it to 
conference. As has been outlined already by the unanimous consent 
agreement that is in place, we will seek a conference with the House at 
the earliest possible time.
  I urge Senators to consider the problem we face, and that is the 
problem of catching up with the bills we should have enacted last year. 
I point no fingers as to reasons we did not. The Senate Appropriations 
Committee, under the chairmanship of Senator Byrd, did report out all 
the bills. We were prepared to act, but circumstances at that time made 
it impossible for us to pass those bills.
  Under the circumstances now, we cannot afford the process of passing 
separate bills, facing vetoes or veto threats, and having bills go back 
and forth between the Houses. If we are going to catch up and start the 
process of dealing with the 2004 appropriations, as is our duty in this 
new Congress, we must put these requests of the past, for the remainder 
of this fiscal year, in place. We must pass this amendment or something 
similar to it as soon as is possible, as soon as the Congress can agree 
and the President will concur with our actions.
  I will say, I have discussed this at length with the Office of 
Management and Budget. I cannot say they approve of what we are doing, 
but I can say they approve of the fact that we are doing something. So 
that is what I am asking the Senate to do tonight, to start the process 
of doing something on these accumulated items that must be faced by 
this Congress as quickly as possible.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the 
Record summaries from which I read partially.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

   Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and 
              Related Agencies Appropriations Act, FY 2003

       The bill provides $74.2 billion in total obligational 
     budget authority for agriculture, rural development, and 
     nutrition programs for FY 2003. This is $670.4 million more 
     than the President's budget request and $1.1 billion more 
     than FY 2002.
       Of this total, $17.4 billion is discretionary spending and 
     the remainder is mandatory spending for such programs as food 
     stamps ($26.3 billion), child nutrition ($10.6 billion), 
     payments to the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation fund ($2.9 
     billion) and the Commodity Credit Corporation ($16.3 
     billion).

[[Page 555]]

       The bill continues to fund rental payments to the General 
     Services Administration (GSA) in the United States Department 
     of Agriculture's (USDA's) buildings and facilities account. 
     The President's budget proposes to fund rental costs in the 
     budgets of each USDA agency.
       Over half (56%) of the FY 2003 spending in this bill ($41.9 
     billion) is devoted to domestic food assistance (Title IV of 
     the bill): food stamps, child nutrition, WIC (supplemental 
     nutrition program for women, infants, and children), 
     commodity and other food assistance programs.

                               HIGHLIGHTS


             highlights from title I, agricultural programs

       The bill provides $986.9 million in appropriations for Farm 
     Service Agency salaries and expenses, an increase of $47.9 
     million over the fiscal year 2002 level. This amount is 
     supplemented by $281 million in transfers from other USDA 
     program accounts for a total amount of $1.278 billion.
       The bill provides $4.07 billion in authorized loan levels 
     for agricultural credit programs for farmers, $175 million 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Funding for the Food Safety and Inspection Service is 
     $759.8 million, an increase of $44 million from last year.
       Agricultural research, education, and extension activities 
     total $2.3 billion. This includes a decrease of $18.0 million 
     for Agricultural Research Service (ARS) buildings and 
     facilities, an increase of $74.1 million for research 
     activities for ARS, and a $128.2 million increase in total 
     funding for the Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
     Extension Service (CSREES). The ARS is provided $1.15 
     billion, and activities of the CSREES are funded at a level 
     of $1.16 billion.
       The Committee provides $16.3 billion in mandatory payments 
     required to reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) 
     for net realized losses.


             highlights of title II, conservation programs

       The bill provides a total funding level of $1.04 billion 
     for the various conservation programs of the Department of 
     Agriculture. This is an increase of $74.6 million from the 
     regular appropriations for fiscal year 2002. Funding of $840 
     million is provided for the conservation operations account 
     of the Natural Resources Conservation Service. This is $61 
     million above the fiscal year 2002 level.


               highlights of title III, rural development

       Rural housing loan authorizations are $3.9 billion. This is 
     $553.6 million less than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Funding for rural rental assistance is $730 million, an 
     increase of $28 million from the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Funding for the Rural Community Advancement Program, which 
     includes funds for water and waste disposal loans and grants, 
     solid waste management grants, community facility loans and 
     grants, and rural business enterprise grants, is increased to 
     $867.2 million. This is $60.6 million above the fiscal year 
     2002 level.


             Highlights of Title IV, Domestic Food Programs

       The bill provides $10.6 billion for child nutrition 
     programs.
       Funding for the Food Stamp program totals $26.29 billion. 
     This amount includes a $2 billion reserve, $140 million for 
     the emergency food assistance program, and $1.377 billion for 
     nutrition assistance for Puerto Rico.
       The Special Supplemental Feeding Program for Women, 
     Infants, and Children (WIC) is funded at $4.751 billion. This 
     is an increase of $403 million from the fiscal year 2002 
     level and the same as the President's budget request.
       The Commodity Assistance Program is funded at $167 million.
       As proposed in the President's budget, the Department of 
     Health and Human Services will fund the elderly feeding 
     program beginning in fiscal year 2003. Funding is no longer 
     provided to the Department of Agriculture for this program.


           Highlights of Title V, Foreign Assistance Programs

       Funding for salaries and expenses for the Foreign 
     Agricultural Service is $135.4 million, $9.4 million more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Public Law 480 programs are funded at the following program 
     levels: Title I--$154.7 million; and Title II--$1.185 
     billion, $335 million more than the fiscal year 2002 level.


            Highlights of Title VI, FDA and Related Agencies

       Total direct appropriations for the Food and Drug 
     Administration (FDA) is $1.4 billion, which is $25.4 million 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Total funding for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission 
     is $93.98 million, $6 million more than the fiscal year 2002 
     level.

                            BILL PROVISIONS


                     Title I--Agricultural Programs

       Total Funding: Title I provides a total of $25.5 billion in 
     mandatory and discretionary funding for various agricultural 
     programs. Of this total, $16.3 billion is for the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation and $2.9 billion is for the Federal Crop 
     Insurance Corporation fund. The remainder funds the 
     agricultural research, executive operations, agricultural 
     marketing services, cooperative state research, extension 
     service, animal and plant health inspection, food safety and 
     inspection, and farm assistance programs.
       Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC): Funds CCC at such sums 
     as may be necessary, estimated in the budget to be $16.3 
     billion for net realized losses incurred from the commodity 
     price and farm income support activities. This is $4 billion 
     less than the estimated fiscal year 2002 level.
       Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund: Recommends an 
     appropriation of such sums as necessary, estimated to be $2.9 
     billion. This is $13.8 million less than the estimated fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS): The bill 
     provides $759.8 million in direct appropriations, which is 
     $44 million more than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Farm Service Agency (FSA): The bill provides $1.27 billion 
     for Farm Service Agency Salaries and Expenses, an increase of 
     $55 million over the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Farm Credit Programs: The bill provides an estimated $4.1 
     billion for farm loans, $175 million more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. Included in this amount is $1.147 billion 
     for farm ownership direct and guaranteed loans and $2.817 
     billion for farm operating direct and guaranteed loans.
       Research and Extension: Agricultural research and extension 
     programs are increased $74.1 million from the fiscal year 
     2002 levels. Appropriations recommended for the Agricultural 
     Research Service total $1.15 billion. For the Cooperative 
     State Research, Education, and Extension Service, $1.16 
     billion is recommended, including $651 million for research 
     and education activities, $453 million for extension 
     activities, and $48 million for integrated activities.
       Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS): The 
     Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is funded at 
     $748.8 million.
       Agriculture Marketing and Inspection: The Agricultural 
     Marketing Service is funded at $91.7 million and the Grain 
     Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration is funded 
     at $44.5 million.


                    Title II--Conservation Programs

       Conservation Programs: The bill increases funding to $1.04 
     billion for the Natural Resources Conservation Service, which 
     is a $74 million increase from the fiscal year 2002 regular 
     appropriations bill. Within the Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service $840 million is included for 
     conservation operations, $10.96 million for watershed surveys 
     and planning, $105 million for watershed and flood prevention 
     operations, $30 million for watershed rehabilitation, and $50 
     million for resource conservation and development.


      Title III--Rural Economic and Community Development Programs

       Rural Housing and Community Development: The total funded 
     rural housing loan authorization level is $3.93 billion, 
     including $3.76 billion for single-family housing direct and 
     guaranteed loans, $120 million for rental housing loans, and 
     $35 million for housing repair loans. No funding is 
     recommended for multi-family housing guaranteed loans.
       Rural Rental Assistance: Funding for rural rental 
     assistance is $730 million, $28 million more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       Rural Community Advancement Program (RCAP): Funding for the 
     Rural Community Advancement Program (RCAP), which includes 
     funds for water and waste disposal loans and grants, solid 
     waste management grants, community facility loans and grants, 
     and rural business enterprise grants, is increased $60.6 
     million from the fiscal year 2002 level to $867.2 million.
       Rural Electric and Telecommunications: The bill funds a 
     total rural electric and telecommunications loan level of 
     $5.6 billion, $1 billion more than the fiscal year 2002 
     level.
       Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program: A funding level 
     of $52 million is provided for the Distance Learning and 
     Telemedicine program for grants and loan subsidy costs, which 
     supports a $129.5 million loan level.


                    Title IV--Domestic Food Programs

       Food Stamp Program (FSP): Funding for the Food Stamp 
     program totals $26.29 billion. This amount includes a $2 
     billion reserve, $140 million for the emergency food 
     assistance program, and $1.377 billion for nutrition 
     assistance for Puerto Rico.
       Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Feeding Program: 
     Recommends an appropriation of $4.751 billion for WIC, which 
     is $403 million more than the fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     same as the budget request. This amount includes a $125 
     million contingency reserve and $25 million for the farmer's 
     market nutrition program.
       Child Nutrition Programs (CNP): To improve the health and 
     well-being of the nation's children, the child nutrition 
     programs include school breakfast and lunch programs, child 
     and adult care food programs, summer food services, and 
     nutrition education and training programs. In addition, the 
     special milk program provides funding for milk service in 
     schools, nonprofit child care centers, and camps which have 
     no other federally assisted food programs. For these 
     programs, the Committee provides an appropriation of $5.8 
     billion, plus a transfer from

[[Page 556]]

     section 32 of $4.7 billion, for a total program level of 
     $10.6 billion, which is $492.9 million more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       Commodity Assistance Program (CAP): The Commodity 
     Assistance Program is funded at $167 million.
       Food Donations Programs: As proposed in the President's 
     budget, the Department of Health and Human Services will fund 
     the elderly feeding program beginning in fiscal year 2003. 
     Funding is no longer provided to the Department of 
     Agriculture for this program.


            Title V--Foreign Assistance and Related Programs

       Foreign Agricultural Service: The Committee provides $135.5 
     million, which is a $9.4 million increase from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       Public Law 480 (Food for Peace): The bill appropriates $1.3 
     billion for Public Law 480 accounts, which serve as the 
     primary means for the U.S. provision of food assistance 
     overseas. A total program level of $1.185 billion is for 
     grants under Title II for food aid for humanitarian relief 
     through private voluntary organizations or through 
     multilateral organizations like the World Food Program, an 
     amount which is a $335 million increase from the fiscal year 
     2002 level. It further funds a Title I direct loan level of 
     $154.7 million (the same as the fiscal year 2002 level) and 
     appropriates $25.2 million for ocean freight differential 
     costs.


                   Title VI--FDA and Related Agencies

       Food and Drug Administration (FDA): Funding for salaries 
     and expenses of the Food and Drug Administration totals 
     $1.632 billion. This is $135 million more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level, and includes an increase of $48.7 million in 
     new budget authority from the fiscal year 2002 level 
     (including supplemental emergency appropriations), a $61 
     million increase in prescription drug user fee collections, 
     and $25.1 million in new medical device user fee collections. 
     The FDA buildings and facilities account is funded at $11 
     million.
       Commodity Futures Trading Commission: Appropriates $93.9 
     million, which is $23.3 million more than the fiscal year 
     2002 level. Increased funding is provided for pay 
     comparability with other Federal financial institutions.
       Farm Credit Administration: Recommends a limitation on 
     administrative expenses of $38.4 million, which is $1.7 
     million above the fiscal year 2002 administrative expense 
     limitation.


                     Title VII--General Provisions

       Total appropriations of $2.496 million are appropriated for 
     Bill Emerson and Mickey Leland Hunger Fellowships through the 
     Congressional Hunger Center.
       The bill continues a provision to allow proprietary centers 
     to participate in the Child and Adult Care Feeding Program if 
     at least 25 percent of the children served are eligible to 
     receive a free or reduced-price meal, at a cost of $22 
     million.
       Limitations are established on mandatory funding for 
     sections 2505, 6030, 6405, and 9010 of P.L. 107-171, as well 
     as the export enhancement program.

     Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies 
                    Appropriations Bill for FY 2003

     Noteworthy:
       The recommendation for the Commerce, Justice, State, the 
     Judiciary, and related agencies appropriation bill for fiscal 
     year 2003 is $47.1 billion. This is approximately $2.5 
     billion above the fiscal year 2002 funding level. The 
     President's budget request for fiscal year 2003 was $44.0 
     billion.
     Bill Highlights:
       This bill makes appropriations for the Departments of 
     Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary, and related agencies 
     for the period of October 1, 2002 through September 30, 2003. 
     The bill provides funding to combat terrorism, fight crime, 
     enhance drug enforcement, address the shortcomings of the 
     immigration process, support the judicial process, manage the 
     commerce of the United States, improve State Department 
     operations, and fulfill the needs of the independent agencies 
     that fall under the Subcommittee's jurisdiction.
       The following are just a few of the initiatives within this 
     bill:
       Fighting Terrorism The bill provides funding to allow State 
     and Local first responders to purchase equipment and undergo 
     training necessary to prevent and respond to acts of 
     terrorism. The bill also addresses the root causes of 
     terrorism by promoting democracy in underdeveloped regions of 
     the world.
       Protecting America's Children The bill includes funding to 
     protect our children in their schools. This effort includes 
     training School Resource Officers to prevent and deter acts 
     of terrorism. Funding is also provided to enhance the 
     security of schools attended by American children overseas.
       Protecting Small Investors The bill allows the Securities 
     and Exchange Commission to hire at least 700 new staff to 
     pursue corporate malfeasance and financial fraud, ensure 
     enhanced public disclosure by corporations and stock 
     analysts, and expand its examination and inspection program.
     Justice: $24.1 billion
       $284.2 million for Anti-Terrorism, Joint Terrorism, and 
     Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Forces, $3.9 billion for the 
     FBI, $1.5 billion for the DEA, $5.7 billion for the INS, $2.0 
     billion for training, equipment, exercise, and research and 
     development programs to combat domestic terrorism, $1.4 
     billion for State and local law enforcement grants.
     Commerce: $6.0 billion
       $100.2 million for BIS, $72.2 million for economic and 
     statistical analysis, $559.0 million for the Census Bureau, 
     $73.5 million for NTIA, $1.2 billion for the PTO, $721.2 
     million for NIST, $3.3 billion for NOAA.
     Judiciary: $5.0 billion
       $97.7 million for the Supreme Court, including renovation 
     of the building and grounds, $276.3 million for court 
     security.
     State: $7.2 billion
       $3.6 billion for Diplomatic and Consular Program, $296.0 
     million for information technology initiatives, $237.9 
     million for educational and cultural exchange programs, $1.3 
     billion for embassy security and construction, $1.5 billion 
     for U.S. obligations to international organizations and 
     peacekeeping, $470.2 million for international broadcasting 
     activities.
     Related Agencies:
       $320.4 million for the EEOC, $275.4 million for the FCC, 
     $175.1 million for the FTC, $329.4 million for Legal Services 
     Corporation, $656.7 million for the SEC, $788.5 million for 
     SBA.

          District of Columbia Appropriations Bill for FY 2003

     Noteworthy:
       FY'03 Senate Recommendation--$512 million, FY'03 
     President's Request--$378.8 million, FY'02 Enacted--$608 
     million.
     Bill Highlights:
       Makes appropriations for the government of the District of 
     Columbia for the period of October 1, 2002 through September 
     30, 2003.
       $10 million for hospital bioterrorism preparedness in the 
     District--These funds will begin to prepare the District's 
     hospitals for a possible attack that may include the use of 
     biological, chemical, radiological, and nuclear weapons, as 
     well as high yield explosives. Funds will be used for the 
     construction of decontamination and quarantine facilities at 
     Children's Hospital and Washington Hospital Center.
       $20 million for DC charter school facilities--These funds 
     will support a credit enhancement fund to assist charter 
     schools in securing financing, a direct loan program for 
     facilities, and a per-pupil facilities allocation.
       $166 million for the DC Courts--Of this amount, $31.2 
     million will support the Family Court.
       $55 million for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative. Most 
     of these funds will be used to begin to clean up the 
     severely-polluted Anacostia River in order to attract 
     development and recreation to this area.
       $17 million for DC resident tuition support--These funds 
     allow DC residents to attend State schools at the in-State 
     tuition rate.
       $15 million for Emergency planning and security costs in 
     the District.

             Energy & Water Appropriations Bill for FY2003

     Noteworthy:
       The Senate bill in total recommends $26.164 billion for 
     FY03, The Senate bill exceeds the President's request by $649 
     million, The Senate bill exceeds the FY02 level by $900 
     million.
     Bill Highlights:
       Army Corps of Engineers; The Senate bill provides $4.55 
     billion that is, $375 million above the President's request, 
     $61 million above the FY02 bill.
       Bureau of Reclamation and related Interior accounts, The 
     Senate bill provides $956 million, which is, $75 million 
     above the President's request, $41 million above the current 
     year level.
       Department of Energy, The Senate bill provides $20.93 
     billion, which is, $31 million over the President's request, 
     $960 million over the current year level.


            Major Highlights within the Department of Energy

       NNSA Weapons Activities (Stockpile Stewardship), The Senate 
     bill provides $6.1 billion, which is, $242 million over the 
     President's request, $543 million over the current year 
     level.
       NNSA Nonproliferation activities, The Senate bill provides 
     $1.1 billion, which is, $2 million over the President's 
     request, $14 million below the current year level.
       Environmental clean-up, The Senate bill provides $7.3 
     billion, which is, $141 million below the President's 
     request, $174 million above the current year level.
       Nuclear Waste Disposal (Yucca Mountain), The Senate bill 
     provides $336 million, which is, $255 million below the 
     President's request, $39 million below the current year 
     level.
       Renewable Energy R&D, The Senate bill provides $448 
     million, which is, $41 million above the President's request, 
     $52 million above the current year level.
       Nuclear Energy R&D, The Senate bill provides $324 million, 
     which is, $75 million above the President's request, $48 
     million above the current year level.

[[Page 557]]

       Science Research, The Senate bill provides $3.33 billion in 
     basic scientific research, which is, $50 million more than 
     the President's request, $96 million above the current year 
     level.


                          Independent Agencies

       The bill provides $74 million for the Appalachian Regional 
     Commission, an increase of $8 million over the President's 
     request and $3 million over the current year.
       The bill provides $15 million for the Delta Regional 
     Authority, an increase of $5 million over the President's 
     request and $5 million over the current year.
       The bill provides a total budget of $585 for the Nuclear 
     Regulatory Commission, the same as the budget request and an 
     increase of $62 million over the current year.

           Foreign Operations Appropriation Bill for FY 2003

     Noteworthy:
       The FY 2003 bill provides $16,249,314,000 in discretionary 
     funds for Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related 
     Programs. This is $221,418,000 below the President's FY 2003 
     request of $16,470,732,000, and $73,586,000 below the FY 2002 
     enacted level.
     Bill Highlights:
       The bill includes the FY 2003 Economic Support Fund (ESF) 
     and Foreign Military Financing (FMF) requests for the Camp 
     David countries: $600,000,000 and $2,100,000,000, 
     respectively, for Israel; and, $615,000,000 and 
     $1,300,000,000, respectively, for Egypt. The bill also 
     includes $250,000,000 in ESF and $198,000,000 in FMF 
     assistance for Jordan, and $75,000,000 in ESF assistance for 
     the West Bank and Gaza.
       The bill provides a total of $220,000,000 for assistance 
     for Afghanistan from all accounts, including $5,000,000 for 
     women's development activities.
       The bill provides $530,000,000 for the Assistance for 
     Eastern Europe and Baltic States (SEED) account and 
     $765,000,000 for the Assistance for Independent States of the 
     former Soviet Union (FSA) account, an increase of $35,000,000 
     and $10,000,000, respectively, over the FY 2003 request.
       The bill provides $1,790,000,000 for the Child Survival and 
     Health Programs Fund--an increase of $356,500,000 over the FY 
     2002 enacted level--of which $791,500,000 is for assistance 
     for HIV/AIDS programs, including $50,000,000 for the 
     President's International Mother and Child HIV Prevention 
     Initiative and $200,000,000 for a contribution to the Global 
     Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
       The bill provides $650,000,000 for the Andean Counterdrug 
     Initiative (ACI)--an increase of $25,000,000 over the FY 2002 
     enacted level. The bill also provides the authority to 
     transfer $35,000,000 from the International Narcotics Control 
     and Law Enforcement account to the ACI, resulting in an 
     appropriation to ACI that is $46,000,000 lower than the FY 
     2003 request.
       The bill provides $80,000,000 for International Military 
     Training and Education Programs which equals the FY 2003 
     request. It also includes $4,072,000,000 for Foreign Military 
     Financing grants, which is $35,000,000 below the FY 2003 
     requested level.
       The bill restricts $75,000,000 for assistance for the 
     Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO). The 
     President may waive this restriction and provide up to 
     $3,500,000 to KEDO, if he determines that it is vital to 
     national security interests to do so, and provides a written 
     policy justification to appropriate congressional committees.

Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill for 
                                FY 2003

     Noteworthy:
       The bill provides $19 billion in total discretionary budget 
     authority. The omnibus package contains $825 million to repay 
     amounts borrowed in FY 2002 for wildland fire suppression.
     Bill Highlights:
       The bill makes appropriations for the Department of the 
     Interior (except the Bureau of Reclamation), the Forest 
     Service, portions of the Department of Energy, the Indian 
     Health Service, and various related agencies for the period 
     of October 1, 2002 through September 30, 2003.
     Interior: $9.43 billion
       $1.86 billion for the Bureau of Land Management. The amount 
     provided restores the $45 million cut proposed in the budget 
     for Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT).
       $1.21 billion for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The 
     amount provided increases Fish and Wildlife Service operating 
     programs by $52 million, including a $46 million increase 
     specifically for refuge operations and maintenance.
       $2.29 billion for the National Park Service, including 
     increases of $50 million for park maintenance and $30 million 
     for park operations ($15 million over the request). The bill 
     provides the full increase requested ($16 million) for the 
     Natural Resource Challenge; an effort to better document and 
     understand the natural resources present in the park system.
       $915 million for the U.S Geological Survey, an increase of 
     $47 million over the budget request. Reinstates cuts for 
     water programs proposed in the budget request.
       $170 million for the Minerals Management Service.
       $297 million for the Office of Surface Mining and 
     Reclamation Enforcement, including an increase of $18 million 
     to restore a portion of cuts proposed for the abandoned mine 
     land reclamation program.
       $2.27 billion for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, including 
     $554 million for Indian education programs and $296 million 
     for Indian education construction. Rejects administration 
     proposed decrease for Tribal Community Colleges by adding $4 
     million over the budget request ($2 million over enacted 
     level).
       The Senate bill fully funds increases requested for Indian 
     trust reform in both the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the 
     Office of the Special Trustee.
     Forest Service: $3.95 billion
       $1.35 billion for Forest Service operations, an increase of 
     $22 million. Rejects research reorganization proposed in the 
     budget request, and funds new Pest and Pathogen fund ($14 
     million) to allow the Forest Service to respond to forest 
     health concerns in an expedited manner.
       Provides funding for wildland fire suppression by the 
     Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management at the 10 
     year average level ($421 FS/$160m BLM). The bill also 
     provides $415 million for Hazardous Fuels Reduction work by 
     the Forest Service and BLM, a level slightly above the budget 
     request and $20 million over the FY 2002 level.
       The bill also includes $825 million ($189m DOI/$636m FS) in 
     supplemental funds to repay amounts borrowed from other 
     accounts in FY 2002 to pay for wildland fire suppression. 
     This amount is equal to the amount requested by the 
     Administration, but less than the $1.25 billion in total 
     borrowing.
     Department of Energy: $1.76 billion
       $626 million for Fossil Energy R&D (including $150 million 
     for Clean Coal).
       $884 million for Energy Conservation, including $225 
     million for the Weatherization Assistance Program and $45 
     million for State Energy Grants.
       $80 million for the Energy Information Administration.
       $179 million for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and 
     Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.
     Indian Health Service: $2.82 billion
       Increases funding for Indian Health Service by $62 million 
     over enacted level.
     Other Related Agencies:
       $531 million for the Smithsonian Institution. The bill 
     provides the Smithsonian with an additional $6 million to 
     complete the National Museum of the American Indian on the 
     Mall.
       $93 million for the National Gallery of Art, including 
     funds to restore cuts proposed in the Special Exhibitions 
     program.
       $34 million for the John F. Kennedy Center for the 
     Performing Arts.
       $116 million for the NEA and $126 million for the NEH.

           Legislative Branch Appropriation Bill for FY 2003

     Noteworthy:
       The bill totals $2.34 billion, It is $66 million below the 
     request level and $66 million above the FY02 enacted level. 
     Increases are aimed primarily at security-related 
     requirements.
     Bill Highlights:
       The Legislative Branch bill provides funding for the Senate 
     and all legislative branch support agencies including the 
     Library of Congress, the General Accounting Office, Capitol 
     Police, and the Architect of the Capitol.
     Senate: $667.6 million
       Funds are provided to accommodate cost-of-living increases 
     and security-related requirements.
     Joint Items: $17 million
       Includes $3.66 million for the Joint Economic Committee, 
     $7.3 million for the Joint Committee on Taxation, $3 million 
     for the Office of Attending Physician, and $3 million for the 
     Capitol Guide Service
     Capitol Police: $203.8 million
       Provides for an increase of 269 employees, for a total of 
     1,839, and allows for a 9.1% payraise for officers.
     Office of Compliance: $2 million
     Congressional Budget Office: $32 million
     Architect of the Capitol: $334 million
     Library of Congress: $497 million
       Provides resources to eliminate the backlog of new material 
     which has not been cataloged, improve the financial 
     management system, and enhance the digital futures program. 
     Additional security-related funds are also included.
       Includes $87 million for the Congressional Research 
     Service.
     Government Printing Office: $119.8 million
       Includes $90 million for Congressional Printing and Binding 
     and $29.7 million for the Superintendent of Documents 
     program.
     General Accounting Office: $451 million
     Center for Foreign Leadership Development: $13 million

    Labor, Health & Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies 
                    Appropriations Bill for FY 2003

     Noteworthy:
       FY03 Recommendation $131,399,000,000, FY03 President's 
     Request $131,946,026,000, FY02 Funding Level 
     $127,658,471,000.

[[Page 558]]


     Bill Highlights:
       This bill makes appropriations for the Departments of 
     Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and related 
     agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003.
     Labor: $11,821,000,000
       $10.8 billion for the Employment & Training Administration, 
     $1.37 billion for Dislocated Worker Assistance, $900 million 
     for Adult training, $1.5 billion for the Job Corps, $218 
     million for Veterans Employment & Training.
       Health & Human Services: $60,750,000,000, $3.74 billion for 
     anti-bioterrorism programs, $27.1 billion for the National 
     Institutes of Health, $4.4 billion for the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention, $6.7 billion for Head Start, 
     $2.03 billion for Substance Abuse Treatment, $2.026 billion 
     for Ryan White AIDS programs including ADAP, $1.53 billion 
     for Community Health Centers, $741 million for the Maternal & 
     Child Health Block Grant, $1.7 billion for Low Income Home 
     Energy Assistance, $305 million for Title VII Health 
     Professions, $674 million for Health Professions, Total, $285 
     million for Children's Hospitals Graduate Medical Education, 
     $505 million for Promoting Safe & Stable Families, $45 
     million for the Compassion Capital Fund, $12.5 million for 
     Mentoring Children of Prisoners, $60 million for the Healthy 
     Communities Innovation Initiative, $741 million for 
     Abstinence Education.
     Education: $49,418,000,000
       $11.35 billion for Title I Grants to Local Education 
     Agencies, $832.5 million for Federal TRIO Programs, $2.85 
     billion for Teacher Quality State Grants, $1 billion for 21st 
     Century Community Learning Centers, $15 million for Literacy 
     through School Libraries, $4,100 for maximum grants available 
     through the Pell Grant program, $1 billion for Reading First, 
     $8.5 billion for Special Education--Grants to States Part B, 
     $200 million for Charter Schools $27.5 million for Voluntary 
     Public School Choice.
     Related Agencies
       $351 million for Domestic Volunteer Service Programs, $395 
     million for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (FY05), 
     $48.7 million for the CPB digitalization program.

Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 
                            FY 2003 (S. xxx)

     Noteworthy:
       The Committee recommendation includes $64.6 billion in 
     total budget resources for FY 03. This amount is $9.4 billion 
     more than the President's Request of $55.2 billion.
     Bill Highlights:
       S. XX makes appropriations for the Department of 
     Transportation and related agencies for the period of October 
     1, 2002 through September 30, 2003. This includes funding for 
     the U.S. Coast Guard, the Transportation Security 
     Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, the 
     Federal Highway Administration, the National Highway Traffic 
     Safety Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration, 
     Amtrak, Federal Transit Administration, Surface 
     Transportation Board, and the National Transportation Safety 
     Board.
       The Committee recommendation restores the $8.6 billion cut 
     to the Highway Program and funds the program at $31.8 
     billion--the same level provided in FY 02.
       The bill provides full funding for essential functions of 
     the newly created Department of Homeland Security, including 
     the U.S. Coast Guard and the Transportation Security 
     Administration.
       The committee recommendation also includes: Increased 
     funding for highway and aviation safety programs, Full 
     funding for the transit program and the FAA capital program, 
     46% increase in funding for Amtrak.
       The bill rejects new user fees requested by the 
     administration, which total $230 million. The proposed new 
     user fees have the effect of artificially reducing the 
     budgetary impact of the President's budget request, because 
     they assume authorization and enactment of the new fees and 
     include the offsetting collections in the budget, as though 
     this money was ``cash in hand.''


                 Office of the Secretary: $83.1 million

       The Committee recommendation is $15.9 million above the FY 
     02 enacted level.


       Transportation Security Administration (TSA): $5.3 billion

       As a critical agency of the newly created Department of 
     Homeland Security, the TSA is charged with ensuring security 
     across the U.S. transportation system, including aviation, 
     railways, highways, pipelines, and waterways.
       The Transportation Security Administration has been funded 
     at the requested level for FY03. This bill provides $124 
     million for the procurement of certified explosive detection 
     systems to screen all checked baggage and $250 million for 
     installation of these machines at our nation's airports.
       The bill also includes $100 million for grants to enhance 
     security at our nation's ports.


                      U.S. Coast Guard: $6 billion

       The Committee recommendation includes full funding for the 
     U.S. Coast Guard. This level of funding will allow the Coast 
     Guard to maintain their critical functions, including search 
     and rescue, drug enforcement, fisheries enforcement and 
     migrant interdiction as well as integrate additional 
     responsibilities as part of the new Department of Homeland 
     Security.
       The amount included is $206 million above the President's 
     request and $604.3 million above the FY 02 enacted level.
       The bill provides $480 million for the Integrated Deepwater 
     System (IDS).


          Federal Aviation Administration (FAA): $13.5 billion

       The Committee recommendation is $249.7 million above the FY 
     02 enacted level. This level of funding is $219 billion more 
     than the FY 02 enacted level.


          Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): $31.8 billion

       This program includes Federal-aid to highways, highway 
     research, and administration. The Committee recommendation 
     rejects the $8.6 billion cut that would have been required 
     under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century.


  Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA): $117.4 Million

       The funding provided in the bill is consistent with the 
     budget request and is $7.5 million above the FY 02 level.


      National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTA): $440 Million

       This program includes operations and research, and highway 
     safety grants to states. (FY 2002 enacted--$423.3 million). 
     The budget request $16.7 million more than President's 
     request.
       The Committee recommendation also includes: $10 million for 
     mobilizations to apprehend drunk drivers.


            Federal Railroad Administration: $985.1 Million

       The funding included in the bill is $273.8 million above 
     the Administration's request. This level of funding includes 
     $762.5 million for Amtrak--$241 million above the requested 
     level.
       The Committee recommendation includes: $118.3 million for 
     railroad safety and operations, $30 million for next 
     generation high-speed rail.


           Federal Transit Administration (FTA): $7.2 Billion

       The Committee recommendation includes funding for formula 
     grants, research, capital discretionary transit programs, 
     ``access to jobs'' and administrative expenses. This is a 
     substantial increase above the FY 02 level consistent with 
     the budgetary ``firewalls'' in TEA21.


      Research and Special Programs Administration: $43.7 Million

       The Committee recommendation is $5.3 million above the 
     President's budget request and $6.4 million above the FY 02 
     request. This funding is provided for hazardous materials 
     transportation safety programs, research, and pipeline safety 
     program.
       The Committee recommendation also includes: $63.9 million 
     for Pipeline safety.


             Office of the Inspector General: $57.4 Million

       The Committee recommendation is consistent with the 
     President's budget request. Funding is provided for 
     transportation-related audits and investigations.


              Surface Transportation Board: $19.5 Million

       The Committee has included $19.5 million, with $1 million 
     to be recovered by already established offsetting 
     collections.


          National Transportation Safety Board: $72.5 Million

       The Committee recommendation is $3.8 million above the 
     amount provided in FY 02 and is $2 million more than the 
     President's budget request.


      Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation: $13.3 Billion

   Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board: $5.1 
                                Million

       The VA/HUD FY 2003 Appropriations Bill makes appropriations 
     for the period of October 1, 2002 through September 31, 2003 
     for the Departments of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban 
     Development, and Independent Agencies.
       Among the key areas of primary funding in the bill are 
     $23.9 billion for VA Medical Care, $16.9 billion for the HUD 
     Certificate program which will provide the needed funding for 
     the renewal of all expiring section 8 vouchers, $5 billion 
     for the HUD Community Development Block Grant program, $1.95 
     billion for the HUD HOME program, $1.2 billion for HUD 
     Homeless Assistance, $8.2 billion for EPA (including $1.425 
     billion for the Clean Water SRF and $875 million for the 
     Drinking Water SRF), $3.2 billion for FEMA (including $843 
     million for Disaster Assistance [FEMA currently has some $2.9 
     billion in unobligated funds], $900 million for FIRE Act 
     grants, and $100 million for Cerro Grande fire grants), 
     $15.123 billion for NASA (including $1.5 billion for the 
     International Space Station and $115 million for the initial 
     investment in a new Orbital Space Plane), and $5.268 billion 
     for the NSF.

[[Page 559]]



 Treasury and General Government Appropriation Bill for FY 2003 (Bill 
                         Number When Available)

     Noteworthy:
       FY03 Recommendation: $34,533,464,000, FY03 President's 
     Request: $34,276,277,000, FY02 Funding Level: 
     $33,817,112,000.
     Bill Highlights:
       Treasury: $16.128 billion; ATF: $888.4 million, Customs 
     Service: $3.1 billion, IRS: $9.9 billion, Secret Service: $1 
     billion.
       United States Postal Service: $29 million.
       Executive Office of the President: $728.384 million; OMB: 
     $70.752 million, Office of National Drug Control Policy: 
     Salaries and Expenses: $26.456 million, Counter-drug 
     Technology Assessment Center: $40 million, HIDTA: $226.35 
     million, Special Forfeiture Fund: $172.7 million.
       Independent Agencies: $17.569 million; GSA construction: 
     $631.663 million, GSA repairs/alterations: $997.839 million, 
     National Archives: $270.939 million, Office of Personnel 
     Management: $261.791 million.

  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, again, I thank my friend from West 
Virginia for his courtesy. I know that while I have been working on 
these other matters, my friend has had a very erudite statement 
prepared, and I am prepared to listen to it.
  I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized 
under the previous order.
  Mr. BYRD. Madam President, first, I thank my esteemed colleague and 
dear friend, Senator Ted Stevens, for his characteristic courtesy, and 
for his friendship, and for the cooperation he has shown to me over 
many years of working together.
  I thank him for joining with me, last year, in reporting out of our 
committee all appropriations bills before the close of July.
  I thank all of the Republican members as well as the Democratic 
members of my committee who voted unanimously to report those 13 bills 
out of the Appropriations Committee, without a single vote cast against 
those bills.
  I am sorry that the situation has developed, as it has, when I must 
oppose the distinguished Senator's amendment. I always do whatever I 
have to do to meet my own conscience and to deal with requirements that 
are incumbent upon me as the chairman of the committee or as the 
ranking member of the committee, whichever is my role at the particular 
time.
  I do not like to be in a position of differing with my friend from 
Alaska, but there are times when we do have to differ. In this case, I 
find myself at odds with him, but I want to say here that it is only 
for the purposes of advancing this bill. It certainly does not cut 
across our friendship, as far as I am concerned, when I have to differ 
with Senator Stevens, and differ with him vigorously. He is still my 
friend.
  I understand what he has to do, as he sees his responsibilities. And 
I have to do what I have to do as I see my responsibilities. Our 
friendship is unaffected. I want to assure him of that, as far as I am 
concerned.
  Last July, almost 6 months ago, the Senate Appropriations Committee 
completed action on all 13 of our appropriations bills, each on a 
bipartisan unanimous vote. These bills restored essential funding for 
programs that the President proposed to cut.
  We provided $1.1 billion more than the President requested for 
veterans medical care. We restored the $8.6 billion cut proposed by the 
President in highway funding. The President proposed only a 1 percent 
increase for education programs. He would have turned the No Child Left 
Behind bill into another unfunded mandate. Our bill provided a 6 
percent increase for education, including key funding to reduce class 
size.
  We included sufficient funding to keep Amtrak operating. We restored 
over $1 billion of cuts that the President proposed for State and local 
law enforcement programs.
  We fully funded the President's proposed increases for homeland 
security programs, but we provided the funds through existing programs 
that our Nation's fire and police organizations support. We provided a 
significant increase for the Securities and Exchange Commission in 
order to investigate corporate fraud. We provided $400 million for 
election reform.
  Now this White House believes that these increases represent wasteful 
and unnecessary spending. Last year this White House worked with the 
House Republican leadership to slow the appropriations process down. 
The House has not passed a regular appropriations bill in nearly 6 
months.
  Let me repeat that. The House of Representatives has not passed a 
regular appropriations bill in nearly 6 months.
  The domestic agencies of the Government are now operating under the 
sixth--the sixth--continuing resolution, which expires on Friday, 
January 31.
  My friend, Senator Ted Stevens--who is the very able ranking minority 
member of the Appropriations Committee, who will soon succeed me as 
chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and who has already 
succeeded me as President pro tempore of the Senate--and I worked 
together to produce those 13 bi-partisan bills last summer. Each of 
those 13 appropriations bills was reported by the Senate Appropriations 
Committee with a unanimous vote--not a single vote cast against any one 
of the 13 appropriations bills.
  After the election, however, the President indicated his 
determination to limit discretionary spending to the arbitrary figure 
of $751.3 billion. This level will necessitate cuts of $9.8 billion 
from 11 of the bills approved last July. After providing for modest 
increases for homeland security programs, the substitute that Senator 
Stevens is forced to offer provides for a virtual freeze in all other 
domestic spending.
  I oppose the $9.8 billion cut that is contained in the substitute. 
The needs of the American people for homeland security, for education, 
for transportation, for veterans, for public health, and for other 
programs have not gone away. The needs are still there as plain as 
ever.
  I am not being critical of my colleague, Senator Stevens. I am not 
being critical of the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, 
Mr. Young of Florida. However, the President has now thrown down the 
gauntlet and is insisting on a $9.8 billion reduction, resulting in 
cuts in priority programs designed for what? Designed to defend our 
homeland, to educate our children, to improve our transportation 
systems, and strengthen our law enforcement programs.
  I am extremely disappointed, not with Senator Stevens or the other 
members of the Senate Appropriations Committee or my friend, the 
chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Mr. Young, or his 
ranking member, Mr. Obey, but with this administration, with this White 
House and its lack of vision and knowledge regarding the needs of the 
people of this country.
  With great fanfare, the President signed numerous authorization bills 
this year that would increase spending demands for many of these same 
important programs. Last January he signed the No Child Left Behind Act 
with great fanfare. The President signed the No Child Left Behind Act 
which had passed the Senate 87 to 10 and which endorsed additional 
resources in important education programs for our children. Last May, 
the President, Mr. Bush, signed a border security bill with great 
fanfare, which had passed the Senate 97 to nothing, which authorized 
strengthening glaring and dangerous weaknesses in our border security. 
Last July, President Bush signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act which had 
passed the Senate 89 to nothing, and which addressed shameful corporate 
fraud that bilks innocent people. In October, Mr. Bush signed the 
election reform bill with great fanfare which had passed the Senate 92 
to 2 to help State governments overhaul the Nation's outdated and 
corruptible electoral system. In November, President Bush signed 
legislation which had passed the Senate 95 to nothing to improve 
security at our ports.
  Yet in order to reduce our bills by $9.8 billion, the omnibus 
legislation that we will consider this week will cut education by $1.5 
billion. It will cut homeland security programs by $1 billion, 
including cuts of $627 million for

[[Page 560]]

border security, $23 million from port security and $132 million from 
first responder funds. It will cut Securities and Exchange Commission 
funding below the levels in Senator Hollings' bill by $94 million.
  This omnibus legislation will reduce Head Start funding by $202 
million. It will reduce job training by $534 million. It will reduce 
low income home energy assistance by $300 million.
  The new omnibus bill will cut Amtrak funding by $374 million, a level 
that will result, I am told, in the termination of Amtrak service.
  In addition, the bill includes 1.6 percent across the board cut on 
all domestic programs. This represents a $435 million cut in the 
National Institutes of Health. It represents a $182 million cut to 
Education for the Disadvantaged. It represents a $372 million cut in 
Veterans Medical Care. On top of these cuts, every homeland security 
initiative in this package is reduced by 1.6 percent. This is no way to 
govern. We must move forward on this legislation. As much as I chafe 
about these mindless cuts, we cannot allow the domestic agencies of our 
government to continue operating on automatic pilot for the rest of the 
fiscal year. The people elected us to make choices about how we invest 
their tax dollars. There will be amendments offered in the coming days 
to restore some of the cuts contained in the substitute to be offered 
by Senator Stevens for homeland security, for education, and for other 
worthy programs. I urge Members to consider these amendments carefully 
and to ponder the impact of the reductions in this bill.
  These should not be up or down party-line votes. When the Congress 
passed, with broad bi-partisan votes, and President Bush signed, 
authorization bills for homeland security, for port security, for 
border security, for investigating corporate fraud, and for No Child 
Left Behind, we all recognized that these programs required adequate 
resources. We did not vote to address these critical problems with 
rhetoric alone. We have heard plenty of rhetoric. We collectively 
decided that these were real problems that needed real solutions. To 
solve these problems requires resources, not empty promises. I urge 
every Member to reflect on their support of these authorization bills 
as they decide how to vote on amendments that will be offered in the 
coming days. Let's make the rhetoric match the resolve.
  While I oppose the $9.8 billion in cuts which are being required by 
the administration as the price to move these bills, I recognize that 
an even worse alternative is to fail in our duty to enact appropriation 
bills and allow the United States Government to operate without 
sufficient funding for the remainder of this fiscal year. I believe my 
colleague, Senator Stevens, is of a similar frame of mind. He is doing 
what he sees as his duty. He is a good soldier. He has my profound 
empathy.
  This is the U.S. Senate. We are 100 Senators who have taken an oath 
of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. 
We serve with Presidents. We don't serve under any President, I have 
served with 11 Presidents, not under any President. The votes that we 
will take on this important legislation, especially those relating to 
the defense of our homeland and the education of our children, are not 
about politics. They are about doing what is right and what was 
promised to the people of this country.
  I ask unanimous consent that a summary of the $9.8 billion of cuts 
contained in the substitute compared to the fiscal year 2003 bills 
reported last July by unanimous vote in the full Appropriations 
Committee, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:


 summary of $9.8 billion of reductions from the fy 2003 appropriations 
                bills reported in june and july of 2002

       Homeland Security--Homeland security accounts are cut by 
     nearly $1 billion (when a $465 million increase for 
     Transportation Security is included, the net cut is $0.5 
     billion):
       $362 million is not provided to the INS for the Entry-Exit 
     system, which will, when funded, track the arrival and 
     departure of non-U.S. citizens. Funding would have supported 
     design of additional lanes and facilities at ports-of-entry; 
     the acquisition of land to support the additional lanes; the 
     development of the new entry/exit system, including the 
     enhancement of the Inspection Program's information systems; 
     and the administration of this large project. From October 1, 
     2001 to September 30, 2002, 439.7 million people were 
     admitted to the United States (700,000 were not admitted), 
     with lengthy delays.
       $265 million is cut from the INS for construction of border 
     security facilities. INS has experienced rapid growth in 
     staffing in recent years, particularly with respect to Border 
     Patrol agents and inspectors. For example, in FY 2002, INS 
     received funding to hire 744 additional border patrol agents 
     and 1,265 additional inspectors. However, INS facility and 
     infrastructure have not kept pace with this growth. From FY 
     1995 through FY 2002, the backlog in needed additional and 
     ungraded facilities has grown to over $5.2 billion. 
     Nationwide, at the end of FY 2001, the Border Patrol had only 
     52 percent of the facilities and space needed to adequately 
     support its current workforce.
       $46 million is not provided for the FBI for requested 
     aviation enhancements, including funding for additional 
     pilots and mechanics; two Blackhawk helicopters and a 
     surveillance aircraft; and funding for maintenance, 
     equipment, and other items needed by the Aviation program. 
     These aviation assets are used to respond to critical 
     incidents, including terrorist attacks, for the hostage 
     rescue team, and to support domestic and international 
     operations. If additional funding is not provided, the FBI 
     would be forced to dismantle the existing surveillance 
     infrastructure and curtail operations in a time when 
     additional capability is needed.
       $92 million is not provided for FBI information technology 
     enhancements.
       $51 million is cut from embassy construction for projects 
     to help protect U.S. citizens overseas.
       $8 million is cut from the Customs Service container 
     security initiative. During Senate Appropriations Committee 
     homeland security hearings, there was extensive testimony 
     about security vulnerability at our ports, particularly with 
     regard to the 50,000 containers and trucks that come through 
     our 361 ports and our border facilities each day, with only a 
     2 percent inspection rate. The Customs Service developed a 
     program for increased inspections and for conducting 
     inspections at overseas ports. Between the FY 2002 
     supplemental and the FY 2003 Treasury/Postal bill, the 
     Committee included $75 million for the project. But because 
     the President blocked the funding for this project in the 
     supplemental and now with the $8 million cut in the 
     substitute, the funding is down to $10 million.
       In addition, the Customs Service budget is reduced by $15 
     million to force Customs to absorb the costs of the 4.1 
     percent pay raise. Customs will likely have to forgo filling 
     630 positions, including port inspectors, as a result of the 
     cut.
       $132 million cut from FEMA first responders. Of this 
     amount: $66 million is cut from interoperable communications 
     equipment for firefighters and $66 million is cut from state 
     and local emergency operations centers. The cut to 
     interoperable communications equipment means less money to 
     local fire departments to purchase badly needed 
     communications equipment--a major priority for local fire 
     departments. The cut to emergency operations centers means 
     less money to help state and local governments upgrade their 
     emergency operations centers--many of which are outdated and 
     in need of expansion and new equipment.
       $465 million is added for the Transportation Security 
     Administration (TSA). After the Committee marked up the 
     Transportation bill last July, the President blocked 
     Congress' effort to add $480 million for TSA. The President 
     then requested another $546 million for the TSA. The new bill 
     fully funds the President's revised request.
     Agriculture (-$580 million)
       The Export Enhancement Program, which is a program designed 
     to combat unfair trade practices, is cut by $450 million. 
     However, USDA has no plans to use the program in FY 2003. The 
     House included a similar provision.
       Various pay accounts are cut by $55.9 million. This 
     reduction will force Agriculture agencies to absorb the cost 
     of the increase in the pay raise from 2.6 percent to 4.1 
     percent that is included, government-wide, in the Treasury/
     General Government bill. This could result in a reduction in 
     staffing of 1.048, potentially including farm services agency 
     personnel, rural housing loan officers and food safety 
     inspectors.
       Competitive Agricultural research grants are cut by $19.8 
     million.
       Summer Feeding program funds are cut by $24 million.
       A $2 million Rural Telework pilot program is eliminated.
     Commerce/Justice/State (-$2,135 million)
       In addition to the $816 million of homeland security cuts 
     from CJS programs noted above, funding for pursuing corporate 
     fraud through the SEC is reduced by $93.8 million.
       At a time when States are facing $65 billion in revenue 
     shortfalls, funding for State and local law enforcement is 
     being cut by $500 million. Funding for the Byrne Formula 
     Grant Program is eliminated. The Byrne

[[Page 561]]

     Formula Grant Program is distributed to the States and 
     territories based on population to provide grants to local 
     law enforcement agencies with the goal of improving Statewide 
     drug and violent crime strategies. Funds can be spent on 
     equipment, systems, and programs aimed at improving intra- 
     and interjurisdictional crime control strategies. The 
     elimination of the Byrne formula program will deny much 
     needed equipment and program funds to the nation's State and 
     local law enforcement agencies at a time when they are being 
     held responsible for acting as the front line against future 
     domestic terrorism.
       The Economic Development Administration is cut by $77 
     million.
     Energy and Water (-$136 million)
       $100 million is cut from the Corps of Engineers 
     construction program.
       The Central and Southern Florida (Everglades) restoration 
     project is cut by $8.2 million. This is an extremely 
     environmentally sensitive project. The Southeast Louisiana 
     project is facing a $15 million cut from the original Senate 
     bill. The Administration severely underbudgeted this project 
     for FY03 and the Committee bill had restored those cuts in an 
     attempt to expedite completion of this project. When 
     completed, the Southeast Louisiana project will protect 30 
     percent of the state's population from severe flood threats. 
     The revised bill will delay the project, forcing the local 
     citizens to continue to endure the threat of severe flooding.
     Foreign Operations (-$100 million)
       The biggest cut is $75 million that was going to be given 
     to North Korea (KEDO, the Korea Energy Development 
     Organization) for purchasing heavy oil. Funding for the 
     United Nations Population Fund is reduced by $15.4 million. 
     International Financial Institutions funding is reduced by 
     about $18 million, with some of the reduction reallocated to 
     the Andean Counter Drug Initiative.
     Interior (-$373 million)
       Federal Land Acquisition program. Cuts of approximately $30 
     million (10% of the program) will result in thousands of 
     acres of environmentally sensitive lands not being given 
     federal protection.
       Dept of Energy Weatherization grants. Cuts of approximately 
     $16 million ($5 million below enacted) will result in 
     thousands of homes not being weatherized. This results in 
     increased energy use nationwide.
       National Park Service, construction/cyclic maintenance. 
     Cuts of approximately $37 million will result in a severe 
     setback to the goal of eliminating the $5 billion in 
     backlogged maintenance. This will result in hundreds of 
     health and safety projects being deferred to FY 04.
       Indian Health Service, facilities and services. Cuts of 
     approximately $19.8 million will reduce critical health 
     services to the American Indian population. In addition, 
     numerous clinic and hospital renovation projects will not 
     proceed until FY 04 at the earliest.
       Fish and Wildlife Service programs. Cuts of $22 million in 
     basic refuge and hatchery operations along with $43 million 
     in cuts to various wildlife conservation grant programs. 
     These cuts will significantly reduce the level of effort 
     being put forward by state and private wildlife preservation 
     officials.
       Forest Service. Cuts of $49 million in areas such as basic 
     forest-health research, assistance to State forestry offices, 
     capital improvements and maintenance, and forest operations.
     Labor/HHS/Education (-$3,033 million)
       Education programs are cut by $1.5 billion. The substitute 
     FY 2003 bill reduces funding for Title I Education State 
     Grants by $500 million compared to the FY 2003 bill marked up 
     in July, 2002. This $500 million would have allowed school 
     districts to serve an additional 447,000 low-income children. 
     This cut comes at a time that many State education budgets 
     are being cut and all States are facing huge costs to 
     implement the ``No Child Left Behind Act'' enacted just last 
     year. The substitute FY 2003 bill eliminates the $250 million 
     increase provided by the Committee in July for teacher 
     quality initiatives. These funds could have been used to hire 
     an additional 7,150 teachers to reduce class size. The 
     substitute FY 2003 bill eliminates the $50 million of the $75 
     million increase provided by the Committee in July for 
     bilingual education programs. The number of students needing 
     such services has increased from less than one million in 
     1980 to more than 3.6 million in 1999.
       Job training programs are cut by $534 million resulting in 
     levels that are $182 million below the FY 2002 level. These 
     cuts will result in 20,000 less training slots for adult 
     workers, 1,030 less training slots for older workers, and 
     50,600 less training slots for youth, at a time when 
     unemployment rate is increasing.
       The substitute bill cuts funding for Head Start by $202.5 
     million as compared to the LHHS marked up in July. That means 
     that more than 17,000 children, almost half of whom are 
     infants and toddlers, will be denied the opportunity to 
     benefit from the Head Start program. Currently, only half of 
     eligible 3 and 4 year olds are enrolled in Head Start and 
     less than 1 in 20 of infants and toddlers are enrolled in 
     Early Head Start.
       Low Income Home Energy Assistance is reduced from $2 
     billion to $1.7 billion at a time that the number of 
     unemployed is increasing and heating prices are increasing.
       Various HHS health programs, including the Centers for 
     Disease Control, Health Professions training and programs 
     designed to improve access to health care for low income 
     people are reduced by $235 million.

                   Legislative Branch (-$51 million)

       Noncontroversial reductions in the Architect of the Capitol 
     and the Capitol Police.
     Transportation (-$400 million)
       The substitute bill would cut the funding for Amtrak by 
     $374 million or 31 percent below the $1.2 billion level 
     approved by the Committee back in July. The substitute bill 
     would fund Amtrak at $762 million which is the same as the 
     level included in the FY2003 Transportation Bill as reported 
     by the House Committee. This funding level will result in the 
     bankruptcy and termination of Amtrak.
       Federal Transit Administration: The substitute bill also 
     cuts $75 million (6 percent) from the Federal Transit 
     Administration's ``New Starts'' program for a new funding 
     level of $1.24 billion. The New Starts program provides 
     capital funding for major new transit projects.
       Federal Aviation Administration: Funding for the Federal 
     Aviation Administration's (FAA) operations was reduced by $34 
     million ($30 million below the President's request) bringing 
     the total funding to $7.047 billion. This account provides 
     funding for all of FAA's operations, including the air 
     traffic controllers and the FAA's safety inspection 
     workforce.
       Federal-aid Highways: The substitute bill deletes $200 
     million of contract authority.
       Agency-wide Administrative Expenses: The substitute bill 
     makes a DOT-wide reduction in administrative expenses of $57 
     million--$51 million more in administrative cuts than was 
     proposed in the bill reported back in July.
       Transportation Security Administration: The substitute bill 
     would increase the funding for the Transportation Security 
     Administration (TSA) by $465 million bringing the total 
     funding for TSA up to the President's request of $5.146 
     billion. After rejecting the $5.1 billion in emergency 
     Homeland Defense funds included in the Supplemental, 
     including $480 million for TSA, the Administration 
     immediately sent up a budget amendment requesting an 
     additional $546 million for TSA. This amendment was sent up 
     after the Committee reported the bill back in July.
     Treasury/General Government (-$281 million)
       In addition to the $8 million of homeland security cuts 
     noted above, $116 million is cut from Treasury and other 
     agency pay accounts. The bill includes a government-wide pay 
     raise of 4.1 percent, compared to the president's request of 
     2.6 percent and the 3.1 percent raise that the President 
     implemented in early January. The 4.1 percent pay raise is 
     the same as the raise included in the bill approved last July 
     and approved for the military in the Defense Authorization 
     Act. Agencies funded by this bill are expected to absorb the 
     $116 million increased cost.
       The IRS is cut by $14 million (funds provided in the July 
     supplemental).
       A Postal Service payment is cut by $31 million and funded, 
     as requested as an advance appropriation.
       An OMB effort to increase investments in electronic 
     government initiatives is cut by $40 million from $45 million 
     to $5 million.
       The Counterterrorism fund of $40 million is cut by $20 
     million.
       GSA Courthouse and Treasury Member projects are cut by 
     $72.8 million.
     VA/HUD (-$2,584 million)
       In addition to the $132 million of homeland security cuts 
     noted above, FEMA Disaster Relief is cut by $1 billion. FEMA 
     has sufficient funds available to meet current and future 
     disaster needs consistent with its historical averages.
       $200 million is cut from FEMA flood plain mapping. $100 
     million remains in the bill. FEMA's flood plain maps are old 
     and out of date. Local planners, developers and homeowners 
     need updated flood plain maps from FEMA. This cut will delay 
     updating the maps.
       Housing programs are cut by nearly $900 million.
       National Service is cut by $110 million, reducing the 
     number of volunteers by 10,000.
       NASA is cut by $70 million.
       National Science Foundation is cut by $85 million.
       EPA is cut by $96 million from $8.3 billion to $8.2 
     billion.
       VA Construction is cut by $49 million in the substitute 
     compared to the bill reported last July.
       In addition, the bill includes 1.6% across the board cut on 
     all domestic programs. This represents a $435 million cut in 
     the National Institutes of Health, a $182 million cut to 
     Education for the Disadvantaged and a $372 million cut in 
     Veterans Medical Care. On top of these cuts, every homeland 
     security initiative in this package is reduced by 1.6%.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I believe under the unanimous consent 
request that now is the time for me to offer my amendment.


                            Amendment No. 1

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, there is an amendment at the desk.

[[Page 562]]

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

       The Senator from Alaska (Mr. Stevens) proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  Mr. STEVENS. The Senator from West Virginia has an amendment to 
offer. I thank him for his comments. We are in substantial agreement, 
except in the conclusion. We both feel that the Government of the 
United States should not operate under a continuing resolution. What it 
means is that our agencies are not moving forward in 2003 at the rate 
actually requested by the President in 2001 for the fiscal year 2002.
  Times have changed. They have changed considerably. Each of these 
agencies are subject to new laws that were passed both in 2001 and 2002 
with regard to the programs that they administer. They cannot do those 
new programs without new money.
  As the Senator from West Virginia said, they are currently operating 
on autopilot. I am an old pilot and autopilot is a wonderful thing to 
have, but it doesn't know how to change course unless someone turns the 
dials. Autopilot cannot take you off or land you. It only continues on 
the course that it is on. It will fly right into a mountain if you 
don't change the course. There is a mountain ahead of us, which is the 
mountain of unfulfilled commitments in the Federal Government, which 
both the President and Congress have made and changes that were made 
since the President first conceived the budget of 2002.
  I do believe that the Senator is right. I would have joined him last 
year in proceeding as we did with the bill as reported. But it is 
different now. We are ready to start a new Congress. We, hopefully, 
will have our organization resolution soon, and we will be working 
toward complying with the laws that we work under--the Budget Act--and 
the requirement that we pass 13 appropriations bills for 2004.
  We cannot get there if we pass these bills separately. As I said 
before, we will face the prospect of disagreement with the House and 
endless conferences on 11 bills, and possibilities of vetoes and 
motions to override, and all the time it will take. Mr. President, it 
will be June before we get down to the business of this Congress if we 
do not follow the recommendation to proceed that has been made now by 
me on behalf of the President and on behalf, I believe, of all the 
members of our committee.
  We have differences on what should be in the bill, but the main thing 
is that we should proceed. I await the offering of the Senator's 
amendment. I know pretty well what is in it, and I regret that I cannot 
join him this year in supporting it.
  Is the amendment now pending before the Senate, Mr. President?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is pending.
  Mr. STEVENS. I yield to the Senator from West Virginia.


                            Amendment No. 2

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

       The Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Byrd] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 2.

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, this Nation faces a turning point as we are 
challenged once again by the threat of attack on our shores. We know 
that terrorists live among us. Yet we do not know where they will 
strike, or when, or how they will strike. With endless warnings in 
mind, and with a clear realization of our many homeland security gaps, 
it is time that Congress invest the necessary resources in homeland 
security to match its rhetoric and to match the rhetoric of this 
administration. So I have offered an amendment that would accomplish 
three goals:
  First, it would restore the $1 billion in reductions in homeland 
security initiatives made from the original committee-passed 
appropriations bills and for which every member of the Appropriations 
Committee voted--every member, 29 members of the Appropriations 
Committee, with 15 Democrats and 14 Republicans.
  Second, it would restore much of the $2.5 billion in emergency 
homeland security funds that passed this Congress overwhelmingly in the 
summer of last year, but which was rejected by this White House.
  Finally, this amendment would fund the priorities that Congress has 
found so necessary and that President Bush has signed into law. This 
amendment would fund the Airport Security Act that created the 
Transportation Security Administration and placed rigorous, new safety 
standards on the Nation's airports. This amendment would fund the 
border security authorization bill that passed the Senate by a vote of 
97 to 0 and that President Bush signed into law last May. This 
amendment would fund the port security authorization bill that passed 
the Senate by a vote of 95 to 0 and that President Bush signed into law 
last November.
  These dollars address our Nation's most critical needs. These funds 
would help to shore up our Nation's defenses and save lives at home.
  The Congress has voted to create the Department of Homeland Security, 
but that Department is months--if not years--away. I read in the 
Washington Post today about the slowdown in the fulfillment of that 
dream, but that Department is months--if not years--away from being a 
strong defense against terrorist attacks. There are many details to be 
worked out. We cannot wait to address gaps in our Nation's defenses 
while this new Department is organized. Terrorists will not wait to 
attack. We cannot afford delay. I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
  I ask unanimous consent that a summary of the amendment be printed in 
the Record at this point so that all Senators, members of the press, 
and the people at large may read on tomorrow the contents of the 
amendment.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:


         Major Elements of $5 Billion Homeland Security Package

                             [In millions]

State and Local Assistance to Combat Terrorism...................$1,406
  To implement the President's smallpox vaccination plan, grants to 
      make first responder radio equipment interoperable, emergency 
      planning and training for terrorist attacks, and study long-term 
      health consequences of attacks of 9/11.
Border Security...................................................1,008
  Customs and TSA container security improvements both at the ports and 
      as containers are shipped within the country, improved INS Entry/
      Exit System, improved INS border security, more INS agents to 
      apprehend absconders, seven additional Coast Guard patrol boats, 
      and Customs northern and southern border security improvements.
Airport Security....................................................720
  Airport security hardening to comply with new statutory security 
      requirements, cockpit door security improvements, and increases 
      to fully fund Transportation Security Administration needs.
Port Security.......................................................585
  To help implement the more rigorous security requirements in the new 
      port security law that the President signed in November.
Nuclear Security/Energy Security....................................296
  Secure nuclear weapons and materials nationwide and conduct 
      vulnerability assessments for energy supply and distribution 
      systems.
Mass Transit Security...............................................300
  Chemical and biological sensors and other monitoring equipment for 
      potential terrorist attacks in mass transit systems.
Federal Law Enforcement (FBI).......................................212

[[Page 563]]

  FBI, Secret Service, additional security for terrorism trials in 
      Federal courts, and Law enforcement training for new TSA 
      personnel
Water Security......................................................178
  Improved security at Corps reservoirs and dams, vulnerability studies 
      for urban and rural water systems.
Cyber Security......................................................128
Food safety, securing biohazardous materials at USDA facilities, 
  embassy security, research to combat chemical attacks, improved 
  security at Washington Monument and Jefferson Memorial, and DC 
  emergency response plan...........................................167
                                                               ________
                                                                5,000
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I rise to support the amendment offered by 
the distinguished chairman, perhaps ranking member, depending on the 
time of the month in January of this year, of the Senate Appropriations 
Committee. He has led the fight in the Senate on these issues dealing 
with homeland security, an extremely important subject for this Senate.
  I wish to talk about why his amendment is a very important choice for 
us to make. This is, after all, about making choices. It is not a case 
that there is not the money to do one thing or the other; it is a 
matter of making the choices of what the right things are for this 
country's future. Emerson once said that common sense is genius dressed 
in work clothes. Common sense with respect to homeland security to me 
is to understand that post-9/11, we are in an urgent situation to 
protect our country at home. We are prosecuting the war against 
terrorists here and abroad, and we have an urgent requirement to 
protect our homeland.
  The head of the CIA just a couple months ago said to the Nation that 
we are as vulnerable today to a terrorist attack as we were on 
September 10, the day before that devastating terrorist attack on our 
Nation. The head of the CIA said: We are as vulnerable today as we were 
the day before that devastating attack.
  If that is the case, then the question is, What more do we need to do 
and how soon must we do it to give a measure of assurance to the 
American people that we are doing everything possible to thwart those 
terrorists who would attack our country?
  I wish to talk about a couple areas of homeland security that my 
colleague, Senator Byrd, has spoken about previously and spoke about 
again this evening, and addresses in his amendment. I wish to talk 
about the security of our country's ports.
  I come from a State that does not have any ports. North Dakota is not 
surrounded by oceans, so we do not have ports. I did recently tour one 
of our large ports in this country. That follows on the heels of a tour 
I did several years previous. I was curious as to what kind of security 
exists in America's ports.
  I know we get 5.7 million containers coming into this country every 
year stacked on container ships. These 5.7 million containers pull up 
to a dock at 2 miles an hour, then are offloaded on to 18-wheel trucks, 
and they motor off to the rest of the country. I also know of the 5.7 
million containers that come into our country every year, 100,000 of 
them are inspected, 5.6 million are not.
  One asks the question: We spend a lot of money and time talking about 
an antiballistic missile program or a missile defense system to protect 
against an incoming ballistic missile or a ballistic missile traveling 
10 or 15,000 miles an hour. So we spend $8 billion creating a ballistic 
missile defense system.
  How much money do we spend protecting against the threat of a ship 
with a container carrying a weapon of mass destruction coming to a dock 
at 2 miles an hour at one of America's major ports in America's major 
cities? The answer is we do not spend nearly enough.
  I recently, with the Customs Service and others, toured one of our 
country's major ports. This is a port that gets a great deal of freight 
and commerce from Asia. I was very impressed with the men and women who 
worked there. I was very impressed with what they do there. I took a 
look at their x-ray technology in which they x-ray containers that are 
on an 18-wheel truck, having been taken from the deck of a ship. This 
technology is remarkable. What they are doing at the Customs Service is 
extraordinary, but they are desperately short of funds. They are 
incapable, in my judgment, of assuring the American people that of 
these 5.7 million containers reaching America's ports, they are able to 
inspect a sufficient number to give us a measure of confidence that 
terrorists will not use these containers with which to attack our 
country.
  We might all remember the story about a fellow who was a suspected 
terrorist who actually put himself in one of those large containers. In 
that container, he included a heater, a cot, water supply, a GPS 
system, a computer--he had all the comforts of home locked with him in 
a container, shipping himself from the Middle East to Canada, 
presumably then to go from Canada into the United States.
  If someone decides to ship a weapon of mass destruction in a 
container aimed at this country with only 2 percent of the containers 
being inspected at our docks, how confident are we that we have the 
homeland security and homeland protection we need and deserve at this 
point?
  Senator Byrd includes in this amendment the resources that are 
necessary to add to that measure of confidence, to create more 
inspections, to provide more security at America's ports, and that is 
important.
  He also in this amendment deals with the issue of border security. I 
do represent a State that has a long and common border with the country 
of Canada. Just a couple of months ago, there were concerns across our 
country about five men, suspected terrorists, who apparently entered 
the U.S. through Canada. We did not know who they were. We did not know 
where they entered our country. We did not know what they planned to 
do. But there was a national manhunt for five men from those parts of 
the world from which terrorists have originated who entered our 
country, and we were searching for these individuals. Apparently they 
were never found.
  The point is, they were supposed to have entered our country through 
Canada. How would one do that? Along the border between the United 
States and Canada, we have a great many ports of entry where we have 
very little security, as a matter of fact. Prior to our Appropriations 
Committee adding some money in the last year and a half, at many ports 
of entry in North Dakota, when the ports of entry closed because they 
are open only a certain portion of the day, at the end of the day, at 9 
o'clock or 10 o'clock at night, they put up an orange rubber cone, and 
that was the security to keep terrorists out of this country or to keep 
out those who are not supposed to enter this country.
  The polite ones who enter this country illegally say they would get 
out of the car, remove the cone, drive into this country, and replace 
the orange cone. Those not so polite would shred that cone at 60 or 70 
miles an hour, with nothing to stop them.
  We changed some of that at ports of entry, but we have a 4,000-mile 
border. There is not a ghost of a chance that the Border Patrol and 
others who are required to provide the security on this country's 
northern border can possibly do all that is necessary to keep 
terrorists from entering our country.
  Despite that, we have the Immigration Service, the Customs Service, 
the Border Patrol, and others doing heroic work, but they need more 
resources. They are short of money. And that also is included in 
Senator Byrd's proposal.
  Last July in Congress, we on the Appropriations Committee passed by a

[[Page 564]]

wide margin a supplemental appropriations bill that included $2.5 
billion for homeland defense, port security, as I mentioned, the 
security of nuclear plants in our country, airport security, cyber 
security, and training for police and fire personnel, the first 
responders for any terrorist attack. Yet the President decided he would 
not use that $2.5 billion. He blocked it, and this amendment restores 
much of those funds.
  I know earlier today we had people come to the Chamber and talk about 
those who want to spend money. There are those who say this is all 
about spending money. This is a rather small amount compared to what we 
did for Defense, for example, in this year.
  The President asked for and we agreed to increase Defense spending 
nearly $45 billion in this year. We face some very significant 
challenges in Iraq, North Korea, terrorists. We call on young men and 
women in this country to put on their uniform and, in a moment's 
notice, be called up, put on a ship or airplane and shipped to the 
farthest points of the world to protect our country. We increased that 
spending in a very significant way.
  Just a year ago--in fact, a year ago this week--I was in central 
Asia. I was in Afghanistan and Uzbekistan and toured those areas where 
our young men and women--American soldiers--were defending our liberty 
and freedom.
  I do not think anyone will ever want to shortchange them in what we 
do to spend money to protect them, and I commend Senator Byrd, Senator 
Stevens, and Senator Inouye for their leadership in making certain we 
make that investment. But it is not only with respect to this Nation's 
defense that we must make investment. We also must make those 
investments in our homeland security. If we fail to do that, there will 
be a time, after some additional national tragedy as a result of a 
terrorist attack, when we will ask the question: Why did we not plug 
that hole? Why did we not add those resources? Why did we not have 
those additional inspections?
  We can avoid all of that if we simply make wise and prudent 
investments in homeland security in this legislation. I prefer we not 
be required to spend any money on homeland security. I prefer we live 
in a world in which there is not a terrorist threat, in which those who 
have evil in their hearts, such as Saddam Hussein and others, would not 
exist and we would live in peace and harmony and not have to worry 
about protecting our homeland. But the attacks of 9/11, which killed 
thousands of innocent Americans, by those holed up in caves in the 
mountains of Afghanistan plotting the murder of innocent people tell us 
we can never again be sure that that kind of world will exist.
  We must understand that terrorists want to do damage to this country 
and kill innocent Americans. As a result, we simply must have adequate 
homeland security and adequate protection. That is all this amendment 
offered by Senator Byrd does.
  We will have an opportunity to discuss other issues with respect to 
the omnibus bill. Although I have been talking about homeland security, 
I fully agree with Senator Stevens and Senator Byrd that we should 
handle these appropriations bills this way. It is the only way we can 
solve this issue of getting the eleven bills done, getting to a 
conference, getting them to the President, and getting them signed. So 
there is no disagreement about that. Senator Byrd and Senator Stevens 
are absolutely correct. This is what we should do. We should do it this 
month and get these priorities funded. But as I say that, the question 
is: What priorities? What choices?
  I have not yet seen the entire amendment or the entire omnibus bill 
that has been offered. I expect I will be able to review some of it 
this evening and perhaps tomorrow. But this is significant legislation. 
I know what part of it is. Chairing one of the subcommittees on 
appropriations, I know what is in that subcommittee. With Senator 
Campbell and me working closely together, I know what is in that 
particular part, but the rest of it I am not aware of, and I think most 
Members would not be aware of the specific provisions. We need to work 
together in the coming days to make sure the choices we make in terms 
of priorities are the right choices.
  I will have a lot to say on a couple of other issues, but I want to 
specifically say to Senator Byrd, I think this amendment makes eminent 
good sense. It is an important amendment, an urgent amendment, and 
represents one of our first priorities: Making the right investment for 
homeland security.
  There is a part in this omnibus bill that deals with disaster 
legislation, drought relief, for farmers. I do not know this for sure, 
but my understanding is the money for that actually comes out of the 
agricultural spending base, which in my judgment should not happen. 
Second, it is only about half the size of what is needed.
  By a very wide margin, we passed last year a $5.9 billion disaster 
relief bill for drought relief for a major part of the country's 
agricultural producers. That is about what we need. In my judgment, we 
are going to have to amend this provision.
  My understanding also is that in order to get part of this money, 
there is an across-the-board reduction, and I believe there are certain 
areas where we cannot do across-the-board reductions. Having said all 
of that, we need to debate those amendment by amendment. This first 
amendment is an important amendment. As Senator Byrd said, and let me 
hasten to say as well because I serve on this committee, the leadership 
of Senator Stevens is exemplary. I am proud to be on this committee, 
whether under his leadership or Senator Byrd's. Our differences in 
choices with respect to both the White House and those who support this 
amendment are not meant to be disrespectful but are an assertive 
difference, representing what we believe to be an urgent priority.
  There is no greater priority than to make sure we have done what we 
can do to thwart the efforts of terrorists to attack this country, and 
in a number of areas we are markedly and substantially deficient in 
homeland security investment. We have known that for some long while. 
This is the time to correct it. It is not spending, it is an 
investment, just as it is an investment in this country when we make 
the kind of appropriations we need to make for defense. We have done 
that. Now we need to make the same judgment with respect to homeland 
security.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coleman). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, Senator Byrd has offered an amendment. I 
would like to address that amendment.
  Senator Byrd has been an advocate, for many months now, of doing 
something to properly fund homeland security. One member of our caucus 
referred to it as hometown security. The Senator from Nebraska, Mr. 
Nelson, referred to it as hometown security, and that is really what it 
is. It is to make sure the cities and towns in our States have the 
protection that is necessary as a result of the terrible events of 
September 11.
  The bill I am interested in is part of S. 11 from the Energy and 
Water Subcommittee. For the next half hour or so, I will be the 
chairman of that committee. That will change sometime this evening.
  Senator Domenici and I have had a longtime relationship on this 
subcommittee. I have been chairman; he has been chairman; we really 
have worked extremely well together. He has been, from my perspective, 
extremely good to work with. He is an absolute expert on numbers, 
having been the chairman of the Budget Committee and having been so 
long with the Appropriations Committee. It has been a pleasure to work 
with him.
  But Senator Domenici, I am sure, recognized that this bill, our bill, 
should have more money--more money as it relates to homeland security. 
During

[[Page 565]]

last year's consideration of the supplemental spending bill for 
homeland security, when we were in the majority, we included hundreds 
of millions of dollars for nuclear security, funding that had been 
requested by the administration and by the Department of Energy but was 
rejected by the Office of Management and Budget. During final 
negotiations on that supplemental, we agreed to provide funding for 
these activities on a contingency basis. In essence, we provided the 
money but gave the President the opportunity to accept it or not. He 
decided not to accept it. I think that is really wrong. I am 
disappointed and sorry that is the case. I believe it was unreasonable 
that the President declined to request emergency funding for nuclear 
security for which his own Department of Energy was screaming. We 
didn't invent this. This came from his own Department of Energy.
  So this evening Senator Byrd has offered it again and is making 
another effort to give this administration the funds they need to keep 
nuclear and other deadly material safe and secure in this country. As 
always, I am grateful to Senator Byrd for his leadership in this area.
  The bill Senator Domenici and I have brought to the floor for many 
years is a big bill, approximately $24- or $25 billion, and it is all 
discretionary. It is the only subcommittee in which the money is 
discretionary, all of it. It has many important components. Tonight we 
are only going to talk about that part relating to nuclear security.
  This amendment provides $25 million to enhance the safety and 
security of nuclear and other materials at the Department of Energy 
Office of Science Laboratories, nationwide; another $25 million for the 
National Nuclear Security Administration, to enhance security during 
the transport of nuclear weapons and materials nationwide; and $35 
million for construction and renovation activities of the National 
Center for Combating Terrorism, again funding that the Department of 
Energy asked the White House to provide.
  Again, we didn't dream it up, saying this would be great for New 
Mexico because they have a lot of things goings on there, or Nevada, or 
Idaho, or Mississippi, where a lot of these activities take place. The 
Department of Energy came forward with this recommendation. Again, the 
White House refused the recommendation that its own Department brought 
forward.
  We are also requesting $90 million for increased safeguards and 
security needs throughout the nuclear weapons complex. Funding is 
provided for explosive detection equipment, protective force support, 
hardened perimeter barriers, and consolidation of special nuclear 
materials and complex-wide security improvements. A minimum of $25 
million is provided for cybersecurity activities.
  Just reading this off should give every person within the sound of my 
voice pause. Why have we been asked this by the Department of Energy? 
We have been asked to do this because we need safeguards throughout the 
nuclear weapons complex that are not now there.
  Funding is provided for explosive detection equipment. We don't have 
that equipment. I hate to say it here on the Senate floor, but we 
don't. We are lacking.
  Protective force support. That means we don't have enough people 
making sure the materials are safe, that the facilities are safe.
  Hardened perimeter barriers. It seems to me, if we have been told by 
the Department of Energy that we should have hardened perimeter 
barriers, that means that what we have now is inadequate.
  Consolidation of special nuclear materials, and complex-wide security 
improvements.
  Also, $56 million is provided for the Defense Environmental 
Administration Restoration and Waste Management Program at the 
Department of Energy to enhance safeguards and security at nuclear and 
weapons cleanup sites at Savannah River in South Carolina, Hanford in 
Washington, Idaho, and in Tennessee.
  Mr. President, you, as a new Senator, did not come and say: Senator 
Domenici, Senator Reid, will you give us some money for Oak Ridge, in 
Tennessee? You didn't do that. The Department of Energy recognized 
there were needs at that very important facility, important for this 
country, and that is why Senator Byrd has stuck in this amendment 
before this body, $56 million, part of which would go to Oak Ridge to 
make sure there is enhancement of safeguards and security at nuclear 
weapons cleanup sites, at this facility and these facilities.
  There is $14 million for the Defense Facilities Closure Projects, the 
program at DOE, to enhance the safeguard and security of these sites 
nationwide.
  The amendment also provides $25 million for the National 
Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center in New Mexico and $25 
million for the National Energy Laboratory to conduct critical 
infrastructure assessments at critical energy supply facilities 
nationwide.
  The funds provided in the Byrd amendment for nuclear safety are 
critical for ensuring the safety of the American people in the post-9/
11 era. I don't expect the White House to take my word for it. They 
should, however, listen to their own Department of Energy. I did, and 
the nuclear safety language in the Byrd amendment reflects what we were 
told, what they said was needed.
  We also have some new information that has come out. We have a report 
that has been done, and we know there are some Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission employees who worry that safety training requirements for 
the nuclear facilities are outdated and ``leave the security of the 
nuclear sites . . . vulnerable to sabotage.''
  Should we not go forward with this work? Yes, we should. It is 
extremely important that we provide this money. If there were ever an 
emergency need in the history of this country, it would be to take care 
of the nuclear facilities.
  They have inadequate security guards. One security company is working 
at one facility and another, which has the lowest bid, at another 
facility. It simply is not the way to do business.
  All over America we have 101 nuclear powerplants. There are workers 
who are questioning the safety of these facilities. A recent survey 
commissioned by the NRC found that a third of its employees question 
the agency's commitment to safety, and almost one-half say they are 
afraid to speak up at the NRC. Employees who are designated to protect 
these plants from terrorists and others are afraid to speak up for fear 
they will get fired or their jobs will be changed or they will be 
transferred.
  According to the survey conducted by an outside firm, these people 
complained that the NRC is influenced by the nuclear industry and that 
its regulatory powers have atrophied. The poll was based on surveys 
completed by one-half of the agency's employees. The most dramatic 
findings came up when pollsters sorted responders by rank. Although 
almost 90 percent of the agency's executive-level employees answered 
favorably on the questions regarding the Commissions's commitment to 
safety, less than two-thirds of those in the midlevel ranks answered 
that they were afraid.
  The study said those differences point to the political influence of 
the nuclear industry. NRC officials declined comment.
  We should be very concerned about workers at the NRC who are afraid 
to come forward and say: We do not have proper safety standards, and we 
are afraid to come forward and tell our own bosses what is wrong. Why? 
Because they are so driven by the nuclear power industry.
  It has been nearly a year since the President warned us in his last 
State of the Union Address how vulnerable our nuclear facilities are. 
But the NRC has still not taken any clear steps to secure the safety 
and security of our Nation's nuclear powerplants. That is not 
acceptable.
  We know the inspector general of the NRC paints a very bleak picture 
of their safety and security. A few days ago, the NRC's inspector 
general released a survey of the employees. I have talked about that to 
some extent.
  This amendment is a very important amendment if we are concerned--I

[[Page 566]]

know everyone is concerned--about the safety and security of our 
nuclear-generating facilities.
  Senator Byrd is to be commended for asking us to support him in 
making sure that we have adequate resources to protect our nuclear 
facilities.
  I repeat what I said earlier when I talked about some of the things 
that the Department of Energy has said is so important. If we ignore 
them, and if the administration ignores them, it is simply not right.
  This money enhances the safety and security of nuclear and other 
materials. It will enhance security during the transport of nuclear 
weapons and materials. There is money for construction and renovation 
activities of the National Center for Combating Terrorism; for 
increased safeguards and security needs throughout the nuclear weapons 
complex. Funding is provided for explosive detection equipment, 
protective force support, hardened perimeter barriers, consolidation of 
special nuclear materials, and complex-wide security improvements.
  I see the Senator from Washington is on the floor. There is $56 
million, as I have mentioned, for the Defense Environmental Restoration 
and Waste Management Program to enhance safeguards and security at 
nuclear and weapons cleanup sites, such as the one at Hanford in 
Washington. I would place it throughout our complex.
  There is money for the Defense Facilities Closure Projects Program to 
enhance safeguards and security at these sites. This is important. If 
we pass the Byrd amendment for no other reason--and there are lots of 
other reasons to talk about--money is provided in my subcommittee of 
appropriations for making our nuclear weapons facilities throughout the 
country and our nuclear powerplants throughout our country safe and 
secure. They are not safe and secure now. That should be of concern for 
every American.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise this evening in strong support of 
the homeland security amendment that was offered earlier this evening 
by Senator Byrd. I am pleased that I had the opportunity to work 
closely with Senator Byrd on the details of the amendment because it 
impacts the security of our transportation system.
  Before I start, I wish to align myself with the very thoughtful and 
important remarks of the Senator from North Dakota made earlier 
regarding the northern border. Senator Dorgan has brought some real 
attention to the northern border issues that are so important to my 
home State of Washington. This work must continue despite the 
President's cuts to the border security initiative that the Senate 
previously approved.
  This amendment represents months of work on behalf of Senator Byrd 
and the Appropriations Committee. Senator Byrd, as chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, convened a series of hearings last spring to 
discuss homeland security needs. We heard from numerous Cabinet 
Secretaries, including Secretary Powell, Secretary Rumsfeld, and 
Secretary Mineta. Several respective national security experts gave us 
very valuable testimony. We also heard from several Governors, 
including Governor Locke from Washington State. Mayors appeared before 
the Appropriations Committee as did fire chiefs, health department 
officials, and water and sewer authorities.
  Senator Byrd and the Appropriations Committee worked very hard to 
identify real needs for homeland security. The Byrd homeland security 
amendment is in large part the result of those hearings and our 
continued efforts to work with the true first responders.
  Homeland security is an enormous task. We all know this. It is going 
to be enormously expensive. We all know this. Sadly, the administration 
has not requested adequate funding for homeland security needs 
throughout our country. The President refused to spend homeland 
security money previously approved in a bipartisan fashion by this 
Congress.
  The bill before us today, at the President's insistence, makes 
further cuts in homeland security funding.
  Homeland security is about our entire country. However, I must tell 
you that this issue is tremendously important to Washington State. 
Already, thanks to an alert Customs agent, we arrested a terrorist 
suspect crossing into Washington State with explosive materials.
  We are an international State with vulnerabilities in our ports, our 
rail and highway infrastructure, and our international airports.
  We are a trade State with an economy that is closely linked to the 
world. We have significant military assets, nuclear facilities, and 
many popular tourist-gathering points. My State is aggressively moving 
forward to protect Washingtonians. We need a partner in the President 
and the Federal Government. Unfortunately, the underlying bill does not 
address all of our homeland security needs. Homeland security should 
not be an unfunded mandate.
  As a nation, we are working hard to close the security gaps that 
still exist. We know the transportation systems are a frequent target 
of terrorist attack. In fact, when you look at the worldwide 
statistics, one-third of terrorist attacks that take place around the 
world target transportation systems, including aircraft, highways, rail 
systems, subways, commercial ships, and ferries.
  As many have observed, our security is only as strong as our weakest 
link. This amendment offered by Senator Byrd will help strengthen some 
of our weakest links in port security, aviation, and mass transit.
  Let me start with port security. We have a lot of work to do to 
protect our Nation's ports. As my colleagues will recall, we passed the 
Maritime Transportation Security Act 95 to 0. That act puts new 
requirements on our ports. However, effectively no funds have been 
provided to our Nation's port authorities to implement those new 
requirements, which will cost billions of dollars.
  The underlying bill that we are looking at this evening, provides 
very little money to enhance port security. So I am really, pleased 
that the Byrd amendment would dramatically increase the security funds 
available to our ports.
  I ask Senators to reflect for a moment on what a terrorist incident 
in our Nation's ports would mean to our Nation's economy.
  Just look at what happened this past fall, when West Coast 
dockworkers were locked out of their jobs. It is estimated that the 
lockout cost our economy $1 billion a day.
  A terrorist attack on our ports--or an attack carried out through our 
cargo container system--would undermine our Nation's confidence in the 
hundreds of thousands of containers that crisscross our country every 
single day.
  And beyond the human toll--an attack on, or through, our ports would 
have a dramatic economic impact and could bring the flow of commerce to 
a dead stop.
  It is not enough just to pass an authorization bill saying that we 
have better secured our ports. We have to actually provide the 
resources to make our ports more secure.
  The Byrd amendment boosts--by almost half a billion dollars--the 
amount of grant money available to our public port authorities. I 
commend the Senator for his vision and leadership on this critical 
challenge.
  Another way to secure our ports is through Operation Safe Commerce, 
an initiative that I started in last year's emergency supplemental 
appropriations bill. This TSA initiative was launched with the 
cooperation of the Customs Service. For the first time, it provides us 
a mechanism to track containers from their point of origin to their 
point of destination. As a result, we will have much better information 
about where the container came from, what is in it, and whether or not 
it requires either x-ray or further inspection.
  With the initial funding that we provided for this initiative--and 
the $30 million that is included in the underlying bill--we have had to 
limit these grants to the three major container ports in our country. 
Those three ports take in roughly three-quarters of all the containers 
entering the United

[[Page 567]]

States. With the additional funding provided under Senator Byrd's 
amendment, we will be able to greatly expand the number of ports that 
can participate in this important initiative.
  Finally, as I talk about port security, I want to talk about the new 
demands being placed on our Coast Guard. For a long time I have been 
very concerned that these new homeland security requirements mean the 
Coast Guard isn't getting adequate resources--or paying adequate 
attention--to its traditional missions, such as search and rescue, 
fisheries enforcement, and marine environmental protection.
  In order to get the Coast Guard the kind of assets it needs to 
conduct port security, Senator Byrd's amendment includes sufficient 
funds to boost the Coast Guard's inventory of coastal patrol boats. 
These are the ideal platform for the Coast Guard's homeland security 
mission. Unfortunately the Coast Guard has not been able to buy enough 
of them, in part because of other major contract obligations that are 
outstanding.
  We cannot continue to burden the Coast Guard with additional missions 
without providing them with the resources and the tools they need to do 
their job. I am pleased the Byrd amendment provides these resources.
  Another weak link this amendment will address concerns mass transit. 
I think we should all recognize that the majority of fatalities 
resulting from transportation terrorist incidents have been in the area 
of mass transit, specifically from buses.
  The challenge in securing our mass transit systems is daunting. By 
their very nature, transit systems are designed to be open and 
accessible and to accommodate many people in a very short period of 
time. It is a real challenge, but we have to address it.
  The amendment that Senator Byrd has offered states that we are not 
going to shrink away from this vulnerability. It says we will better 
protect the millions of citizens who commute to their jobs every day. 
The $300 million included in this amendment will make a serious 
downpayment and get our Nation's transit systems focused on mechanisms 
that will simultaneously protect their passengers without clogging our 
transit systems.
  I commend Senator Byrd for recognizing this vulnerability and for 
addressing it.
  Finally, I want to talk about aviation security. I commend the 
Senator for including an additional $250 million for our Nation's 
airports.
  As my colleagues know, the Aviation Transportation Security Act 
mandated that we check all passengers' checked baggage for explosives. 
Just a few weeks ago, the Transportation Security Administration met 
that deadline. But the truth is, there is a huge amount of construction 
that needs to be done to transition our Nation's airports from the 
interim explosive detection solutions to more permanent and efficient 
systems to check all bags for explosives.
  From the very first day that this requirement was put into law, the 
Transportation Security Administration has consistently refused to 
request adequate funds to compensate the airports for these costs. They 
have consistently underestimated the true costs to implement these 
massive retrofits in order to leave our airports ``holding the bag'' 
for these costs.
  The amendment offered by Senator Byrd provides an extra $200 
million--over and above the $250 million included in the underlying 
bill--to more accurately reflect the real cost of this initiative in 
fiscal year 2003.
  We will be paying the cost to implement the Transportation Security 
Act for many years to come. Our airports do not have easy access to the 
kind of resources that will be needed to make these very necessary 
investments. The airlines--which the airports depend on for rates and 
charges--are almost uniformly in serious financial difficulty. Many 
airports have already extended about as many bonds as they can 
currently afford to pay off. So this amendment would provide very 
critical support.
  I am proud of the progress this amendment makes in adequately funding 
port security, mass transit, and aviation security. I commend Chairman 
Byrd for this amendment, and I urge all my colleagues to support it.
  We cannot let the protection of the American people be ignored 
because an OMB director--a few blocks down the road--has said that 
discretionary spending will not exceed a certain arbitrary figure.
  We have serious security needs in this country, and this amendment 
will help us meet them.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I understand we are now on the Byrd 
amendment to the appropriations measure before us; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Presiding Officer.
  First, I thank Senator Byrd for offering this important amendment 
which provides much-needed funding for our homeland security.
  Secondly, I thank Senator Byrd for including funding in his amendment 
to help States implement the President's plan for inoculating our first 
responders against the smallpox virus. A month ago, on December 13, 
President Bush announced his policy for vaccinating U.S. citizens 
against smallpox. He had a tough decision to make, and I support that 
decision.
  That same day, the Government began inoculating 500,000 armed 
services personnel and other Government officials working overseas, 
people who are most likely to encounter the smallpox virus.
  The second phase involves inoculating on a voluntary basis first 
responders and health care workers across the United States against 
smallpox. It is estimated that up to about 10 million Americans may 
fall into this category. Senator Specter and I have worked with the 
administration and Senators Byrd and Stevens since the events of 
September 11 to provide sufficient funds to produce the smallpox 
vaccine necessary to inoculate every American against smallpox if that 
becomes necessary. That money has been appropriated, and I understand 
the production of vaccine is well underway and that sufficient vaccine 
will be available by the end of the year. That was a good first step.
  It is one thing to produce the vaccine, but the administration of the 
vaccine also costs money. That financial burden will fall on our State 
and local public health departments. Local public health departments 
will absorb the costs of the needles and personnel to administer the 
vaccine. But then again, personnel and equipment and needles only 
represent a part of the cost to local health departments. That is 
because the smallpox vaccination is a far more resource-intensive 
activity than any other type of vaccination activity.
  For example, costs include specialized training for the vaccinators. 
You cannot just have someone off the street doing the vaccinating; they 
have to be specially trained. And since we have not administered the 
smallpox vaccine for a number of years, people would have to be 
trained. There would also have to be prevaccination screening for 
individuals to make sure you don't have something else that might 
interfere with the vaccination. It will also include postvaccination 
monitoring because it is estimated that 1,000 out of every 1 million 
vaccinated will experience a serious adverse effect. Then you add to 
those costs the cost of extra security for the vaccine.
  I have received estimates from those involved in public health that 
the cost of administering the vaccine to State and local health 
departments under the President's plan may be $85 a person, or $850 
million to inoculate 10 million first responders and health care 
personnel.
  The amendment before us--the Byrd amendment--includes that $850 
million

[[Page 568]]

appropriated to HHS for distribution to the States for this first 10 
million first responders' vaccination.
  When I first saw this figure of $85 a person, I thought that was 
pretty expensive. I remember when I was a kid and got my smallpox 
vaccination in school. They lined you up, and the public health nurse 
gave you your vaccination. I cannot believe it costs, in equivalent 
dollars, $85 to get that vaccination. So I think we here on the 
Appropriations Committee and on the Oversight Committee and those at 
Health and Human Services under Secretary Thompson really need to look 
at this and to make sure these estimates are valid estimates.
  Again, I know that, as I said, there are other things we have to do, 
such as prescreening and training of inoculators; there has to be 
postvaccination monitoring and safety. There are other considerations 
that perhaps we didn't have maybe 50 years ago when I got my smallpox 
vaccination.
  I do think we are going to have to be careful stewards of the 
public's money to make sure we are getting our money's worth and to 
make sure every dime is accounted.
  Some may say we have already provided significant new funding to 
State and local health departments since the events of September 11, 
and that is true. Senator Specter and I and the Appropriations 
Committees have worked hard to provide those funds, and those funds 
were sorely needed because we had let our public health departments 
stagnate over the years.
  The money we provided over the last couple of years was just to begin 
to repair the benign neglect of our public health system, to upgrade 
public health monitoring, to increase the lab capacity in our State 
labs to identify possible bioterrorism agents, to improve 
communications between CDC, the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, health departments, and other health providers. That was 
just a few of the needed improvements that, again, had been consigned 
to benign neglect over the years.
  I guess what I am saying is, we should not put a stop to those 
improvements by forcing our local public health departments to use 
those funds to administer the smallpox vaccine. We are making strides 
in this country to bring our public health resources back up to where 
they should be. We should not be robbing those resources to administer 
the smallpox vaccine.
  Local health departments are concerned that the financial burden of 
administering the smallpox vaccine will force them to make cuts in 
other areas. For example, Dr. Floyd Novak, president of the New York 
State Association of County Health Officials and the commissioner of 
health of the county that includes Syracuse, said, according to an 
article in the New York Times:

       We have to transfer staff from other functions to do this. 
     It just cannot be absorbed as business as usual. We need more 
     resources.

  Dr. Novak said his department would conduct 221 fewer screening tests 
for breast and cervical cancer and 835 fewer pediatric dental 
examinations, among other lost services, in the 2 months when 
vaccinations are to be performed. That is why the amendment we have 
before us is so crucial.
  The Byrd amendment we are considering includes funds not only for 
smallpox vaccinations but also for other important homeland security 
needs, and it means that Dr. Novak in New York and other county health 
officials throughout the United States will not have to stop the 
important functions of breast and cervical cancer screening, pediatric 
dental examinations, and other functions we sorely need, in order to 
conduct the smallpox vaccinations.
  I urge my colleagues to support this much-needed amendment. Of the $5 
billion amendment that Senator Byrd has proposed, $850 million will go 
to make sure we have the needed resources to inoculate the 10 million 
estimated first responders--police, fire, emergency personnel, 
guardsmen, and others who will be our first responders in this country. 
These resources would, indeed, ensure we can do that without robbing or 
stopping the other needed services of our public health departments.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from West 
Virginia, Mr. Byrd, presented a chart showing the major elements of the 
$5 billion homeland security package. Eventually, this homeland 
security money, since it is money that people involved in that area 
want, we will address not only this year, in this 2003 bill, not only 
in the 2004 bill, but out into 2005. This Homeland Security Department 
has not even formed yet, as we know. There are several components in 
the existing Government that will be transferred into homeland 
security, and they have funding in this amendment I have offered.
  For instance, Senator Byrd wants to add to this amendment I have 
offered $1.4 billion for State and local assistance to combat 
terrorism, but we already have spread throughout the 11 bills $2.2 
billion to deal with the same concepts. We have money for first 
responder radio equipment. We have money for emergency planning and 
training.
  Last year, I supported this money that Senator Byrd wants in his 
amendment for this bill--in a series of bills, as a matter of fact. The 
problem we face now is, should we continue to operate at the 2002 level 
until we can find an agreement with the President as to the amounts 
Senator Byrd wants to add to the President's request or should we move 
forward through the way we allocated money in the bill for the various 
elements of homeland security in the existing Departments? The money we 
put in the existing Departments will be transferred to Homeland 
Security as that Department is formed.
  Senator Byrd wants to put up an additional $1.8 billion for border 
security. Again, in the period ahead we will spend money like that, but 
in these bills already is a total of $4.3 billion, and we are looking 
at a period of less than 8 months to spend that money.
  I have presented the amendment that is before the Senate now because 
we want to find a way to work with the President to close the books on 
the 2003 appropriations. We cannot do that if we continue to battle 
with the administration and try to give them money beyond what they 
believe is necessary.
  At the time we were looking at this last year, we thought the 
Homeland Security Department would have been created before September 
30 of last year. We wanted to put up money so it would be there for the 
Homeland Security Department to be transferred to start spending in 
October. This money would be started to be spent in late February or 
March.
  I am trying to make a point. Take airport security; Senator Byrd 
wants an additional $720 million. We have already appropriated 
substantial monies that are in the supplemental from last year for 
airport security. We have tried to fund the needs of the Transportation 
Security Administration. We already have an additional $374 million in 
these separate portions of the amendment I have offered.
  I am trying to emphasize the fact that we do not need to give this 
Department of Homeland Security more money beyond what has been asked.
  On nuclear and energy security, I do not disagree with the statements 
that have been made about the needs for additional money. In this 
amendment I have offered is $1.650 billion for that function. Senator 
Byrd wants to add another $296 million. I understand he is trying to 
fully fund the estimated needs of homeland security for the future, 
which is a laudable goal, but we are trying to stay within some sort of 
budget constraint.
  As I said, let's finish the job of getting the books closed on how 
much the agencies have to spend in the remainder of fiscal year 2003.
  On Federal law enforcement with the FBI, Senator Byrd wants to add 
$212 million to the $1.2 billion already in

[[Page 569]]

the bill. I am urging the Senate to listen in terms of the concepts we 
have worked out. Stop this battle with the President over how much is 
needed for the agency that has not even been established yet. The 
various components of that agency, the Homeland Security Department, 
will have enough money coming into this new Department to fully fund 
whatever they can do by the time they get organized as a Department.
  I urge the Senate to oppose the amendment offered by the Senator from 
West Virginia--not because he is not right at estimating the future 
needs of homeland security--because we believe we are right in saying, 
let's fund now the money that can be spent before the end of this 
fiscal year, be spent before September 30. I am confident we have 
sufficient moneys in this amendment that we have offered in the 11 
separate sections which would normally be separate appropriations 
bills, enough money to deal with the problems of homeland security.
  Beyond that, I remind the Senate the President still has some money 
left from the $20 billion we gave him after 9/11. If there are any 
defects here, he has more than $5 billion in that account and can 
allocate it if it is necessary to establish Homeland Security so long 
as it is working toward establishing the facilities and entities we 
need to prevent further repetition of the catastrophe of September 11.
  I hope the Senate will listen. To adopt the Byrd amendment will be to 
prolong the conference. If it was in a bill that would go to the 
President, he would veto it. Then where are we? Maybe I am too 
pragmatic about this, but it is time to get this job done. The 
amendment I have offered will get the job done. There will still be 
some differences with the House. As a matter of fact, there will still 
be some differences with the administration because we have increased 
some items that they do not want to see increased and we have decreased 
some they do not want decreased. But overall, we are within the total 
limit and parameters of the requests of the President.
  I hope tomorrow the Senate will be looking at this. There will be 
further debate tomorrow morning. The leader will, of course, state what 
the procedure will be. We expect a vote sometime around noon or soon 
thereafter on the Byrd amendment. I am hopeful that the Senate will 
work with us to try and understand my job now is to get this amendment 
to conference.
  As I told the Senate Members, the House has not passed any of these 
bills. It passed some of them last year. We did not act on them. We 
passed some last year and they did not act on them. We are trying to 
restart the 2003 conference and there will be an overall conference on 
all 11 bills at one time if the Senate will give us the support to pass 
this bill and take it to conference.
  There will be individual differences as far as amendments are 
concerned. As a matter of fact, there are some things in this amendment 
I personally would change, but they have been brought here by the work 
of the subcommittee chairmen and ranking Members of the individual 
areas covered by these bills. I think it is the best course to follow, 
to take this amendment to conference, to go to the House and say, let's 
get these 11 bills finished so the agencies will know for certain the 
money they have. Even the homeland security bill was not passed when we 
originally contemplated passing the appropriations to fund it.
  I am confident we have done the best we can under the circumstance. 
Again, I do not criticize Senator Byrd. Eventually, we will spend more 
than $5 billion in addition to what we have in the amendment before the 
Senate. However, we do not need it now. I sat through all the hearings 
that have been mentioned, that Senator Byrd had on the needs for 
homeland security across the Nation. I remember going to small towns in 
my State when the mayor told me they needed a new fire truck. They 
needed a new fire truck? They have never had a fire truck. There is not 
anyone in the country that does not want some of this homeland security 
money. The question is, what is needed now to go on with the job and 
protect the country. I believe our amendment does it.
  I send to the desk a statement prepared by the individual 
subcommittees that goes along with 11 components of this bill. Had we 
had the meetings of the separate subcommittees and reported separate 
bills, we would have prepared 11 reports. Instead, I am submitting for 
the Record to be printed the overview and summary of each of the 
components so there will be no question in the future of what is 
intended by the provisions of the amendment I have offered if it is 
enacted. I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

   Mr. Cochran, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, 
     Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs 
     for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other 
     purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the 
     bill do pass.


             Total obligational authority, fiscal year 2003

Amount of bill as reported to the Senate..............................$
Amount of 2002 appropriations acts to date...............73,078,443,000
Amount of estimates, 2003................................73,530,625,000
The bill as recommended to the Senate:
  Over the appropriations provided in 2002.............................
  Over the estimates for 2003..........................................

                           BREAKDOWN BY TITLE

       The amounts of obligational authority for each of the six 
     titles are shown in the following table. A detailed 
     tabulation, showing comparisons, appears at the end of this 
     report. Recommendations for individual appropriation items, 
     projects and activities are carried in this report under the 
     appropriate item headings.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 2003 Committee
                                                                                 2002\1\         recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I: Agricultural programs............................................    $29,252,688,000    $25,521,466,000
Title II: Conservation programs...........................................      1,056,139,000      1,036,864,000
Title III: Rural economic and community development programs..............      2,569,924,000      2,739,526,000
Title IV: Domestic food programs..........................................     37,945,627,000     41,926,581,000
Title V: Foreign assistance and related programs..........................      1,124,518,000      1,463,645,000
Title VI: Related agencies................................................      1,456,651,000      1,488,490,000
Title VII: General provisions.............................................       -327,104,000         24,496,000
                                                                           -------------------------------------
      Total, new budget (obligational) authority..........................     73,078,443,000     74,201,068,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes emergency supplemental appropriations.

                    OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

       The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
     Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill 
     provides funding for a wide array of Federal programs, mostly 
     in the U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA]. These programs 
     include agricultural research, education, and extension 
     activities; natural resources conservation programs; farm 
     income and support programs; marketing and inspection 
     activities; domestic food assistance programs; rural economic 
     and community development activities, and telecommunications 
     and electrification assistance; and various export and 
     international activities of the USDA.
       The bill also provides funding for the Food and Drug 
     Administration [FDA] and the Commodity Futures Trading 
     Commission [CFTC], and allows the use of collected fees

[[Page 570]]

     for administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration 
     [FCA].
       Given the budgetary constraints that the Committee faces, 
     the bill as reported provides the proper amount of emphasis 
     on agricultural and rural development programs and on other 
     programs and activities funded by the bill. It is within the 
     subcommittee's allocation for fiscal year 2003.
       All accounts in the bill have been closely examined to 
     ensure that an appropriate level of funding is provided to 
     carry out the programs of USDA, FDA, CFTC, and FCA. Details 
     on each of the accounts, the funding level, and the 
     Committee's justifications behind the funding levels are 
     included in the report.
       The Committee has encouraged the consideration of grant and 
     loan applications from various entities. The Committee 
     expects the Department only to approve those applications 
     judged meritorious when subjected to the established review 
     process.

                 Government Performance and Results Act

       Public Law 103-0962, the Government Performance and Results 
     Act [GPRA] of 1993, requires Federal agencies to develop 
     succinct and precise strategic plans and annual performance 
     plans that focus on results of funding decisions made by the 
     Congress. Rather than simply providing details of activity 
     levels, agencies will set outcome goals based on program 
     activities and establish performance measures for use in 
     management and budgeting. In an era of restricted and 
     declining resources, it is paramount that agencies focus on 
     the difference they make in citizens' lives.
       The Committee supports the concepts of this law and intends 
     to use the agencies' plans for funding purposes. The 
     Committee considers GPRA to be a viable way to reduce Federal 
     spending while achieving a more efficient and effective 
     Government and will closely monitor compliance with this law. 
     The Committee is fully committed to the success and outcome 
     of GPRA requirements as envisioned by the Congress, the 
     administration, and this Committee.

Accrual Funding of Retirement Costs and Post-Retirement Health Benefits

       The President's Budget includes a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requests an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill,'' as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

               Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA)

       The President's budget includes a legislative proposal to 
     allow the Department of Labor (DOL) to charge agencies for 
     administrative costs related to FECA benefits paid to 
     employees. Currently, although DOL bills agencies for FECA 
     benefits; it does not bill agencies for the costs of 
     administering these benefits.
       The President's budget includes the administrative costs in 
     each agency's budget, as opposed to the DOL budget, where the 
     funds have previously been appropriated. The Committee's 
     recommendation, however, assumes that this proposal will not 
     be enacted into law, and excludes these administrative costs.

                         Rental Payments to GSA

       In recent years, funding for General Services 
     Administration (GSA) rental payments has been appropriated to 
     the USDA Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental 
     Payments account. The budget request proposes decentralizing 
     these expenses and appropriating the proper amounts to each 
     separate agency and activity. The Committee does not support 
     this request, and provides funding for rental payments in the 
     same account as previous years. The Committee expects each 
     agency to properly manage its rental space needs to ensure 
     the most efficient use of limited Federal resources.

                     TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS

                 Production, Processing, and Marketing

                        Office of the Secretary

Appropriations, 2002\1\......................................$2,992,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\.....................................36,667,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,412,000

\1\Excludes $80,919,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations 
provided by Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes $74,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Secretary of Agriculture, assisted by the Deputy 
     Secretary, Under Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries, Chief 
     Information Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and members of 
     their immediate staffs, directs and coordinates the work of 
     the Department. This includes developing policy, maintaining 
     relationships with agricultural organizations and others in 
     the development of farm programs, and maintaining liaison 
     with the Executive Office of the President and Members of 
     Congress on all matters pertaining to agricultural policy.
       The general authority of the Secretary to supervise and 
     control the work of the Department is contained in the 
     Organic Act (7 U.S.C. 2201-2202). The delegation of 
     regulatory functions to Department employees and 
     authorization of appropriations to carry out these functions 
     is contained in 7 U.S.C. 450c-450g.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Secretary, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $3,412,000. This amount is $420,000 more 
     than the 2002 appropriation and $33,255,000 less than the 
     budget request.
       This amount does not include $28,250,000, as requested in 
     the President's budget, for security improvements, as these 
     funds were provided in the fiscal year 2002 emergency 
     supplemental appropriations bill. This amount also does not 
     include an increase of $5,000,000 for Service Center Agencies 
     streamlining, or $5,000 for FECA administrative charges, as 
     proposed in the budget.
       Environmentally preferable products.--The Secretary shall 
     work with the General Services Administration, the Department 
     of Defense, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other 
     appropriate agencies to maximize the purchases of 
     environmentally preferable products, as defined by Executive 
     Order 13101 on Federal Acquisition, Recycling and Waste 
     Prevention. Such products are not only useful in improving 
     the environment, but they can, when the product contains a 
     substantial amount of agri-based content, also open 
     considerable markets for farmers.
       The Department should actively participate in joint task 
     forces and other multiagency entities in this area. It should 
     actively work to properly define standards for agri-based 
     content of products and work towards the development of such 
     environmentally preferable products.
       Drought mitigation.--The Committee is concerned by the lack 
     of a coherent national policy to combat drought. When drought 
     strikes, it is a very serious disaster bringing economic and 
     personal hardships to large sections of the nation. Current 
     conditions in the Pacific Northwest, as one example, have 
     resulted in water supplies for agriculture falling to within 
     only 20 to 30 percent of normal supply. The report of the 
     National Drought Commission, ``Preparing for Drought in the 
     21st Century'', recommends that Congress pass a National 
     Drought Preparedness Act. Such an act would establish a 
     Federal/non-Federal partnership through a National Drought 
     Council responsible for implementing a national drought 
     policy. The Committee expects the Secretary to carry out the 
     recommendations of the National Drought Commission and 
     coordinate USDA mission areas to provide a response to 
     drought-stricken areas in as prompt and meaningful a way as 
     possible.
       Administrative convergence.--The Secretary is expected to 
     seek the Committee's approval before implementing a merger or 
     reduction of any administrative or information technology 
     functions relating to the Farm Service Agency, Natural 
     Resources Conservation Service, USDA Rural Development, or 
     any other agency of the Department.
       Lower Mississippi River Delta.--The Committee remains 
     supportive of actions by the Department to improve economic 
     and social conditions in the Lower Mississippi River Delta. 
     The Committee encourages the Secretary to give consideration 
     to utilizing locations in the Delta for Department-wide 
     functions, such as training sessions, for USDA personnel and 
     other activities, where practicable, in order to help bring 
     added economic stimulus to the region. The Committee is aware 
     that property in Helena, Arkansas, may be available through a 
     gift to the Department for such purposes. The Committee 
     requests the Secretary to investigate this opportunity and to 
     provide a report to the Committee on this subject by March 1, 
     2003.

[[Page 571]]

       Federal procurement of biobased products.--The Secretary, 
     after consultation with the Administrator, the Administrator 
     of General Services, and Secretary of Commerce (acting 
     through the Director of the National Institute of Standards 
     and Technology) shall prepare and from time to time revise 
     guidelines for the use of procuring agencies in complying 
     with the requirements of Public Law 107-171, section 9002. 
     The Secretary shall also work to carry out all other 
     requirements of section 9002.
       Ground and surface water conservation program.--The 
     Committee is concerned that the Secretary may restrict access 
     to funding under the ground and surface water conservation 
     program authorized in the Farm Security and Rural Investment 
     Act to producers in one region of the country. The Committee 
     directs the Secretary to provide access to funds under this 
     program to all eligible producers, and in determining 
     allocations for fiscal year 2003, to give priority to 
     eligible producers who did not benefit from fiscal year 2002 
     funds.

                          Executive Operations

       Executive operations were established as a result of the 
     reorganization of the Department to provide a support team 
     for USDA policy officials and selected Departmentwide 
     services. Activities under the executive operations include 
     the Office of the Chief Economist, the National Appeals 
     Division, and the Office of Budget and Program Analysis.


                            Chief Economist

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,704,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................12,117,000
Committee recommendation.....................................12,016,000

\1\Excludes $391,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Office of the Chief Economist advises the Secretary of 
     Agriculture on the economic implications of Department 
     policies and programs. The Office serves as the single focal 
     point for the Nation's economic intelligence and analysis, 
     risk assessment, energy and new uses, and cost-benefit 
     analysis related to domestic and international food and 
     agriculture issues, and is responsible for coordination and 
     review of all commodity and aggregate agricultural and food-
     related data used to develop outlook and situation material 
     within the Department.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Chief Economist, the Committee 
     recommends $12,016,000. This amount is $4,312,000 more than 
     the 2002 appropriation and $101,000 less than the budget 
     request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $101,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, as requested in the budget.


                       National Appeals Division

Appropriations, 2002........................................$12,869,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................14,334,000
Committee recommendation.....................................13,759,000

\1\Excludes $928,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The National Appeals Division conducts administrative 
     hearings and reviews of adverse program decisions made by the 
     rural development mission area, the Farm Service Agency, the 
     Risk Management Agency, and the Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the National Appeals Division, the Committee recommends 
     $13,759,000. This amount is $890,000 more than the 2002 
     appropriation and $575,000 less than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $575,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, as requested in the budget.


                 Office of Budget and Program Analysis

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,041,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\......................................7,358,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,358,000

\1\Excludes $530,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Office of Budget and Program Analysis provides 
     direction and administration of the Department's budgetary 
     functions including development, presentation, and execution 
     of the budget; reviews program and legislative proposals for 
     program, budget, and related implications; analyzes program 
     and resource issues and alternatives, and prepares summaries 
     of pertinent data to aid the Secretary and departmental 
     policy officials and agency program managers in the 
     decisionmaking process; and provides departmentwide 
     coordination for and participation in the presentation of 
     budget-related matters to the committees of the Congress, the 
     media, and interested public. The Office also provides 
     departmentwide coordination of the preparation and processing 
     of regulations and legislative programs and reports. This 
     amount includes on increase of $269,000 for pay parity costs 
     and benefits.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of Budget and Program Analysis, the 
     Committee recommends $7,358,000. This amount is $317,000 more 
     than the 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget 
     request.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,029,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................31,277,000
Committee recommendation.....................................31,275,000

\1\Excludes $455,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Office of the Chief Information Officer was established 
     in August 1996, pursuant to the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, 
     which required the establishment of a Chief Information 
     Officer for major Federal agencies. This office provides 
     policy guidance, leadership, coordination, and direction to 
     the Department's information management and information 
     technology investment activities in support of USDA program 
     delivery. The Office provides long-range planning guidance, 
     implements measures to ensure that technology investments are 
     economical and effective, coordinates interagency information 
     resources management projects, and implements standards to 
     promote information exchange and technical interoperability. 
     In addition, the Office of the Chief Information Officer is 
     responsible for certain activities financed under the 
     Department's working capital fund (7 U.S.C. 2235). The Office 
     also provides telecommunication and automated data processing 
     [ADP] services to USDA agencies through the National 
     Information Technology Center with locations in Fort Collins, 
     CO, and Kansas City, MO. Direct ADP operational services are 
     also provided to the Office of the General Counsel, Office of 
     Communications, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, 
     and Executive Operations.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends $31,275,000 for the Office of the 
     Chief Information Officer. This amount is $21,246,000 more 
     than the 2002 appropriation and $2,000 less than the budget 
     request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $2,000 for FECA 
     administrative charges, as requested in the budget.

                      Common Computing Environment

Appropriations, 2002........................................$59,369,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................133,155,000
Committee recommendation....................................133,155,000

       The Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 
     requires the Secretary of Agriculture to procure and use 
     computer systems in a manner that enhances efficiency, 
     productivity, and client services, and that promotes computer 
     information sharing among agencies of the Department. The 
     Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 requires USDA to maximize the value 
     of information technology acquisitions to improve the 
     efficiency and effectiveness of USDA programs. Since its 
     beginning in 1996, the USDA Service Center Modernization 
     initiative has been working to restructure county field 
     offices, modernize and integrate business approaches and 
     replace the current, aging information systems with a modern 
     Common Computing Environment that optimizes information 
     sharing, customer service, and staff efficiencies.


                       committee recommendations

       The Committee recommends $133,155,000 for the Common 
     Computing Environment. This is $73,786,000 more than the 2002 
     appropriation and the same as the budget request.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,384,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\......................................7,918,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,877,000

\1\Excludes $481,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       Under the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, the Chief 
     Financial Officer is responsible for the continued direction 
     and oversight of the Department's financial management 
     operations and systems. The Office is also responsible for 
     the management and operation of the National Finance Center. 
     In addition, the Office provides budget, accounting, and 
     fiscal services to the Office of the Secretary, departmental 
     staff offices, Office of the Chief Information Officer, 
     Office of Communications, and executive operations.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the 
     Committee recommends $7,877,000. This amount is $2,493,000 
     more than the 2002 appropriation and $41,000 less than the 
     budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $41,000 for 
     FECA administrative charges, as requested in the budget.
       The Committee recognizes the broad range of activities 
     carried out by the National Finance Center (NFC), and the 
     importance of these activities to both the Department of 
     Agriculture and the other customers it serves. In responding 
     to a directive of this Committee, the Secretary provided a 
     report on the Department's plans for continuing operation of 
     the NFC. While that report included general objectives of 
     enhanced performance and improved effectiveness, few details 
     were included in regard to immediate plans regarding the NFC 
     location or infrastructure. The report concluded that while 
     the Department had every intention of continuing those NFC 
     activities relating to its controllership function, 
     intermediate or long-term plans focusing on other issues 
     would be best addressed within the context of integrated 
     Federal initiatives rather than

[[Page 572]]

     by USDA unilaterally. The Committee is aware that the 
     physical plant in which the NFC is located needs 
     improvements, and certain cyber-security issues, such as 
     ``mirroring'' backup systems, require immediate attention. 
     The Committee expects the Chief Financial Officer to complete 
     a review of NFC needs in regard to physical location and 
     cyber security and to include in future budget requests those 
     items necessary and proper to maintain the NFC in a safe and 
     secure setting.

                          Working Capital Fund

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$21,000,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Working Capital Fund was established in the 1944 
     Appropriations Act. It was created for certain central 
     services in the Department of Agriculture, including 
     duplicating and other visual information services, art and 
     graphics, video services, supply, centralized accounting 
     system, centralized automated data processing system for 
     payroll, personnel, and related services, voucher payments 
     services, and ADP systems. The National Finance Center's 
     expenses are also funded through this fund.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee does not provide an appropriation to the 
     Working Capital Fund, as requested in the budget. This is the 
     same as the 2002 level and $21,000,000 less than the budget 
     request.
       The Committee is aware that approximately $21,700,000 of 
     fiscal year 2002 unobligated balances have been transferred 
     to the Working Capital Fund and will be available for fiscal 
     year 2003 to meet the needs for which an appropriation was 
     requested.

           Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget Estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.......................................$400,000


                       Committee Recommendations

       The Committee recommends $400,000 to establish the Office 
     of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights. This amount is 
     $400,000 more than the 2002 level and the budget request.
       The Committee believes that additional policy level 
     oversight provided through this new Assistant Secretary will 
     be beneficial in addressing these concerns and in 
     establishing policies to improve civil rights performance at 
     the Department.

          Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$647,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................780,000
Committee recommendation........................................780,000

\1\Excludes $17,000 requesed for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration 
     directs and coordinates the work of the departmental staff in 
     carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress relating to 
     real and personal property management, personnel management, 
     equal opportunity and civil rights programs, ethics, and 
     other general administrative functions. In addition, the 
     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration is 
     responsible for certain activities financed under the 
     Department's working capital fund (7 U.S.C. 2235).


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
     Administration, the Committee recommends $780,000. This 
     amount is $133,000 more than the 2002 level and the same as 
     the budget request.

        Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$187,647,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................70,499,000
Committee recommendation....................................197,662,000

\1\Excludes $493,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits, and includes no funding for rental payments.

       Rental payments.--Annual appropriations are made to finance 
     the appropriated portion of the payments to the General 
     Services Administration [GSA] for rental of space and for 
     related services to all USDA agencies, except the Forest 
     Service, which is funded by another appropriations bill.
       The requirement that GSA charge commercial rent rates to 
     agencies occupying GSA-controlled space was established by 
     the Public Buildings Amendments of 1972. The methods used to 
     establish commercial rent rates in GSA space follow 
     commercial real estate appraisal practices. Appeal and rate 
     review procedures are in place to assure that agencies have 
     an opportunity to contest rates they feel are incorrect.
       Building operations and maintenance.--On October 1, 1984, 
     the General Services Administration [GSA] delegated the 
     operations and maintenance function for the buildings in the 
     D.C. complex to the Department. This activity provides 
     departmental staff and support services to operate, maintain, 
     and repair the buildings in the D.C. complex. GSA expanded 
     the delegation to include two additional buildings on October 
     1, 1986. One building is the Government-owned warehouse for 
     forms in Lanham, MD, and the other is a leased warehouse for 
     the excess property operation located at 49 L Street SW, 
     Washington, DC. GSA retains responsibility for major 
     nonrecurring repairs. In fiscal year 1999, USDA began 
     operations and maintenance of the Beltsville office facility.
       Strategic space plan.--The Department's headquarters staff 
     is presently housed in a four-building Government-owned 
     complex in downtown Washington, DC, and in leased buildings 
     in the Metropolitan Washington, DC, area. In 1995, USDA 
     initiated a plan to improve the delivery of USDA programs to 
     the American people, including streamlining the USDA 
     organization. A high-priority goal in the Secretary's plan is 
     to improve the operation and effectiveness of the USDA 
     headquarters in Washington, DC. To implement this goal, a 
     strategy for efficient reallocation of space to house the 
     restructured headquarters agencies in modern and safe 
     facilities has been proposed. This USDA strategic space plan 
     will correct serious problems USDA has faced in its facility 
     program, including the inefficiencies of operating out of 
     scattered leased facilities and serious safety hazards which 
     exist in the Agriculture South Building.
       During fiscal year 1998, the Beltsville Office Facility was 
     completed. This facility was constructed with funds 
     appropriated to the Department and is located on Government-
     owned land in Beltsville, Maryland. In fiscal year 1999, USDA 
     began operations at the Beltsville Office Facility.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For U.S. Department of Agriculture buildings and facilities 
     and payments for the rental of space and related services, 
     the Committee recommends $197,662,000. This amount is 
     $10,015,000 more than the 2002 appropriation and $127,163,000 
     more than the budget request. The Committee does not concur 
     with the President's proposal to fund rental payments in the 
     accounts of USDA agencies occupying GSA controlled space and 
     provides $130,266,000 in this account for rental payments.
       The following table reflects the Committee's specific 
     recommendations for this account as compared to the fiscal 
     year 2002 and budget request levels:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    2003 budget      Committee
                                                                   2002 estimate      request     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rental Payments.................................................         130,266  ..............         130,266
Building Operations.............................................          31,438          36,522          33,419
Strategic Space Plan............................................          25,943          33,977          33,977
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
  Total.........................................................         187,647          70,499         197,662
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Hazardous Materials Management

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,665,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................15,685,000
Committee recommendation.....................................15,685,000

\1\Excludes $59,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act and the Resource Conservation 
     and Recovery Act, the Department has the responsibility to 
     meet the same standards regarding the storage and disposition 
     of hazardous materials as private businesses. The Department 
     is required to contain, clean up, monitor, and inspect for 
     hazardous materials in areas under the Department's 
     jurisdiction.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends $15,685,000 for hazardous 
     materials management. This amount is $20,000 more than the 
     2002 appropriation and the same as the budget request.

                      Departmental Administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$37,079,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................46,398,000
Committee recommendation.....................................42,479,000

\1\Excludes $2,144,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       Departmental administration is comprised of activities that 
     provide staff support to top policy officials and overall 
     direction and coordination of administrative functions of the 
     Department. These activities include departmentwide programs 
     for human resource management, management improvement, 
     occupational safety and health management, real and personal 
     property management, procurement, contracting, motor vehicle 
     and aircraft management, supply management, civil rights and 
     equal opportunity, participation of small and disadvantaged 
     businesses and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers in 
     the Department's program activities, emergency preparedness, 
     small and disadvantaged business utilization, and the 
     regulatory hearing and administrative proceedings conducted 
     by the Administrative Law Judges and Judicial Officer. 
     Departmental Administration also provides administrative 
     support to the Board of Contract Appeals. Established as an 
     independent entity within the Department, the Board 
     adjudicates contract claims by and against the Department, 
     and is funded as a reimbursable activity.
       Departmental administration is also responsible for 
     representing USDA in the development of Governmentwide 
     policies and

[[Page 573]]

     initiatives; and analyzing the impact of Governmentwide 
     trends and developing appropriate USDA principles, policies, 
     and standards. In addition, departmental administration 
     engages in strategic planning and evaluates programs to 
     ensure USDA-wide compliance with applicable laws, rules, and 
     regulations pertaining to administrative matters for the 
     Secretary and general officers of the Department.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For Departmental Administration, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $42,479,000. This amount is $5,400,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and $3,919,000 
     less than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $3,898,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $21,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.

     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,718,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\......................................4,157,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,157,000

\1\Excludes $65,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
     Relations maintains a liaison with the Congress and White 
     House on legislative matters. It also provides for overall 
     direction and coordination in the development and 
     implementation of policies and procedures applicable to the 
     Department's intra- and inter-governmental relations.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional 
     Relations, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $4,157,000. This amount is $439,000 more than the 2002 level 
     and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee allows these funds to be transferred to 
     support congressional relations' activities at the agency 
     level. Within 30 days from the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations on the allocation of these funds by USDA 
     agency, along with an explanation for the agency-by-agency 
     distribution of the funds.

                        Office of Communications

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,894,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\......................................9,637,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,637,000

\1\Excludes $516,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Office of Communications provides direction, 
     leadership, and coordination in the development and delivery 
     of useful information through all media to the public on USDA 
     programs. The Office serves as the liaison between the 
     Department and the many associations and organizations 
     representing America's food, fiber, and environmental 
     interests.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of Communications, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $9,637,000. This amount is $743,000 more 
     than the 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget 
     request.

                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$70,839,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................82,231,000
Committee recommendation.....................................78,127,000

\1\Excludes $4,878,999 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Office of the Inspector General was established October 
     12, 1978, by the Inspector General Act of 1978. This act 
     expanded and provided specific authorities for the activities 
     of the Office of Inspector General which had previously been 
     carried out under the general authorities of the Secretary of 
     Agriculture.
       The Office is administered by an inspector general who 
     reports directly to the Secretary of Agriculture. Functions 
     and responsibilities of this Office include direction and 
     control of audit and investigative activities within the 
     Department, formulation of audit and investigative policies 
     and procedures regarding Department programs and operations, 
     and analysis and coordination of program-related audit and 
     investigation activities performed by other Department 
     agencies.
       The activities of this Office are designed to assure 
     compliance with existing laws, policies, regulations, and 
     programs of the Department's agencies, and to provide 
     appropriate officials with the means for prompt corrective 
     action where deviations have occurred. The scope of audit and 
     investigative activities is large and includes 
     administrative, program, and criminal matters. These 
     activities are coordinated, when appropriate, with various 
     audit and investigative agencies of the executive and 
     legislative branches of the Government.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of Inspector General, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $78,127,000. This is 
     $7,288,000 more than the 2002 appropriation and $4,104,000 
     less than the budget request. This amount does not provide an 
     increase of $4,034,000 for rental payments to GSA, or $70,000 
     for FECA administrative charges, as requested in the budget.

                     Office of the General Counsel

Appropriations, 2002........................................$32,627,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................37,287,000
Committee recommendation.....................................35,588,000

\1\Excludes $2,554,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Office of the General Counsel, originally known as the 
     Office of the Solicitor, was established in 1910 as the law 
     office of the Department of Agriculture and performs all of 
     the legal work arising from the activities of the Department. 
     The General Counsel represents the Department in 
     administrative proceedings for the promulgation of rules and 
     regulations having the force and effect of law and in quasi-
     judicial hearings held in connection with the administration 
     of various programs and acts. The office also serves as 
     general counsel for the Commodity Credit Corporation and the 
     Federal Crop Insurance Corporation and reviews criminal cases 
     arising under the programs of the Department for referral to 
     the Department of Justice.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the General Counsel, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $35,588,000. This amount is 
     $2,961,000 more than the 2002 appropriation and $1,699,000 
     less than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $1,693,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $6,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$573,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................780,000
Committee recommendation........................................780,000

\1\Excludes $17,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, 
     and Economics provides direction and coordination in carrying 
     out the laws enacted by the Congress for food and 
     agricultural research, education, extension, and economic and 
     statistical information. The Office has oversight and 
     management responsibilities for the Agricultural Research 
     Service; Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
     Service; Economic Research Service; and National Agricultural 
     Statistics Service.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Under Secretary for Research, 
     Education, and Economics, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $780,000. This amount is $207,000 more than 
     the 2002 level and the same as the budget request.
       Nutrition monitoring activities are vital to shaping 
     policies for food safety, child nutrition, food assistance, 
     and dietary guidance. While the Committee supports the 
     process underway to integrate the National Health and 
     Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) conducted by the 
     Department of Health and Human Services and the Continuing 
     Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) conducted by 
     USDA, it is concerned that USDA has failed to continue to 
     conduct the CSFII in 2000 and 2001 as the integration process 
     continues. The Committee directs USDA to conduct the CSFII to 
     ensure that the quality of dietary data collected is not 
     diminished, and survey methods capture statistically valid 
     intakes of various population groups, especially at-risk 
     groups, and has provided a $1,000,000 increase to ARS for 
     this purpose.

                       Economic Research Service

Appropriations, 2002........................................$67,200,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................79,243,000
Committee recommendation.....................................65,123,000

\1\Excludes $2,789,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits

       The Economic Research Service [ERS] provides economic and 
     other social science information and analysis for public and 
     private decisions on agriculture, natural resources, food, 
     and rural America. The information ERS produces is for use by 
     the general public and to help the executive and legislative 
     branches develop, administer, and evaluate agricultural and 
     rural policies and programs.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Economic Research Service, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $65,123,000. This amount is $2,077,000 
     less than the 2002 level and $14,120,000 less than the budget 
     request. This amount does not include an increase of 
     $5,914,000 for rental payments to GSA, or $11,000 for FECA 
     administrative charges, as requested in the budget.
       The Committee encourages ERS to fully fund activities 
     relating to the improvement of retail price reporting.
       The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the ERS to carry out 
     food and nutrition studies through the Small Research Grants 
     Program. The Committee provides funding under the Food and 
     Nutrition Service for other studies and evaluations relating 
     to that agency's programs and that agency's responsibilities 
     for administering the food assistance programs within USDA. 
     The Committee directs the ERS to work fully with

[[Page 574]]

     the FNS to ensure that all ongoing studies and evaluations 
     are completed to their full scope. Further, the Committee 
     provides the Secretary with the authority to transfer up to 
     $2,000,000 from FNS to ERS, if such a transfer is deemed 
     necessary for ERS to complete ongoing studies, or if the 
     Secretary determines that a particular proposed study would 
     be more effectively carried out by ERS. The Committee expects 
     to be notified each time that such a transfer of funds 
     occurs, including the amount of the transfer, and a summary 
     of the study for which the transfer was deemed necessary.

                National Agricultural Statistics Service

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$113,786,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\....................................143,659,000
Committee recommendation....................................140,854,000

\1\Excludes $5,410,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The National Agricultural Statistics Service [NASS] 
     administers the Department's program of collecting and 
     publishing current national, State, and county agricultural 
     statistics. These statistics provide accurate and timely 
     projections of current agricultural production and measures 
     of the economic and environmental welfare of the agricultural 
     sector which are essential for making effective policy, 
     production, and marketing decisions. NASS also furnishes 
     statistical services to other USDA and Federal agencies in 
     support of their missions, and provides consulting, technical 
     assistance, and training to developing countries.
       The Service is also responsible for administration of the 
     Census of Agriculture, which was transferred from the 
     Department of Commerce to the Department of Agriculture in 
     fiscal year 1997 to consolidate agricultural statistics 
     programs. The Census of Agriculture is taken every 5 years 
     and provides comprehensive data on the agricultural economy 
     including: data on the number of farms, land use, production 
     expenses, farm product values, value of land and buildings, 
     farm size and characteristics of farm operators, market value 
     of agricultural production sold, acreage of major crops, 
     inventory of livestock and poultry, and farm irrigation 
     practices. The 1997 Census of Agriculture was released on 
     February 1, 1999. The next agricultural census will be 
     conducted beginning in January 2003 for the calendar year 
     2002.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $140,854,000. This 
     amount is $27,068,000 more than the 2002 appropriation and 
     $2,805,000 less than the budget request. This amount does not 
     include an increase of $2,801,000 for rental payments to GSA, 
     or $4,000 for FECA administrative charges, as requested in 
     the budget.
       The Committee recognizes the importance of the Census of 
     Agriculture to collect reliable, accurate data about 
     agriculture in the United States, providing a statistical 
     overview of U.S. farms and ranches every 5 years. This 
     information is critical in order to make informed decisions 
     regarding all aspects of the agricultural sector and rural 
     America. The Committee's recommendation includes an increase 
     of $15,924,000 over the 2002 level for Census of Agriculture 
     activities. The Committee understands this increase is 
     necessary for NASS to carry out the majority of information 
     gathering activities related to the 2002 Census of 
     Agriculture.
       The Committee also encourages NASS to conduct Monthly Hogs 
     and Pigs Inventory reporting, and Barrow and Gilt Slaughter 
     reporting.

                     Agricultural Research Service


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$979,464,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\....................................971,445,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,053,597,000

\1\Excludes $40,000,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations 
provided by Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes $42,641,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Agricultural Research Service [ARS] is responsible for 
     conducting basic, applied, and developmental research on: 
     soil, water, and air sciences; plant and animal productivity; 
     commodity conversion and delivery; human nutrition; and the 
     integration of agricultural systems. The research applies to 
     a wide range of goals; commodities; natural resources; fields 
     of science; and geographic, climatic, and environmental 
     conditions.
       ARS is also responsible for the Abraham Lincoln National 
     Agricultural Library which provides agricultural information 
     and library services through traditional library functions 
     and modern electronic dissemination to agencies of the USDA, 
     public and private organizations, and individuals.
       As the U.S. Department of Agriculture's in-house 
     agricultural research unit, ARS has major responsibilities 
     for conducting and leading the national agricultural research 
     effort. It provides initiative and leadership in five areas: 
     research on broad regional and national problems, research to 
     support Federal action and regulatory agencies, expertise to 
     meet national emergencies, research support for international 
     programs, and scientific resources to the executive branch 
     and Congress.
       The mission of ARS research is to develop new knowledge and 
     technology which will ensure an abundance of high-quality 
     agricultural commodities and products at reasonable prices to 
     meet the increasing needs of an expanding economy and to 
     provide for the continued improvement in the standard of 
     living of all Americans. This mission focuses on the 
     development of technical information and technical products 
     which bear directly on the need to: (1) manage and use the 
     Nation's soil, water, air, and climate resources, and improve 
     the Nation's environment; (2) provide an adequate supply of 
     agricultural products by observing practices that will 
     maintain a sustainable and effective agriculture sector; (3) 
     improve the nutrition and well-being of the American people; 
     (4) improve living in rural America; and (5) strengthen the 
     Nation's balance of payments.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For salaries and expenses of the Agricultural Research 
     Service, the Committee recommends $1,053,597,000. This is 
     $74,133,000 more than the 2002 level and $82,152,000 more 
     than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $2,807,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $234,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.
       The Committee recommendation includes $4,623,000 of the 
     savings from project terminations proposed in the budget. 
     These savings are to be redirected to those research areas 
     for which increased funding is provided by the Committee. The 
     Committee does not provide funding for contingencies.
       For fiscal year 2003, the Committee recommends funding 
     increases, as specified below, for new and ongoing research 
     activities. The remaining increase in appropriations from the 
     fiscal year 2003 level is to be applied to mandatory pay and 
     related cost increases to prevent the further erosion of the 
     agency's capacity to maintain a viable research program at 
     all research locations.
       The Committee expects the agency to give attention to the 
     prompt implementation and allocation of funds provided for 
     the purposes identified by Congress.
       In complying with the Committee's directives, ARS is 
     expected not to redirect support for programs from one State 
     to another without prior notification to and approval by the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in accordance 
     with the reprogramming procedures specified in the Act. 
     Unless otherwise directed, the Agricultural Research Service 
     shall implement appropriations by programs, projects, 
     commodities, and activities as specified by the 
     Appropriations Committees. Unspecified reductions necessary 
     to carry out the provisions of this Act are to be implemented 
     in accordance with the definitions contained in the 
     ``Program, project, and activity'' section of this report.
       The Committee's recommendations with respect to specific 
     areas of research are as follows:
       Aerial application research.--Aerial application is a 
     necessary crop protection tool in farming and permits large 
     areas to be covered rapidly, thus ensuring timely and 
     effective applications of large farming areas. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $120,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level for expanded ARS aerial application research at 
     the College Station, TX, research station.
       Agricultural genomes.--The Committee recognizes the 
     importance of plant/crop genome sequencing and the need to 
     identify genes that influence disease resistance, 
     reproduction and nutrition and provides an increase of 
     $1,175,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level for the 
     proposed research as follows: Beltsville, MD, $475,000; 
     Kerrville, TX, $350,000; and St. Paul, MN, $350,000.
       Agricultural genome bioinformatics.--The Committee provides 
     an increase of $600,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to 
     continue work on the Bioinformatics Institute for Model Plant 
     Species at the National Center for Genome Resources in New 
     Mexico, as authorized in Section 227 of the Agriculture Risk 
     Protection Act (Public Law 106-224).
       Agricultural law, Drake University.--The field of 
     agricultural law and policy is developing rapidly, with many 
     ramifications for agricultural producers and the food and 
     agriculture industry. Developments in food and agricultural 
     law and policy at the State and local level, in particular, 
     are increasingly important to future opportunities for 
     agricultural producers and rural communities. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $150,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     level for support of a national center focusing on State and 
     local food and agricultural law and policy. Drake University 
     in Des Moines, Iowa, is highly qualified to serve as the 
     location of the center. Of the funding available for this 
     increase, $20,000 is available to the Leflar School of Law at 
     Fayetteville, AR.
       Agroforestry research.--The Committee expects the ARS to 
     continue its support for the South Central Family Farm 
     Research Center at Booneville, AR. The Committee expects no 
     less than the fiscal year 2002 level of funding to continue 
     agroforestry research in conjunction with work at the 
     University of Missouri.
       In addition, emerging research indicates that shiitake 
     mushrooms and other similar agroforestry products contain 
     important cancer defeating and cholesterol reducing 
     chemicals. The Committee provides an increase of $50,000 from 
     the fiscal year 2002

[[Page 575]]

     level to the ARS research station at Booneville, AR, for 
     expanded cooperative research with the University of Missouri 
     Agroforestry Center on plants, and in particular, shiitake 
     mushrooms, which contain optimal amounts of these chemicals 
     and to test models to substantiate health and nutrition 
     claims.-
       Animal vaccines.--The U.S. food animal economy continues to 
     be threatened by infectious diseases that can devastate the 
     cattle, swine, and poultry industries. Increased research to 
     investigate the adverse impacts of diseases on cattle, swine, 
     and poultry are critically needed to avoid potential economic 
     disasters, such as the spread of food and mouth disease. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $150,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level to expand current collaborative research 
     between ARS and the Universities of Connecticut and Missouri 
     to develop more effective animal vaccines.
       Appalachian Fruit Research Station.--The Committee 
     recognizes the importance of the fruit research program 
     carried out at the Appalachian Fruit Research Station in 
     Kearneysville, WV, and provides an increase of $350,000 from 
     the fiscal year 2002 level for essential staffing to support 
     the station's ongoing research to identify new alternatives 
     for chemical control of insects, and to develop disease-
     resistant trees.
       Appalachian pasture-based beef systems.--The Committee is 
     aware of the benefits to be derived from the pasture-raised 
     beef research program currently underway at the ARS 
     Appalachian Farming Systems Research Center located in 
     Beaver, WV. The research partnership, which includes West 
     Virginia University, Virginia Tech, and ARS, is targeted to 
     Appalachian cattle farmers. The Committee provides an 
     increase of $125,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for this 
     research, which will ensure the economic viability of these 
     farmers and conserve and protect the region's environment.
       Aquaculture research.--The Committee acknowledges the 
     importance of avoiding duplication in research administered 
     by the U.S. Department of Agriculture at various locations 
     throughout the country. In order to ensure that duplication 
     does not occur in the field of warmwater aquaculture 
     research, the Stuttgart research facility should not engage 
     in channel catfish research related to production systems, 
     nutrition, water quality, genetics, disease diagnosis, or 
     food processing which is ongoing at the National Warmwater 
     Aquaculture Research Center at Stoneville, MS.
       The Committee notes the tremendous opportunities provided 
     through advancements in research related to aquaculture 
     species in terms of producer income, U.S. balance of trade, 
     and healthy diets for Americans. In view of the variety of 
     ARS aquaculture research locations, the Committee believes 
     that adequate sharing of information will best facilitate the 
     operations of all research locations and requests the ARS to 
     provide a listing of specific research projects in the field 
     of aquaculture to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House and the Senate.
       Aquaculture research.--The Committee provides an increase 
     of $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to the 
     USDA/ARS National Small Grains and Potato Germplasm Research 
     Laboratory, Aberdeen, ID, for support for an ARS cereal grain 
     chemist/processing specialist assigned to the UI Hagerman 
     Station to work on value-added processing of barley and oats 
     to produce high-protein concentrates suitable for use in 
     feeds for fish, and soluble fiber and starches for food and 
     industrial uses.
       Arid lands research.--The challenges for agricultural 
     production and natural resource management in the desert 
     Southwest and adjoining border regions are immense. 
     Technologies for arid land agriculture are needed for the 
     remediation of arid and semi-arid rangelands, sustainable 
     agriculture production for growers of irrigated cotton and 
     selected crops, and the restoration of disturbed lands. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for expanded research in rangeland resource 
     management, irrigated farming technology, and environmental 
     horticulture at the Jornada Experimental Range Station at Las 
     Cruces, NM.
       Arkansas Children's Nutrition Center, Little Rock, AR.--The 
     Committee notes the importance of optimizing the nutrition 
     and health of children from conception through adolescence. 
     The Center is leading major research efforts to understand 
     the relationship between chronic disease and diet, genetics, 
     and lifestyle. The Committee provides an increase of $300,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 level for expanded investigations 
     on these issues.
       Biobased products from agricultural commodities.--The 
     Committee is aware of the expanded effort required to develop 
     biobased products and bioenergy from agricultural commodities 
     which will create new demand for U.S. crops. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $1,800,000 over the fiscal year 2002 
     level for increased research on agricultural biomass 
     feedstock and the production of biobased products from 
     agricultural commodities. The research will be conducted at 
     the following research locations: Madison, WI, $400,000; New 
     Orleans, LA, $300,000; Wyndmoor, PA, $500,000; Peoria, IL, 
     $300,000 and Albany, CA, $300,000.
       Biological control research.--The Committee has been 
     impressed by results of the various approaches which have 
     been taken by the Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center 
     in the area of biological controls of cotton insect pests. 
     The economic and environmental benefits of this research 
     could eventually reduce the vulnerability of crops to major 
     insect pests and create alternatives to traditional crop 
     protection methods. The Committee continues funding for this 
     project at the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Biomass crop production.--The Committee provides an 
     increase of $600,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for 
     increased cooperative research between ARS and South Dakota 
     State University to further investigate the applicability of 
     using a method of fiber extrusion to dry and process wet 
     distiller grains from ethanol production into high value feed 
     for cattle, as well as conversion to increased ethanol 
     production.
       Biomedical materials in plants.--Increased research is 
     needed to carry out studies on tobacco and other plants as a 
     medium to produce vaccines and other biomedical products for 
     the prevention of many human and animal diseases. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $425,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for expanded ARS cooperative research with 
     the Biotechnology Foundation.
       Biotechnology research to improve crops and livestock.--
     Biotechnology research has opened the path for sequencing and 
     mapping the genes of crops and livestock, marking genes for 
     adding precision to breeding of improved plants and animals, 
     and identifying gene products through proteomics technology. 
     Other technological advancements can be achieved in the 
     livestock industry through the development of imaging at the 
     molecular level using light, heat, and/or fluorescing 
     signatures. These biotechnology efforts generate huge volumes 
     of data, which must be managed, transmitted electronically, 
     and analyzed. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $1,500,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to ARS at 
     Stoneville, MS, to support cooperative research in genomics 
     and bioinformatics and in the use of biophotonics for the 
     imaging of animal physiological processes at the cellular 
     level.
       Biotechnology risk assessment.--The National Academy of 
     Sciences in a report of April, 2000, ``Genetically Modified 
     Pest-Protected Plants,'' affirms that genetically engineered 
     organisms are not inherently more dangerous then similar 
     organisms derived from conventional selection and breeding. 
     It did, however, identify areas that needed further study. 
     The Committee provides an increase of $1,100,000 for fiscal 
     year 2003 for research proposed in the President's budget as 
     follows: Corvallis, OR; Ames, IA; Phoenix, AZ; $300,000 each 
     and Wapato, WA, $200,000.
       Broiler production in the Mid South.--Reduced broiler 
     production costs are essential for the industry to increase 
     net profit and remain competitive internationally. The 
     Committee recognizes the importance of the cooperation 
     between the ARS Poultry Research Unit and the Mississippi 
     Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station at Mississippi 
     State. This cooperation has resulted in improved bird 
     nutrition, control of mycoplasma disease with vaccines, and 
     overall health, vigor, and growth of the birds through 
     improved housing environmental controls. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $1,000,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     level to expand cooperative research on reducing ammonia 
     levels in poultry litter, improving environmental controls, 
     and reducing mortality in broiler flocks.
       Canal Point sugarcane research.--The ARS sugarcane research 
     laboratory at Canal Point, FL, has successfully contributed 
     to the needs of sugarcane growers for 80 years, providing 
     breed stock to the growers in Texas, Florida, Louisiana and 
     Hawaii. The Committee provides an increase of $750,000 from 
     the fiscal year 2002 funding level to improve the utilization 
     and application of ongoing research that will enhance this 
     sugarcane variety program.
       Catfish Health.--Disease-causing bacteria, viruses, and 
     parasites threaten the economic viability of the Nation's 
     billion dollar catfish industry. Rapid expansion of the U.S. 
     channel catfish industry increases the vulnerability of the 
     industry to outbreaks of diseases and parasites. Research 
     urgently is needed to identify disease vectors, modes of 
     transmission, life cycles and methods for controlling catfish 
     diseases caused by parasites, fungi, bacteria, and viruses. A 
     thorough understanding of the impact of environmental factors 
     on disease will lead to improved management practices for 
     conventional catfish culture in earthen ponds. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $550,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     level for the comprehensive catfish health research program 
     based at the Stoneville, MS, National Warmwater Aquaculture 
     Center. This Center is strategically located in the mid-
     delta, proximal to the vast majority of the U.S. commercial 
     catfish farming acreage and already has a critical mass of 
     scientists, facilities, and instrumentation addressing the 
     disease issue. Ongoing research in genomics and breeding can 
     be expanded to select for fish with disease and parasite 
     resistance, but additional scientists, including a 
     parasitologist and virologist, are required for a 
     comprehensive disease and parasite genetic resistance 
     research program.

[[Page 576]]

       Center for Food Safety and Postharvest Technology.--The 
     Committee is aware of the significance of the research 
     currently underway relating to catfish and other food 
     products at the Mississippi Center for Food Safety and 
     Postharvest Technology and continues funding at the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for research on shellfish safety and methods 
     of decreasing risks to consumers.
       Central Great Plains Research Station.--This is the only 
     ARS station conducting research aimed at solving dryland 
     production problems in Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, and 
     Wyoming. The Committee provides an increase of $600,000 from 
     the fiscal year 2002 funding level to the Central Great 
     Plains Research Station at Akron, CO, for research on 
     extensive crop rotation strategies. Increased research will 
     focus on biological diversity to reduce weed, disease, and 
     insects inherent in single crop rotation and utilize a 
     complete systems approach to quantify comparative yield 
     benefits under various rotation schemes.
       Cereal disease research.--The Committee provides an 
     increase of $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to 
     support the core group of scientists currently performing 
     research at the Cereal Disease Research Laboratory, St. Paul, 
     Minnesota. The Committee directs that the current number of 
     scientists be maintained to effectively tackle the rust and 
     fusarium head blight (FHB) disease which caused 
     $3,000,000,000 in losses to wheat and barley farmers over the 
     last several years.
       Children's Nutrition Research Center.--The Children's 
     Nutrition Research Center at the Baylor College of Medicine, 
     Houston, TX, has helped define the role of nutrition in 
     children's health, growth, and development; contributed to 
     nutritional guidelines used by physicians, parents, and 
     others responsible for the care and feeding of children, and 
     is unique in it's ability to address a broad array of 
     children's nutritional issues. The Committee provides an 
     increase of $600,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for 
     increased investigation of the nutritional needs of pregnant 
     and nursing women, and children from conception to 
     adolescence, at the Children's Nutrition Research Center, 
     Houston, TX.
       Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD).--In order to reduce 
     livestock losses and to improve efficiency of production, it 
     is important to eradicate transmissable spongiform 
     encephalopathies (TSE) in domestic animals. Scrapie of sheep 
     and goats, bovine spongiform encephalopathies (BSE) and 
     chronic wasting disease (CWD) of deer and elk are classes of 
     TSE's of ruminant animals and are fatal diseases that can 
     affect both animals and humans. The Committee provides an 
     increase of $1,000,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding 
     level to the Animal Disease Laboratory, Pullman, WA, and the 
     National Animal Disease Laboratory, Ames, IA, for urgent 
     research on CWD.
       Coffee and cocoa.--The disease resistance and alternative 
     crop research program for coffee and cocoa has important 
     economic benefits and implications for foreign policy goals 
     in South Central America and West Africa. As a globally 
     marketable cash crop, cocoa can provide an alternative, 
     environmentally beneficial choice for small farmers and an 
     incentive to Andean farmers to abandon illegal crops for 
     those that can provide stable long-term economic benefit. 
     Cocoa is produced primarily by small farmers in the tropics 
     of South Central America and West Africa that is also under 
     severe disease pressure which threatens the stability of 
     world supply of cocoa and the economies of other cocoa-
     producing nations. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $900,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to fully 
     realize the research potential of coffee and cocoa as 
     alternatives to illegal crops.-
       Conservation research.--The Committee provides an increase 
     of $250,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to expand 
     important non-irrigated dryland research conducted at the ARS 
     Soil Conservation Laboratory, Pendleton, OR. The research is 
     directed toward developing better management practices and 
     techniques required for sound natural resource conservation 
     in the Columbia River Plateau and regional resource areas for 
     sustainable crop production.
       Cotton genomics, breeding, variety development, and pest 
     resistance.--The Committee recognizes the progress that has 
     been made through the cooperative efforts of the ARS and the 
     Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station at 
     Stoneville, MS, in the research, development, and transfer of 
     improved cotton germplasm to the cotton industry. This 
     cooperative research must be accelerated to incorporate new 
     genetic material into agronomically-acceptable varieties and 
     to transfer reniform nematode and other pest resistance into 
     improved cotton lines. An increase of $700,000 is provided 
     from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to enhance the public 
     cotton breeding program conducted by ARS at Stoneville, MS.
       Corn germplasm.--Corn is a key resource in Iowa and 
     throughout the world, providing food, industrial uses, 
     livestock feed and export. It is important to broaden the 
     germplasm base of corn hybrids grown by American farmers to 
     establish genetic diversity and stability in corn production. 
     The Committee provides an increase of $600,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 level for the ARS Corn Germplasm Research 
     Laboratory at Ames, Iowa for expanded research to increase 
     the productivity and genetic diversity of maize grown in the 
     United States.
       Cotton ginning laboratory.--The Committee continues funding 
     at the fiscal year 2002 level for ginning research at the 
     Stoneville, MS, laboratory.
       Cotton genetics research.--Global competition in the 
     textile industry has caused domestic textile manufacturers to 
     adopt more efficient cotton farm spinning technologies. These 
     new technologies require higher fiber strength to operate 
     resistance to nematodes and insect pests that annually 
     inflict significant losses to the cotton industry. There is a 
     need to broaden the genetic base of cotton germplasm with 
     fiber properties that will meet today's more efficient yarn 
     spinning machines, as well as cotton varieties with improved 
     host resistance to insects and pathogens. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     level for support of a cotton geneticist position at the ARS 
     Cotton Breeding laboratory, Florence, SC.
       Crop Production and Food Processing.--The Committee 
     provides the fiscal year 2002 level to ARS to continue 
     collaborative research with Purdue University on a genomics 
     project to continue in the identification and execution of 
     critical steps in the development of pest resistance in 
     wheat.
       Dairy forage research.--The Committee recognizes the 
     important research on dairy forage carried out by ARS at the 
     U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center in Madison, WI. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $1,150,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for expanded dairy forage research at the 
     center. Of the total increase, $150,000 is provided for 
     increased support of the Wisconsin Integrated Cropping 
     Systems (WICTS) program.
       Delta nutrition intervention initiative.--The Lower 
     Mississippi Delta Nutrition Intervention Research Initiative 
     is a research consortium consisting of ARS and six 
     universities located in Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas. 
     Current appropriations have allowed the consortium to develop 
     important research on the health and nutrition status, food 
     security and diet intake of people who live in the Delta 
     regions of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $1,000,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for nutrition intervention activities that 
     cannot be carried out within currently available funding. 
     Increased funding will allow the consortium to initiate 
     community involved planning, implement interventions, and 
     initiate research to assess the effects on health and 
     nutrition status in a number of counties in each of the three 
     States over the next 5 years.
       Emerging diseases of plants and animals.--The Committee 
     recognizes the importance of research in support of new 
     prevention and control strategies for emerging, reemerging 
     and exotic diseases of plants and animals. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $1,400,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     level for exotic plant disease research at the following 
     locations: Beltsville, MD, $300,000; Frederick, MD, $300,000; 
     Prosser, WA, $200,000; Raleigh, NC, $350,000; and Prosser, 
     WA, $250,000. The Committee provides an additional $3,050,000 
     for exotic animal disease research as follows: Marek's 
     disease, East Lansing, MI, $500,000; Porcine Respiratory 
     disease, Ames, IA, $250,000; Foot and Mouth disease, 
     Greenport, NY, $500,000; Newcastle disease, Athens, GA, 
     $300,000; BSE/TSE at Albany, CA; Ames, IA; and Pullman, WA; 
     $500,000 each.
       Fish disease research.--The development of safe and 
     effective vaccines for prevention of disease in catfish is 
     essential to the growth of the catfish industry. There are 
     currently only a number of approved therapeutic compounds 
     available for farmers to heal diseases of fish. Vaccinations, 
     successful in other animals, appear to be the best means of 
     preventing diseases. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $600,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to the ARS 
     Fish Disease and Parasitic Research Laboratory at Auburn, AL, 
     for increased research on the development of commercially 
     approved vaccines for catfish.
       Floriculture and nursery research.--Nursery and greenhouse 
     products rank third in production in the Nation. As the 
     public demands more plants and trees to help clean the air, 
     prevent water runoff and soil erosion, and improve water 
     conservation and quality, the nursery industry is playing an 
     expanding and significant role in enhancing environmental 
     quality. The Committee provides an increase of $750,000 from 
     the fiscal year 2002 level for expanded ARS floriculture and 
     nursery research aimed at reducing chemical use, improved 
     post-harvest life of flowers and plants, disease and pest 
     resistant flowers and plants, control of root diseases, 
     robotics research, and control of run-off from greenhouse and 
     nursery operations.-
       Food Safety and Engineering.--The Committee provides an 
     additional $600,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for 
     increased collaborative research with Purdue University in 
     the area of food safety and engineering.
       Forage-Livestock Systems.--The Committee provides an 
     increase of $1,000,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding 
     level to ARS to continue a cooperative project with the 
     University of Kentucky on tall fescue breeding and 
     improvement efforts to develop an enhanced national forage 
     base.

[[Page 577]]

       Forage and range research.--The Committee recognizes the 
     important research being carried out by ARS at the Forage and 
     Range Research Laboratory, Logan, UT. The research program 
     seeks to develop and improve range and pasture plants, 
     reinvigorate disturbed and over-used rangelands, effect 
     revegetation following wild fires, combat invasive weeds, and 
     provide improved forages for livestock. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     level for additional research required to develop range and 
     pasture plant varieties.
       Formosan Subterranean Termite.--The management of this 
     termite is essential to Louisiana economic well-being. This 
     termite has infested 32 parishes in Louisiana, with the most 
     severe infestations occurring in the New Orleans and Lake 
     Charles areas. This insect has caused millions of dollars 
     worth of damage with an astonishing $300,000,000 impact in 
     New Orleans alone. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to the Southern 
     Regional Research Center at New Orleans, LA, for expanded 
     research efforts focusing on improved termite detection 
     systems, evaluation of wood products for protecting building 
     materials, and enhancement of bait technology.
       Fort Keogh Livestock and Range Research Laboratory.--The 
     Committee recognizes the threat to long-term sustainability 
     of the Northern Great Plains range livestock industry from 
     infestations of noxious weeds such as leafy spurge and 
     spotted knapweed. The objective of the Fort Keogh, MT, 
     station is to develop low-input rangeland management 
     strategies that impede or control the spread of noxious weeds 
     into native rangelands and planted pastures. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $600,000 for this research for the 
     fiscal year 2002 level.
       Glassy-winged sharpshooter.--The Committee continues to be 
     concerned about the serious costs that the Glassy-winged 
     sharpshooter (GWSS) and Pierce's disease (PD) inflict on U.S. 
     vineyards. Citrus and nursery stock growers now have costly 
     new shipping requirements to inspect and treat plants and 
     crops to curb the spread of GWSS-PD. The Committee provides 
     an increase of $750,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to 
     the ARS Parlier, CA, laboratory to continue its research 
     efforts and collaborations to control and eradicate this 
     devastating carrier and disease.
       Grain sorghum.--The Committee provides an increase of 
     $200,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to the ARS 
     Energy, Soil, and Animal Waste Resources Research Unit in 
     Bushland, TX, to evaluate the feed value of distillers dried 
     grain (DDG). More sorghum is being used for ethanol as 
     farmers look to add value to locally produced crops and to 
     provide oxygenates for gasoline and DDG for livestock feed. 
     Research is needed to determine the relative feeding values 
     of sorghum distillers grains so that it can be nutritionally 
     and economically evaluated for the cattle feeding industry.
       Grapefruit juice/drug interaction research.--With the 
     consumption of grapefruit juice dramatically declining, there 
     is a need to examine and attain more precise data on the 
     effect of grapefruit juice on the absorption rates of certain 
     medications. The Committee provides an increase of $300,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 level to the ARS Citrus Research 
     Laboratory at Winterhaven, FL, for research to identify and 
     characterize the components of grapefruit juice responsible 
     for enzyme suppression, understand the dosage affected, and 
     determine the rate of consumption for safety and efficacy.
       Grand Forks Human Nutrition Laboratory.--Research is needed 
     to study rural health problems related to diet in the 
     Northern Great Plains. Particular emphasis will be given to 
     the diets of Native Americans and the rural elderly. The 
     Committee provides $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level 
     for this program to be carried out by the ARS Grand Forks 
     Human Nutrition Center in cooperation with the University of 
     North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences.
       Harbor Branch aquaculture initiative.--The Committee 
     recognizes that continued expansion of aquaculture 
     enterprises in the United States would increase domestic 
     competitiveness in seafood markets, ease harvest pressures on 
     wild fish stocks, as well as help in offsetting existing 
     trade deficits. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for expanded ARS 
     collaborative research with the Harbor Branch Oceanographic 
     Institute and the Florida State University (FSU) on 
     sustainable marine aquaculture systems. The objectives are to 
     design and operate low-cost, energy efficient, zero discharge 
     aquaculture production systems to produce warm water fish 
     species year round; to expand use of inland agricultural land 
     through aquaculture of salt water species that are adaptable 
     to fresh water; and to generate new aquaculture enterprises.
       Harry Dupree National Aquaculture Research Center.--
     Arkansas leads the Nation in raising hybrid striped bass, as 
     well as in producing 80 percent of the Nation's baitfish and 
     other food fishes. The Committee understands that this Center 
     plays a significant role in meeting the needs of the U.S. 
     aquaculture industry by conducting research aimed at 
     improving yields, food quality, disease control, and stress 
     tolerance. The Committee provides an increase of $300,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 funding level for increased 
     research on the genetic improvement of hybrid striped bass.
       Hawaii Agriculture Research Center.--The Committee provides 
     the fiscal year 2002 level for the Hawaii Agriculture 
     Research Center to enhance the competitiveness of U.S. 
     sugarcane producers and to continue to support the expansion 
     of new crops and products, including those from agroforestry, 
     to complement sugarcane production in Hawaii.
       Hides and leather research.--The USDA's only hides and 
     leather research is carried out at the Eastern Regional 
     Research Center in Wyndmoor, PA. The research provides the 
     hides and leather industry with cost-effective and 
     environmentally safe tanning processes which will enhance 
     U.S. producers' competitiveness in world markets. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $100,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 funding level for this research.
       Horticulture research.--The Committee recognizes the 
     importance of the cooperation between the ARS Small Fruits 
     Research Unit and the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry 
     Experiment Station at Poplarville, MS. This cooperation 
     catalyzed and now undergirds the Gulf Coast blueberry and 
     other small fruit industries. This cooperation has expanded 
     into the development of vegetable, melon, and ornamental 
     industries and can revitalize small farms in the south. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $500,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 funding level to expand the cooperative research 
     and development efforts on ornamentals, vegetables, and 
     melons at Poplarville, MS.
       In addition, Tennessee has a vibrant nursery industry and a 
     growing floricultural and ornamental horticulture industry. 
     The Agricultural Research Service is establishing a research 
     laboratory at the University of Tennessee to jointly conduct 
     and collaborate in plant pathology, entomology, horticulture, 
     germplasm, and biotechnology research to improve rural and 
     suburban economies, and enhance international quality. The 
     Committee supports this ARS/UT collaborative initiative to 
     establish the Appalachian Horticulture Research Institute at 
     Knoxville, TN, and provides an increase of $1,000,000 for 
     staffing at this location from the fiscal year 2003 level.
       Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging (HNRCA).--The 
     HNRCA at Tufts University is one of six USDA research centers 
     that study the effects of human nutrition on health. The 
     program at HNRCA requires additional resources to maintain 
     existing scientists and staff as well as to offset inflation 
     and spiraling energy costs. The Committee provides an 
     increase of $625,000 to ARS from the fiscal year 2002 level 
     to meet these resource needs.
       Hyperspectral Imaging Technology for Protection of the Food 
     Supply and Agricultural Production.--Through a cooperative 
     agreement with the ARS, the Institute for Technology 
     Development at the Stennis Space Center has successfully 
     applied its hyperspectral imaging capabilities to detect 
     fecal contamination on poultry, furthering efforts to 
     increase the safety of the Nation's food supply. The 
     Committee is aware that this technology could be applied to 
     detection of crop diseases such as karnal bunt and rusts, 
     animal diseases such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, and 
     mold/toxins found in food and feed. The Committee provides 
     fiscal year 2003 funding of $700,000, which is to be 
     redirected from the current hyperspectral poultry project, to 
     explore hyperspectral imaging as a possible tool for finding, 
     identifying, and quantifying diseases and infestations that 
     have economic impact and health risks either naturally or as 
     a terrorist act.
       Integrated farming systems.--The Committee understands that 
     Integrated Farming Systems represents the agriculture 
     operation in its entirety, including finances, natural 
     resources and off-farm environmental impacts. The National 
     Soil Tilth Laboratory in Ames, IA, conducts this research 
     with special emphasis on nutrient management. The Committee 
     provides an additional $300,000 for this work from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       IPM strategies for northern climate.--Insect pests, plant 
     pathogens, and weed pests are serious threats to Alaska's 
     economic viability. The Committee recognizes the importance 
     of agricultural research to enhance productivity and 
     profitability of Alaska's farming industry, including the 
     preservation and management of its valuable natural resources 
     utilizing IPM strategies. The Committee provides an increase 
     of $700,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level for 
     expanded research to develop IPM application approaches 
     suitable to northern latitudes that support viable crop and 
     nursery production systems and the sustainability of natural 
     resources.
       Invasive species.--The Committee understands the serious 
     impact that invasive species have on production agriculture. 
     Invasive species are second only to loss of habitat in 
     causing negative impacts on environmental areas and loss of 
     biological diversity. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $1,800,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for the continued 
     development of biological control programs as follows: 
     Beltsville, MD; Davis, CA; Wooster, OH; and Ft. Collins, CO; 
     $300,000 each. The Committee provides $300,000 for expanded 
     research on the Asian Longhorned

[[Page 578]]

     Beetle. The Committee also provides $300,000 for systematics 
     of invasive insects and weeds at Beltsville, MD.
       Johne's Disease (Bovine Paratuberculosis).--Johne's is a 
     contagious disease that causes chronic wasting or 
     debilitating enteritis and eventual death in cattle, sheep, 
     goats, deer and other wild and domestic ruminants. Infected 
     animals intermittently shed the microorganisms into milk and 
     feces. Infection is difficult to diagnose because of the 
     fastidious, slow growth of the microorganisms and the poor 
     reliability of the sero-diagnostic tools. Additional research 
     is needed to develop improved diagnostics and vaccines, and 
     better understanding of the pathogenicity of the organism. 
     The Committee provides an increase of $1,200,000 from the 
     funding level available in fiscal year 2002 for expanded 
     research to control this devastating disease affecting this 
     Nation's beef and dairy industries.-
       Karnal Bunt.--The Committee is aware of the significant 
     threat karnal bunt poses to the U.S. wheat industry and U.S. 
     wheat exports. To aid in development of karnal bunt 
     resistance and control methods, the Committee provides 
     $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for research in this 
     area. The Committee expects ARS to work with Kansas State 
     University to establish a consortium in Manhattan, KS, that 
     will work with other land grant universities in this research 
     area.
       Livestock genome sequencing.--The Committee provides an 
     increase of $300,000 in fiscal year 2003 for the U.S. Meat 
     Animal Research Center at Clay Center, NE, for expanded 
     genomics research to identify the genes that influence 
     disease resistance, reproduction, nutrition, and other 
     economically important traits in livestock. This research is 
     to be performed in collaboration with the University of 
     Illinois.-
       Malignant Catarrhal Fever (MCF) Virus.--The Committee 
     acknowledges the importance of research for the sheep-
     associated virus, Malignant Catarrhal Fever (MCF), infecting 
     small ruminants. The Committee continues the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level for research on the development of vaccines 
     critical to the systematic eradication of MCF virus in small 
     ruminants at the ARS laboratory at Pullman, WA, in 
     cooperation with the ARS sheep, station at Dubois, ID, and 
     Washington State University.
       Michael Fields Agricultural Institute.--The Committee 
     provides an increase of $500,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     level for ARS to initiate collaborative research with the 
     Michael Fields Agricultural Institute. This research will 
     develop high-quality corn in Wisconsin and other Mid-Western 
     States for increased nutritional value and adaptation to 
     sustainable farming systems. Collaborative research will be 
     directed at corn breeding, analysis, corn quality, on-farm 
     research and information dissemination.
       Microbial Genomics.--The Committee recognizes the 
     importance and significance of the joint microbial genomics 
     initiative between the ARS Animal Disease Research Unit at 
     Pullman, WA, and the ARS Tick Research Unit at Kerrville, TX, 
     and continues the fiscal year 2002 level of funding.
       National Agricultural Library.--The Committee provides an 
     increase of $400,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for the 
     National Agricultural Library for the continued development 
     of information technology including new software, 
     telecommunications and networking capabilities. These 
     resources are recommended in the President's fiscal year 2003 
     budget.
       National Cold Water Marine Aquaculture Center.--The 
     Committee notes the importance of aquaculture research to the 
     State of Maine, which leads the Nation in Atlantic salmon 
     cultivation. Other important aquaculture species in Maine 
     include shellfish and trout. Research on marine finfish is 
     vitally important to Maine's aquaculture program. Finfish, 
     including haddock, halibut, and cod, are primary candidates 
     for future diversity of Maine's aquaculture industry. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 funding level for this research, which will be 
     undertaken at the Franklin, Maine, research location.
       National Corn to Ethanol Research Pilot Plant.--The 
     National Corn to Ethanol Research Pilot Plant at 
     Edwardsville, IL, was constructed to avail researchers and 
     commercial producers with a state-of-the-art facility to 
     develop more efficient production of ethanol. The plant is 
     scheduled to begin operations in early 2003 and will operate 
     on a time-share basis to Federal and State agencies, 
     universities, and commercial producers. The plant has the 
     near-term potential to improve the efficiency and decrease 
     the cost of corn conversion for ethanol production. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $750,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level to fund ARS research at the pilot plant. The 
     research will utilize both wet milled and dry milled projects 
     and will focus on processing efficiencies that can be adapted 
     commercially in the near term.
       National nutrition monitoring system.--Health and dietary 
     information gathered from a combined U.S. Department of 
     Agriculture/Department of Health and Human Services is 
     critical to the Nation and plays a key role in shaping 
     national food policies and programs including food safety, 
     food labeling, child nutrition, food assistance and dietary 
     guidance. The Committee provides an increase of $1,000,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 level for the combined national 
     nutrition monitoring program.--
       National Peanut Research Laboratory, Dawson, GA.--The 
     Committee concurs with the authority to purchase land for 
     research at the National Peanut Laboratory at Dawson, GA, as 
     provided under Section 7506, Title VII of the Farm Security 
     and Rural Investment Act of 2002. The Dawson laboratory, 
     which has been conducting research on this property, has 
     entered a lease with an option to purchase this land. The 
     Agency will utilize available funds and will not require 
     additional appropriations to purchase this property.
       National Soil Erosion Laboratory.--The Committee provides 
     an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for 
     salaries and related research expenses for a water quality 
     researcher stationed at the USDA-ARS National Soil Erosion 
     Laboratory at West Lafayette, Indiana.
       National sclerotinia initiative.--The Committee recognizes 
     the importance of controlling this disease which affects 
     sunflowers, soybeans, canola, edible beans, peas and lentils. 
     The Committee provides an increase of $600,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 level for this research initiative which is 
     centered at the ARS research station at Fargo, ND.
       Natural products.--The Committee provides an increase of 
     $400,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for the ARS to 
     continue and accelerate its cooperative research with the 
     National Center for Natural Products Research to discover and 
     develop natural product chemicals for use in agriculture.
       Northern Grains Insect Research Laboratory.--Diverse 
     economic and environmental pressures have impacted 
     agriculture in the Northern Plains. The Northern Grains 
     Insect Research Laboratory in Brookings, South Dakota focuses 
     on production agriculture problems for the Northern Plains. 
     This laboratory is working on research that directly benefits 
     farmers, such as new cropping systems and innovative crop 
     rotations that minimize use of chemicals and tillage. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $600,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for support of two additional scientist 
     positions required by the laboratory to assemble a team of 
     scientists to address the diverse economic and environmental 
     problems in the Northern Plains.
       Northern Great Plains Ecosystem.--The Committee is aware of 
     the research and outreach programs conducted by the ARS 
     Biological Control and Soil Conservation Laboratory at 
     Sidney, Montana. A major focus of research at the station is 
     targeted to biocontrol of invasive and noxious weeds and 
     enhancing the long-term sustainability of range, irrigated 
     and dryland agriculture. Invasive weeds alter ecosystem 
     structure and function, reduces biodiversity, displaces 
     native plants and requires widespread use of herbicides. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $1,000,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level to strengthen this program.
       Noxious weeds in the desert southwest.--Invasive and 
     noxious weeds are expected to infest 140 million acres in the 
     United States by the year 2010. Rangeland and pastures will 
     be the primary land types invaded by these species. The 
     Committee supports the biocontrol research on invasive non-
     native and tree species carried out by ARS at the Jornada 
     Experimental Range in Las Cruces and provides an increase of 
     $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level for this 
     research.
       Ogallala Aquifer.--Surface water in the Central High Plains 
     region is severely limited and the Ogallala Aquifer, which 
     underlies this area, has provided water for the development 
     of a highly significant agricultural economy. However, the 
     Ogallala Aquifer is a finite resource. The Committee provides 
     the Agricultural Research Service an increase of $900,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 level for research into the complex 
     nature of water availability, potential uses, and costs which 
     will help determine future water policy in this region. This 
     research is to be based in Texas but coordinated with other 
     affected States, including Kansas.
       Ornamental and horticulture research.--The Committee 
     recognizes the collaborative research program between ARS and 
     the University of Vermont (UVM). Research currently underway 
     at UVM includes Pear thrips and the Asian Long-horned Beetle. 
     UVM research is critical to the protection of the ornamental 
     and horticulture industries throughout New England. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $150,000 for Pear thrips 
     research from the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Papaya Ringspot Virus.--The Committee provides the fiscal 
     year 2002 level to the University of Hawaii College of 
     Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources to monitor and 
     refine control of the papaya ringspot virus and to expand the 
     techniques and knowledge obtained from this program to other 
     diseases and pests; and to coordinate a program to induce 
     nematode resistance, flowering control, and mealy bug wilt 
     disease resistance in commercial pineapple varieties and to 
     seek funds from the private sector to complement Federal 
     funds. The Committee views the nematode and ringspot virus 
     activities as supportive of a national agricultural research 
     agency and that of Hawaii.

[[Page 579]]

       Phytoestrogens research.--The Committee is aware of the 
     increased consumption of soy products and controversies 
     surrounding the health claims from those products. 
     Phytoestrogens, plant-derived products that can mimic or 
     block estrogen, remain a priority issue for USDA researchers. 
     Research studies have suggested that phytoestrogens have a 
     range of human health benefits that can prevent certain 
     diseases. However, extensive studies on their long-term 
     benefits and side effects are lacking. The Committee provides 
     an increase of $900,000 for this research from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. Current research is carried out at the 
     Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans in 
     collaboration with other universities. The Committee directs 
     $300,000 of these resources be used in collaboration with the 
     University of Toledo to fingerprint and isolate novel 
     products in stressed and unstressed soy.
       Plant and animal pathogen research.--The Committee provides 
     an increase of $500,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for 
     expanded plant pathogen research to be carried out at 
     Frederick, MD. The Committee also provides $500,000 for rapid 
     detection of poultry diseases at the ARS Poultry Disease 
     Laboratory at Athens, GA. New technologies will enhance U.S. 
     food security and strengthen the Nation's competitiveness in 
     global markets.
       Potato Production.--The Committee recognizes the important 
     contributions made by the USDA-ARS research units at Prosser 
     and Yakima, Washington, but encourages closer cooperation 
     between the units in conducting research and solving problems 
     in potato production.
       Potato research.--The Committee is concerned that funding 
     levels and lack of personnel resources limit ARS' ability to 
     address some aspects of potato variety research. The 
     Committee provides an additional $30,000 from the fiscal year 
     2002 level to meet research staffing needs at the Aberdeen, 
     ID, research laboratory.
       Precision agriculture research.--The Committee provides a 
     $750,000 increase from the fiscal year 2002 level for the 
     Mandan Northern Great Plains Research Laboratory for a 
     precision agriculture research project and global climate 
     change research recommended in the budget request at 
     $135,000. The precision agriculture research should be 
     conducted in cooperation with the Upper Midwest Aerospace 
     Consortium and DigitalGlobe. In addition, the Committee has 
     restored the funding provided last year for the Hettinger 
     Extension Service Southwest Feeders Program. ARS researchers 
     can contribute significantly to the knowledge base UMAC can 
     transfer to producers.
       Program continuations.--The Committee directs the 
     Agricultural Research Service to continue to fund the 
     following areas of research in fiscal year 2003 at the same 
     funding level provided in fiscal year 2002: Conservation 
     Research, Pendleton, OR; Dryland Production Research, Akron, 
     CO; Improved Animal Waste Management, Florence, SC; Improved 
     Crop Production Practices, Auburn, AL; Irrigated Cropping 
     Systems in the Mid South, Stoneville, MS; Manure Mangement 
     Research, Ames, IA; Mid-West/Mid-South Irrigation, Columbia, 
     MO; National Sedimentation Lab, Yazoo/TMDL's, Oxford, MS; 
     National Sedimentation Lab, Acoustics, Oxford, MS; National 
     Sedimentation Lab, Yazoo Basin, Oxford, MS; National Soil 
     Dynamics Laboratory, Auburn, AL; New England Plant, Soil, and 
     Water Laboratory, Orono, ME; Northern Great Plains Research 
     Laboratory, Mandan, ND; Pasture Systems and Watershed 
     Management, University Park, PA; Soil, Plant Nutrient 
     Research, Ft. Collins, CO; Seismic and Acoustic Technologies 
     in Soils, Oxford, MS; Soil Tilth Research, Ames, IA; Source 
     Water Protection Initiatives, Columbus, OH/West Lafayette, 
     IN; Waste Management Research, Starkville, MS; Watershed 
     Research, Colombia, MO; Western Grazinglands, Burns, OR; 
     Aerial Application Research, College Station, TX; Alternative 
     Crops and Value Added Products, Stoneville, MS; Appalachian 
     Fruit Research Station, Kearneysville, WV; Appalachian 
     Pasture Based Beef Systems, Beaver, WV; Arctic Germplasm, 
     Palmer, AK; Bee Research, Logan, UT/Weslaco, TX; Binational 
     Agricultural Research and Development Program (BARD); 
     Bioinformatics Institute for Model Plant Species at the 
     National Center for Genome Resources, Santa Fe, NM; 
     Biomedical Materials in Plants, Beltsville, MD; Cereal Crops 
     Research, Fargo, ND; Cereal Crops Research, Madison, WI; 
     Citrus and Horticulture Research, Ft. Pierce, FL; Coffee and 
     Cocoa Research, Miami, FL/Beltsville, MD; Corn Germplasm, 
     Starkville, MS; Cotton Genomics, Breeding, and Variety 
     Development, Stoneville, MS; Corn Resistant to Aflatoxin for 
     the Mid-South, Starkville, MS; Crop Production and Food 
     Processing, Peoria, IL; Ecology of Tamarix, Reno, NV; 
     Endophyte Research, Boooneville, AR; Floriculture/Nursery 
     Crops Research; Ft. Pierce horticultural Research Lab, Ft. 
     Pierce, FL; Golden Nematode, Ithaca, NY; Grain Legume, 
     Pullman, WA; Grain Research, Manhattan, KS; Grape Rootstock, 
     Geneva, NY; Great Basin Rangelands, Boise ID/Reno, NV; 
     Greenhouse and Hydroponics Research, Wooster, OH; Honey Bee 
     Research, Baton Rouge, LA; Hops Research, Corvallis, OR; 
     Improved Forage Livestock Production, Lexington, KY; 
     Integrated Farming Systems/Dairy Forage, Madison, WI; IPM for 
     Northern Climate Crops, Fairbanks, AK; Jornada Experimental 
     Range, Las Cruces, NM; Late Blight Fungus, Orono, ME; 
     Medicinal Botanical Production and Processing, Beaver, WV; 
     Microbial Genomics, Pullman, WA/Kerrville, TX; Minor Use 
     Pesticides (IR-4); National Germplasm Resources Program; 
     National Sclerotinia Initiative, Fargo, ND; National Wheat 
     and Barley Scab Initiative (Fusarium Head Blight), various 
     locations; Northern Grain Insect Laboratory, Brookings, SD; 
     Northwest Small Fruits Research, Corvallis, OR; Oat Virus, 
     West Lafayette, IN; Olive Fruit Fly, Parlier, CA/Montpellier, 
     France; Pecan Scab Research, Byron, GA; Pierce's Disease, 
     Parlier, CA/Ft. Pierce, FL; Plant Stress and Water 
     Conservation, Lubbock, TX; Potato Breeding, Aberdeen, ID; 
     Potato Research Enhancement, Prosser, WA; Rangeland Resources 
     Research, Cheyenne, WY; Rangeland Resource Management, Las 
     Cruces, NM; Red Imported Fire Ants, Stoneville, MS; Residue 
     Management in Sugarcane, Houma, LA; Rice Research, Stuttgart, 
     AR; Risk Assessment for Bt. Corn, Ames, IA; Root Diseases in 
     Wheat and Barley, Pullman, WA; Small Farms, Booneville, AR; 
     Small Fruits Research, Poplarville, MS; Sorghum Research, 
     Manhattan, KS/Bushland, TX/Stillwater, OK/Lubbock, TX; 
     Southwest Pecan Research, College Station, TX; Soybean and 
     Nitrogen Fixation, Raleigh, NC; Soybean Cyst Nematode, 
     Stoneville, MS; Soybean Genetics, Columbia, MO; Soybean 
     Research in the South, Stoneville, MS; Sudden Oak Disease, 
     Ft. Detrick, MD; Sugarbeet Research, Kimberly, ID; Sugarcane 
     Variety Research, Canal Point, FL; Sweet Potato, Stoneville, 
     MS; Temperate Fruit Flies, Yakima, WA; Turfgrass Research, 
     Washington, DC; U.S. Pacific Basin Agricultural Research 
     Center, Hilo, HI; Vegetable Crops Research, Madison, WI; 
     Virus-free Potato Germplasm, Palmer, AK; Viticulture 
     Research, Corvallis, OR; Wheat Quality Research, Pullman, WA/
     Wooster, OH/Manhattan, KS/Fargo, ND; Wild Rice, St. Paul MN; 
     Woody Genomics and Breeding for the Southeast, Poplarville, 
     MS; Animal Vaccines, Greenport, NY; Aquaculture Initiative, 
     Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, Stuttgart, AR; 
     Aquaculture Initiative for Mid-Atlantic Highlands, Leetown, 
     WV; Aquaculture Fisheries Center, Pine Bluff, AR; Aquaculture 
     Systems (Rainbow Trout), Leetown, WV; Asian Bird Influenza, 
     Athens, GA; Avian Pneumovirus, Athens, GA; Bovine Genetics, 
     Beltsville, MD; Broiler Production in the Mid South, 
     Starkville, MS; Catfish Genome, Auburn, AL; Catfish Health, 
     Stoneville, MS; Dairy Forage, Madison, WI; Dairy Genetics 
     Research, Beltsville, MD; Formosan Subterranean Termite, New 
     Orleans, LA; Livestock and Range Research, Miles City, MT; 
     Livestock Genome Mapping Initiative, Clay Center, NE 
     (including the cooperative agreement carried out at Urbana-
     Champaign, IL); National Center for Cool and Coldwater 
     Aquaculture, Leetown, WV; Aquaculture Systems (Freshwater 
     Institute), Leetown, WV; Malignant Catarrhal Fever (MCF), 
     Pullman, WA; National Warmwater Aquaculture Center, 
     Stoneville, MS; Poult Enterititis-Mortality Syndrome (PEMS), 
     Athens, GA; Poultry Diseases, Beltsville, MD/Athens,GA; 
     Seafood Waste, Fairbanks, AK; Shellfish Genetics, Newport, 
     OR; Stuttgart National Aquaculture Research Center, 
     Stuttgart, AR; Trout Genome Mapping, Leetown, WV; Vaccines 
     and Microbe Control for Fish Health, Auburn, AL; Aflatoxin in 
     Cotton, Phoenix, AZ; Biomass Crop Production, Brookings, SD; 
     Biotechnology Research and Development Corporation, Peoria, 
     IL; Cotton Ginning Research, Las Cruces, NM; Food Safety for 
     Listeria and E.coli; Natural Products, Oxford, MS; Barley 
     Food Health Benefits Research, Beltsville, MD; Diet and 
     Immune Function, Little Rock, AR; Nutritional Requirements 
     Research, Houston, TX; Animal Welfare Information Center 
     (NAL), Beltsville, MD; National Center for Agriculture Law 
     (NAL); Honey Bee Research Laboratory, Tuscon, AZ; Bee 
     Research Laboratory, Beltsville, MD; Wild Rice, St. Paul, MN; 
     National Sedimentation Laboratory/Seismic and Acoustics 
     Technologies in Soils, Oxford, MS; Midwest/Mid-South 
     Irrigation, Columbia, MO; Soft Wheat Research Laboratory, 
     Wooster, OH; Wheat Quality Research, Wooster, OH; and Minor 
     Use Pesticides, Corvallis, OR.
       Proposed closure and consolidation of laboratories and 
     programs.--The President's budget recommends a number of 
     location closures, consolidations and reductions of ongoing 
     research. The Committee does not concur with proposals to 
     close selected research laboratories and consolidate and 
     terminate related ongoing research programs. The Committee 
     directs the Agency to maintain these important research 
     programs and laboratories and maintains funding which was 
     eliminated under the President's budget. The research 
     laboratories and ongoing base programs to be continued and 
     restored by this Committee are as follows: the Avian Disease 
     and Oncology Laboratory, East Lansing, MI; Water Management 
     Research Laboratory, Brawley, CA; new England Plant, Soil, 
     and Water Research Laboratory, Orono, ME; the Honey Bee 
     Research Laboratories located at Beltsville, MD; Baton Rouge, 
     LA; and Tucson, AZ; the Cereal Crops Quality Research 
     Laboratories located at Fargo, ND; Madison, WI;

[[Page 580]]

     and Wooster, OH; Biotechnology Research and Development 
     Corporation, Peoria, IL; Animal Health Consortium, Peoria, 
     IL; and the research and laboratories impacted at the Western 
     Regional Research Center, Albany, CA.
       Regional grains genotyping research.--Current regional ARS 
     laboratories characterize germplasm and improve resistance to 
     rusts, blights and insect pests. Regional genotyping centers 
     will overcome the barriers to practical use through DNA 
     extraction and high-throughout marker screening procedures. 
     The Committee strongly supports this regional research 
     program and provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for this research to be carried out at the 
     ARS research laboratory at Raleigh, NC.
       Resistance Management and Risk Assessment in Bt Cotton and 
     Other Plant Incorporated Protectants.--Transgenic Bt cottons 
     have provided outstanding control of insecticide-resistant 
     tobacco budworms and suppressed other cotton caterpillar 
     pests. However, potential evolution of resistance in 
     caterpillar pests to the Bt protein(s) in transgenic cotton 
     threaten the viability of the Bt plant protectant technology. 
     The Environmental Protection Agency has imposed strategies 
     for managing the evolution of resistance to preserve the Bt 
     technology, but it is important to develop data to validate 
     these strategies. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $1,100,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to ARS at 
     Stoneville, MS, to coordinate a national program for devising 
     the most effective and economically sustainable production 
     systems for ensuring the long-term integrity of Bt crop 
     protection and resistance management.
       Seafood waste.--The disposal of seafood waste continues to 
     be a national and international problem. Additional research 
     is needed to determine alternative uses of discarded fish as 
     a possible source of additional income for seafood producers. 
     The Committee supports the existing ARS/University of Alaska 
     collaborative research project on feedstuff that can be 
     generated from materials usually wasted during processing of 
     seafoods. The Committee provides an increase of $200,000 from 
     the level of funding available in fiscal year 2002 for 
     expanded research to address this problem.
       Sedimentation issues in flood-control dam rehabilitation.--
     Nearly 11,000 flood control dams have been constructed by the 
     United States Department of Agriculture nationwide in 2,000 
     watersheds since 1944. These watershed projects represent a 
     $14,000,000,000 infrastructure, providing flood control, 
     municipal water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat 
     enhancement. The life expectancy of these dams is projected 
     to be 50 years. Sedimentation has reduced water-holing 
     capacity, structural components have deteriorated, and safety 
     regulations have become more strict. The Committee provides 
     an increase of $500,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding 
     level to ARS at Oxford, MS, for assessing the efficiency of 
     these structures in regulating floodwater, including the use 
     of acoustics techniques, and hazards that the sediments may 
     pose if introduced into the environment.
       Shellfish genetics.--The West Coast has become the largest 
     regional producer of oysters in the United States with an 
     annual value of $69,000,000. Domestic production does not 
     meet national demands. ARS has established a shellfish 
     genetics research program that focuses on genetics, ecology 
     and food quality. The Committee recognizes the importance of 
     this multi-State research program and provides an additional 
     $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level for 
     shellfish genetics research at the Oregon State University 
     Hatfield Marine Science Center in Newport, OR.
       Silverleaf Whitefly.--The silverleaf whitefly, also known 
     as the sweetpotato whitefly, causes millions of dollars in 
     crop damage in several States, including Hawaii. The 
     Committee recommends participation by all affected States in 
     the collaborative effort to control this pest.
       Small fruits research.--The Committee supports the ongoing 
     research conducted by the Small Fruit Genetics and Pathology 
     Research unit at Corvallis, OR. The demand for fresh and 
     processed berries and grapes in both domestic and 
     international markets continues to grow at a rapid rate. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level of funding for this research which involves 
     cooperation between industry, State and Federal research.
       Soil dynamics research.--The extent of soil degradation in 
     the South not only impairs soil and water quality but also 
     reduces profitability and economic sustainability of farms in 
     the region. Improving profitability of farms in the South is 
     critical to rural economies as farm numbers continue to 
     decline. The Committee provides an increase of $300,000 from 
     the fiscal year 2002 funding level to the ARS Soil Dynamics 
     Laboratory at Auburn, AL, for expanded research to develop 
     technologies and strategies for managing soils to increase 
     farm profitability, and preserve the soil resource for future 
     generations.
       Soil, plant, nutrient research.--The Committee understands 
     the important contributions made by the ARS Ft. Collins Soil, 
     Plant, Nutrient Laboratory and provides an additional 
     $120,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to support 
     the cropping systems and nitrogen management research program 
     carried out at this laboratory.
       Sorghum research.--Sorghum is fourth on the list of 
     economically important grains, behind corn, soybeans, and 
     wheat. However, very little is known about the alternative 
     uses of this major U.S. cash crop with an estimated value of 
     over $2,100,000,000 in 1999. The Committee provides an 
     increase of $150,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level 
     for expanded research at the ARS Grain Sorghum Research 
     Laboratory, Manhattan, KS, on the measurement of sorghum 
     quality and the development of alternative uses of this 
     important crop.
       Sudden oak disease syndrome.--This is a fungus that has 
     afflicted wood and nursery products in California and Oregon 
     in the last several years. Very little is known on how the 
     fungus is spread, which species are vulnerable, and how 
     afflicted species can be treated. The Committee is concerned 
     about the potential spread of the fungus to other parts of 
     the country without the appropriate treatment and management 
     of the disease. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $150,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to the ARS Ft. 
     Detrick, MD, research laboratory for research critical in 
     stemming the spread of this disease.
       Sugarbeet research.--There are 230,000 acres of sugarbeets 
     grown in Idaho and eastern Oregon requiring research 
     technologies to maintain and enhance production and 
     profitability. The Committee provides an increase of $150,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to support research 
     to reduce irrigation and energy costs essential to sugarbeet 
     production. This research is carried out at the ARS Kimberly, 
     ID, research station.
       Sugarcane research.--The Committee is aware of the urgent 
     need for ARS research to provide viable, cost-effective 
     ``green cane'' harvesting methods that will provide 
     alternatives to burning cane in the field. The Committee 
     provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level for this research to be carried out at the 
     Houma, LA, research station.
       Sweet Potato Research.--Sweet potato is a high value, 
     nutritious, alternative crop for the Mid South. Improved 
     production practices, including timing of planting, agronomic 
     practices, and pest control, have the potential for doubling 
     the level of production per acre, further increasing the 
     profitability of this small farm crop. The Committee provides 
     an increase of $350,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding 
     level for ARS, Stoneville, MS, to conduct research on sweet 
     potato production in cooperation with the Alcorn State 
     University Demonstration Farm at Mound Bayou, MS.
       Swine lagoon alternatives research.--The Committee is aware 
     of the research carried out at the ARS Florence, SC, 
     laboratory to treat the waste on small swine farms at a 
     reasonable cost while meeting stringent environmental 
     regulations. The Committee provides an increase of $600,000 
     for this research from the fiscal year 2002 funding level.
       Tree Fruit Industry.--The Committee believes the U.S. tree 
     fruit industry is a vital part of the economy in many regions 
     of this country, and its economic viability is seriously 
     threatened by an unprecedented downturn in profitability. To 
     enhance its competitiveness, the Committee believes the 
     industry needs additional tools to reduce its costs. The 
     Committee recommends that USDA consult with the U.S. tree 
     fruit industry to develop, enhance and disseminate a range of 
     new approaches and technologies, including: fruit genomics, 
     fruit quality, precision agriculture applications, sensor 
     technology, and intelligent and automated orchard and fruit 
     handling systems that will lower costs and improve fruit 
     quality. The Committee requests that USDA develop a plan to 
     address the tree fruit industry's needs and report its 
     progress to the Committee no later than January 1, 2003.
       Trout genome mapping.--The Committee recognizes the 
     important tools of molecular genetics and biotechnology, and 
     their application to solve problems facing the cool and cold 
     water aquaculture industry, which has had a flat growth 
     profile nationally, but is an emerging industry in the 
     Appalachian region. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $600,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level for research 
     on cool and cold water species at the National Center for 
     Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture, in collaboration with West 
     Virginia University.
       Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus.--The Committee is aware of the 
     widespread losses caused by the tomato spotted wilt virus in 
     Hawaii and encourages the agency to collaborate with a fund 
     as appropriate University of Hawaii scientists to transfer 
     generic resistance to tomato spotted wilt virus into 
     University of Hawaii breeding lines for the impacted 
     vegetable crops.
       USDA-ARS New England Plant, Soil, and Water Laboratory.--
     The USDA-ARS New England Plant, Soil, and Water Laboratory, 
     Orono, ME, performs a critical function that benefits not 
     only the Maine economy, but the agriculture industry as a 
     whole. The research performed at this laboratory--including 
     cropping systems and management practices, efficient use of 
     nutrients and water,

[[Page 581]]

     and control of pathogens, insects and weeds--benefits 
     numerous agricultural interests, most notably the potato and 
     livestock industries.
       It is especially vital to New England potato growers that 
     this lab continue and even increase its important research. 
     The laboratory conducts experiments to address unique 
     challenges that face potato growers both in the region and 
     across the Nation. Research at the Orono facility, for 
     example, has included tracking late blight disease, a 
     devastating epidemic that costs potato growers approximately 
     $3,000,000,000 annually. Of the nation-wide locations of 
     USDA-ARS laboratories, this is the only laboratory located in 
     New England and it should be noted that 95 percent of the 
     potato acreage in the six New England States are in Maine 
     where the laboratory has the benefit of being in close 
     proximity to the grower's fields.
       The Committee provides funding at no less than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level to maintain the New England Plant, Soil, and 
     Water Laboratory and research programs.
       U.S. National Plant Germplasm System.--The Committee 
     recognizes the need to collect, identify, characterize and 
     incorporate plant germplasm into centralized gene banks. The 
     value of the U.S. germplasm collections is increasingly clear 
     with the discovery of new genomics tools that can rapidly 
     identify scientifically and commercially useful genes. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $2,650,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for this program as requested in the budget 
     for the following locations: Beltsville, MD, $300,000; 
     Riverside, CA, Parlier, CA, Fort Collins, CO, Corvallis, OR, 
     Davis, CA, Raleigh, NC, Madison, WI, Hilo, HI, and Mayaguez, 
     PR, $250,000 each; and Pullman, WA, $100,000.
       Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center.--The Committee 
     restores base funding not included in the Administration's 
     budget request, and provides an increase of $300,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 level for operating the U.S. Pacific Basin 
     Agricultural Research Center. Of the amount restored for 
     fiscal year 2002 and the added amount provided for fiscal 
     year 2003, one-third is for the Center to continue the 
     recruitment and hiring of scientists and technicians at rates 
     consistent with construction of the Center and its mission; 
     one-third is for the University of Hawaii Hilo to increase 
     its capacity to complement the research of the Center; and 
     one-third is for the University of Hawaii Manoa for improving 
     its statewide capacity to transfer research results and to 
     communicate industry-identified needs and issues to the 
     research community.
       U.S. Vegetable Laboratory.--The Committee is aware of the 
     important scientific staffing requirements of the newly 
     completed U.S. Vegetable Laboratory located at Charleston, 
     SC. Additional scientists are necessary to conduct priority 
     research and to maximize use of the facility. An increase of 
     $600,000 is provided from the fiscal year 2002 level for 
     plant virologist and pathologist positions.
       Virus free fruit tree cultivars.--The Committee recognizes 
     the need for rapid foreign and domestic exchange of varieties 
     to sustain economic vitality of the U.S. tree fruit and 
     nursery industries. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $300,000 for fiscal year 2003 to implement new technologies 
     for more rapid and dependable methods of pathogen detection 
     and to provide secure production and maintenance of virus-
     free fruit tree cultivars. The collaborative research is to 
     be carried out at the Prosser, WA research station with the 
     Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center.
       Viticulture research.--With the emerging importance of the 
     grape and wine industry in the Pacific Northwest, the 
     Committee provides an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 funding level for the viticulture research position 
     at the University of Idaho Parma Research and Extension 
     Center, for research at the Center, and for cooperative 
     research agreements with University of Idaho researchers for 
     viticulture research. It also provides an additional $400,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 funding level to enhance 
     viticulture research at the Northwest Center for Small Fruit 
     Research (NWCSFR). Of this funding increase, $200,000 is to 
     support additional research at the USDA/ARS NWCSFR, and 
     $200,000 is to be awarded competitively for collaborative 
     research between the University of Idaho, Washington State 
     University and Oregon State University. In addition, the 
     Committee supports research carried out at ARS' Prosser, 
     Washington laboratory and provides an increase of $150,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 level for collaborative work with 
     Washington State University on winegrape plant virus 
     research.
       Waste management research.--The Committee provides an 
     increase of $1,000,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to the 
     ARS to continue an expanded joint research project with 
     Western Kentucky University to examine the use of chicken 
     litter as a fertilizer source for fescue pasture, as a 
     nutrient source for cattle, and other agricultural 
     applications such as mushroom culturing.
       Water quality/water use research.--Agricultural producers 
     in the Southeast are seeking solutions to meet reduced 
     irrigation requirements while maintaining or enhancing their 
     net returns. The National Peanut Research Laboratory at 
     Dawson, GA, is conducting research to find solutions to a 
     more restrictive water supply that impacts agriculture and 
     rural economies in Southwest, Georgia. The Committee provides 
     an increase of $300,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for 
     these investigations at the Dawson laboratory.
       Watershed research, Columbia, MO.--The Committee continues 
     the fiscal year 2002 level of funding to ARS for laboratory 
     analysis of water samples collected during implementation of, 
     and in accordance with, the Missouri Watershed Research, 
     Assessment, and Stewardship Project.
       Western grazinglands research.--The Committee is aware of 
     the important rangeland research program conducted at the 
     Burns, OR, laboratory to control invasive weeds which affect 
     the Great Basin. Research is targeted to management of 
     rangelands, conservation, and sustainable practices. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $750,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level for this research.
       Western Wheat Quality Laboratory.--The Committee recognizes 
     the important contributions made by the Western Wheat Quality 
     Laboratory in Pullman, Washington. The Committee provides an 
     additional $150,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to 
     enhance its ability to handle more samples, modernize 
     equipment, and develop new predictive quality tests.
       Wind erosion research.--The Committee provides funding for 
     the Wind Erosion Unit in Manhattan, KS, at the fiscal year 
     2002 level. The Committee directs the ARS to avoid 
     reprogramming or routing any of the provided funds to or 
     through other wind erosion facilities in the ARS system 
     during fiscal year 2003.
       Wheat and barley scab initiative.--The Committee recognizes 
     the importance of the research carried out through the ARS 
     National Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative. Fusarium head 
     blight is a major threat to agriculture, inflicting heavy 
     losses to yield and quality on farms in 18 States. The 
     Committee provides an additional $600,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level of funding for this research.


                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$118,987,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................16,580,000
Committee recommendation....................................100,955,000

\1\Excludes emergency supplemental appropriations of $73,000,000 for 
provided by Public Law 107-117.

       The ARS ``Buildings and Facilities'' account was 
     established for the acquisition of land, construction, 
     repair, improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of 
     fixed equipment or facilities of, or used by, the 
     Agricultural Research Service. Routine construction or 
     replacement items continue to be funded under the limitations 
     contained in the regular account.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For Agricultural Research Service, Buildings and 
     Facilities, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $100,955,000. This is $18,032,000 less than the 2002 
     appropriation and $84,375,000 more than the budget request. 
     The Committee's specific recommendations are indicated in the 
     following table:

                                          ARS BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                      State and facility                                          2003 budget     recommendation
                                                                 2002 enacted       estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona: Water Conservation and Western Cotton Laboratory,               8,400  ...............  ...............
 Maricopa....................................................
California:
    Western Human Nutrition Research Center, Davis...........            5,000  ...............  ...............
    Western Regional Research Center, Albany.................            3,800  ...............  ...............
District of Columbia: U.S. National Arboretum................            4,600            3,000            3,000
Hawaii: U.S. Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center, Hilo            3,000  ...............            3,000
Idaho: Advanced Genetics Laboratory, Aberdeen................              500  ...............            4,600
Illinois:
    National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research,               6,500  ...............  ...............
     Peoria..................................................
Iowa: National Animal Disease Center, Ames...................           40,000  ...............           20,000
Kansas: U.S. Grain Marketing and Production Research Center,             3,000  ...............            4,280
 Manhattan...................................................
Maine: Northeast Marine Cold Water Aquaculture Research                  3,000  ...............            9,150
 Center, Orono/Franklin......................................

[[Page 582]]

 
Maryland:
    Abraham Lincoln National Agricultural Library, Beltsville            1,800            7,400  ...............
    Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville......            3,000            4,180            7,180
Minnesota: Cereal Disease Laboratory, St. Paul...............              300  ...............            3,200
Mississippi:
    Southern Horticultural Laboratory, Poplarville...........              800  ...............            9,200
    National Biological Control Laboratory, Stoneville.......            8,400  ...............  ...............
    Plant Propagation Facility, Oxford.......................  ...............  ...............            2,000
New Mexico: Jornado Experimental Range Management Research                 475  ...............  ...............
 Laboratory, Las Cruces......................................
New York: Plum Island Animal Disease Center, Greenport.......            3,762            2,000            2,000
Oklahoma: Southern Plains Range Research Station, Woodward...            1,500  ...............            8,000
Pennsylvania: Eastern Regional Research Center, Wyndmoor.....            5,000  ...............  ...............
South Carolina: U.S. Vegetable Laboratory, Charleston........            4,500  ...............            1,400
South Dakota: Northern Grain Insects Research Laboratory,                  850  ...............            8,600
 Brookings...................................................
Utah: Poisonous Plant Laboratory, Logan......................            5,600  ...............            1,495
West Virginia:
    National Center for Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture,                 2,200  ...............  ...............
     Leetown.................................................
    Appalachian Fruit Laboratory, Kearnysville...............  ...............  ...............              475
Wisconsin:
    Cereal Crops Research Unit, Madison......................            3,000  ...............            8,400
    Nutrient Management Laboratory, Marshfield...............  ...............  ...............            5,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................          118,987           16,580          100,955
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee provides funds for the design of the U.S. 
     Vegetable Laboratory. Funds are provided for design and 
     construction of the Nutrient Management Research Laboratory. 
     The Committee provides $5,000,000 for planning, design, and 
     construction of a nutrient management research facility to be 
     located in Marshfield, WI. The Committee expects that these 
     funds be used solely toward the establishment of a Federal 
     facility at that location and not be used to replace State 
     funding in related University of Wisconsin facility projects. 
     Funds are also provided to complete construction of the 
     Cereal Disease Laboratory, the Cereal Crops Laboratory, 
     Phases III and IV of the U.S. Grain Marketing Research 
     Laboratory, the Franklin location of the Northeast Marine 
     Cold Water Aquaculture Research Center, the Southern 
     Horticultural Laboratory, the Northern Grain Insects Research 
     Laboratory, the Plant Propagation Facility, Phase I of the 
     Southern Plains Research Center, and greenhouse facilities in 
     conjunction with the Poisonous Plant Laboratory. The funds 
     provided for the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center are 
     for the construction of the poultry facility and to complete 
     the restoration effort of the damaged and destroyed 
     facilities as a result of the deadly tornado strike on 
     September 24, 2001. Additional funds are provided toward 
     modernization and construction of the U.S. Pacific Basin 
     Agricultural Research Center, Advanced Genetics Laboratory, 
     National Animal Disease Center, the Plum Island Animal 
     Disease Center, the Appalachian Fruit Research Station, and 
     the U.S. National Arboretum. Due to budgetary constraints, 
     the Committee is unable to provide the full amount required 
     to complete construction of all projects.
       Columbia, MO.--The Committee directs the ARS to provide a 
     report on the requirements, feasibility, and scope for 
     construction of a new facility to accommodate space needs for 
     personnel located at the ARS Plant Genetics Research 
     laboratory in Columbia, MO. The report should detail building 
     size, cost, associated facilities, scientific capacity, and 
     other requirements required in collaboration with the 
     University of Missouri. The report should detail existing and 
     planned program and resource requirements for this location. 
     The report is to be submitted to the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House and Senate by March 1, 2003.
       Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center.--The Jamie 
     Whitten Delta States Research Center is strategically located 
     in the agriculturally important Yazoo-Mississippi River 
     Delta. Millions of acres of cotton, soybean, rice, and corn 
     are located in this Delta area of Mississippi and millions 
     more are in the Mississippi Floodplain of Louisiana, 
     Arkansas, and Tennessee. The Delta leads the world in channel 
     catfish production with approximately 100,000 acres of ponds. 
     Approximately 200 ARS personnel are located at the Whitten 
     Center, of which 65 are scientists conducting research to 
     increase the efficiency of food and fiber production. The ARS 
     Mid South Area Office is located in the Whitten Center along 
     with the Area Information Technology Office.
       The Committee is aware that the main buildings of the 
     Whitten Center were constructed in 1968 and that present 
     design of these facilities is obsolete and the laboratories 
     do not efficiently accommodate modern biotechnology research. 
     A fiscal year 1999 facility condition survey revealed the 
     need to replace all HVAC and utility support systems and 
     stripping of all laboratories and offices to the concrete 
     walls and rebuilding to meet all current codes and standards 
     for safety, fire protection, accessibility, and air quality. 
     The Committee directs the ARS to report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House and Senate by March 1, 2003, on 
     its plan for facilities modernization at this location, 
     including building requirements, costs and schedule for 
     completion of this work, and urges the Administration to 
     request funding for this modernization project in its fiscal 
     year 2004 budget.
       National Agricultural Library.--The Committee notes that 
     the Abraham Lincoln National Agricultural Library completed a 
     facility condition study in 1991. The estimate to correct 
     identified deficiencies at that time was $18,000,000. Because 
     of escalating costs, funds required to correct these 
     deficiencies are now estimated to be $32,000,000, a 78 
     percent increase over the original estimate. The Committee 
     directs the Agency to review the costs and deficiencies 
     identified 12 years ago; reassess those requirements; and 
     compare current requirements and costs in light of new 
     program technologies and needs. Detail infrastructure needs 
     and phase requirements and options, related costs, and detail 
     appropriated funds already committed to this project.
       Pullman, WA.--The Committee is aware of the need for 
     facilities to accommodate scientists at Pullman, WA and 
     directs the ARS to conduct a feasibility study on the 
     location's facility requirements including scientific 
     capacity, size, and cost including greenhouse and other 
     support facility space requirements. The report is to be 
     submitted to Committee on Appropriations of the House and 
     Senate by March 1, 2003.

      Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

       The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
     Service was established by the Secretary of Agriculture on 
     October 1, 1994, under the authority of the Department of 
     Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6912). The 
     Service was created by the merger of the Cooperative State 
     Research Service and the Extension Service. The mission is to 
     work with university partners and customers to advance 
     research, extension, and higher education in the food and 
     agricultural sciences and related environmental and human 
     sciences to benefit people, communities, and the Nation.


                   research and education activities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$542,062,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\....................................552,549,000
Committee recommendation....................................651,411,000

\1\Excludes $1,084,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The research and education programs administered by the 
     Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service 
     [CSREES] are the U.S. Department of Agriculture's principal 
     entree to the university system of the United States to 
     support higher education in food and agricultural sciences 
     and to conduct agricultural research as authorized by the 
     Hatch Act of 1887 (7 U.S.C. 361a-361i); the Cooperative 
     Forestry Research Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. 582a-7); Public Law 
     89-106, section (2) (7 U.S.C. 450i); the National 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 
     1977 (7 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.); the Equity in Educational Land-
     Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301); the Agricultural 
     Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998; and the 
     Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. Through these 
     authorities, the U.S. Department of Agriculture participates 
     with State and other cooperators to encourage and assist the 
     State institutions to conduct agricultural research and 
     education through the State agricultural experiment stations 
     of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the 
     territories; by approved schools of forestry; by the 1890

[[Page 583]]

     land-grant institutions and Tuskegee University; by colleges 
     of veterinary medicine; and by other eligible institutions.
       The research and education programs participate in a 
     nationwide system of agricultural research program planning 
     and coordination among the State institutions, U.S. 
     Department of Agriculture, and the agricultural industry of 
     America.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For research and education activities of the Cooperative 
     State Research, Education, and Extension Service, the 
     Committee recommends $651,411,000. This amount is 
     $109,349,000 more than the 2002 appropriation and $98,862,000 
     more than the budget request. This does not include an 
     increase of $51,000 for FECA administrative charges, as 
     requested in the budget.
       The following table summarizes the Committee's 
     recommendations for research and education activities of the 
     Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, 
     as compared to the fiscal year 2002 and budget request 
     levels:

    COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICES [CSREES]--RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ACTIVITIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     2002                           Committee
                                                                 appropriation    2003 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payments under Hatch act......................................         180,148         180,148          185,553
Cooperative forestry research (McIntire-Stennis)..............          21,884          21,884           22,541
Payments to 1890 colleges and Tuskegee University.............          34,604          34,604           35,643
Special research grants (Public Law 89-106):
    Advanced genetic technologies (KY)........................             600  ...............             750
    Advanced spatial technologies (MS)........................             978  ...............           1,000
    Aegilops cylindricum/jointed goatgrass (WA)...............             367  ...............             367
    Agricultural diversification (HI).........................             128  ...............             128
    Agricultural diversity--Red River Trade Corridor (MN, ND).             400  ...............             400
    Agriculture science (OH)..................................  ..............  ...............           1,000
    Agriculture water usage (GA)..............................             293  ...............             293
    Agroecology (MD)..........................................             400  ...............             400
    Air quality (TX)..........................................             640  ...............             750
    Alliance for food protection (GA, NE).....................             293  ...............             299
    Alternative crops (ND)....................................  ..............  ...............             400
    Alternative crops for arid lands (TX).....................             100  ...............  ...............
    Alternative nutrient management (VT)......................             186  ...............             190
    Alternative salmon products (AK)..........................             631  ...............             631
    Alternative uses for tobacco (MD).........................             360  ...............             360
    Animal disease research (WY)..............................  ..............  ...............             500
    Animal science food safety consortium (AR, IA, KS)........           1,598  ...............           1,598
    Apple Fire Blight (MI, NY)................................             489  ...............             489
    Aquaculture (AR)..........................................             232  ...............             232
    Aquaculture (FL)..........................................             490  ...............  ...............
    Aquaculture (LA)..........................................             322  ...............             400
    Aquaculture (MS)..........................................             579  ...............             592
    Aquaculture (NC)..........................................             293  ...............             293
    Aquaculture (VA)..........................................             100  ...............             150
    Aquaculture (ID, WA)......................................             600  ...............             800
    Aquaculture product and marketing development (WV)........             733  ...............             750
    Armillaria root rot (MI)..................................             160  ...............             160
    Asparagus technology and production (WA)..................             260  ...............             260
    Babcock Institute (WI)....................................             588  ...............             600
    Beef technology transfer (MO).............................             294  ...............             294
    Berry research (AK).......................................  ..............  ...............             200
    Biomass-based energy reserach (OK, MS)....................             960  ...............           1,250
    Biotechnology (NC)........................................             306  ...............             306
    Biotechnology Test Production (IA)........................  ..............  ...............             500
    Blocking anhydrous methamphetamine production (IA)........             242  ...............             242
    Bovine tuberculosis (MI)..................................             318  ...............             400
    Brucellosis vaccine (MT)..................................             485  ...............             485
    Carbon sequestration (CO).................................  ..............  ...............             250
    Center for food quality (UT)..............................  ..............  ...............             250
    Center for Rural Studies (VT).............................             240  ...............             500
    Chesapeake Bay agroecology/pfiesteria initiative (MD).....             280  ...............             500
    Childhood obesity & nutrition (VT)........................  ..............  ...............             250
    Citrus canker (FL)........................................             490  ...............  ...............
    Citrus tristeza...........................................             725  ...............  ...............
    Competitiveness of agriculture products (WA)..............             665  ...............             665
    Cool season legume research (ID, WA)......................             321  ...............             321
    Cotton fiber quality (GA).................................             400  ...............  ...............
    Cranberry/blueberry (MA)..................................             172  ...............             172
    Cranberry/blueberry disease and breeding (NJ).............             216  ...............             216
    Crop integration and production (SD)......................             200  ...............             350
    Crop diversification (MO).................................             800  ...............             800
    Crop pathogens (NC).......................................  ..............  ...............             400
    Dairy and meat goat research (TX).........................              63  ...............              63
    Dairy farm profitability (PA).............................             294  ...............             500
    Delta rural revitalization (MS)...........................             201  ...............             205
    Designing foods for health (TX)...........................             690  ...............             750
    Diaprepes/root weevil (FL)................................             400  ...............  ...............
    Drought mitigation (NE)...................................             196  ...............             200
    Ecosystems (AL)...........................................             489  ...............  ...............
    Efficient irrigation (NM, TX).............................           1,176  ...............           1,450
    Environmental biotechnology (RI)..........................             400  ...............             750
    Environmental horticulture (FL)...........................             400  ...............  ...............
    Environmental research (NY)...............................             391  ...............  ...............
    Environmental risk factors/cancer (NY)....................             222  ...............  ...............
    Environmentally-safe products (VT)........................             240  ...............             250
    Exotic pest diseases (CA).................................           1,600  ...............           1,800
    Expanded wheat pasture (OK)...............................             286  ...............             286
    Farm injuries and illnesses (NC)..........................             278  ...............             278
    Feed barley for rangeland cattle (MT).....................             833  ...............             833
    Feedstock conversion (SD).................................             560  ...............             560
    Fish & shellfish technologies (VA)........................             465  ...............             465
    Floriculture (HI).........................................             400  ...............             400
    Food Chain Economic Analysis (IA).........................  ..............  ...............             100
    Food & Agriculture Policy Research Institute (IA, MO).....           1,000  ...............           1,800
    Food irradiation (IA).....................................             245  ...............             245
    Food Marketing Policy Center (CT).........................             484  ...............             484
    Food processing center (NE)...............................              42  ...............              42
    Food quality (AK).........................................             342  ...............             350
    Food safety (AL)..........................................             608  ...............           1,600
    Food safety (OK, ME)......................................             400  ...............             800
    Food safety (TX)..........................................  ..............  ...............             250
    Food safety research consortium (NY)......................             800  ...............  ...............
    Food safety risk assesment (ND)...........................             800  ...............           1,500
    Food security (WA)........................................             400  ...............  ...............
    Food Systems Research Group (WI)..........................             490  ...............             500
    Forages for advancing livestock production (KY)...........             367  ...............             500
    Forestry (AR).............................................             512  ...............             512
    Genetic commodity promotions, research & evaluation (NY)..             194  ...............  ...............

[[Page 584]]

 
    Genomics (MS).............................................             640  ...............             800
    Global change/ultraviolet radiation.......................           1,404           2,500            2,500
    Grain sorghum (KS)........................................             104  ...............             175
    Grass seed cropping systems for sustainable agriculture                414  ...............             414
     (ID, OR, WA).............................................
    Greenhouse nurseries (OH).................................  ..............  ...............             300
    Hoop barns (IA)...........................................             200  ...............             225
    Human nutrition (IA)......................................             463  ...............             463
    Human nutrition (LA)......................................             800  ...............             800
    Human nutrition (NY)......................................             609  ...............  ...............
    Hydroponic tomato production (OH).........................             100  ...............  ...............
    Illinois/Missouri Alliance for Biotechnology..............           1,214  ...............           1,214
    Improved dairy management practices (PA)..................             389  ...............             400
    Improved early detection of crop disease (NC).............             194  ...............             194
    Improved fruit practices (MI).............................             239  ...............             239
    Increasing shelf life of agricultural commodities (ID)....             640  ...............             950
    Infectious disease research (CO)..........................             640  ...............             800
    Institute for biobased products & food science (MT).......  ..............  ...............           1,000
    Institute for Food Science and Engineering (AR)...........           1,222  ...............           1,222
    Integrated production systems (OK)........................             176  ...............             176
    Intelligent quality sensor for food safety (ND)...........             360  ...............             360
    International arid lands consortium.......................             484  ...............             484
    Iowa Biotechnology Consortium.............................           1,530  ...............           1,530
    Livestock and dairy policy (NY, TX).......................             558  ...............             558
    Livestock genome sequencing (IL)..........................             400  ...............  ...............
    Lowbush blueberry research (ME)...........................             254  ...............             265
    Maple research (VT).......................................             120  ...............             300
    Meadowfoam (OR)...........................................             293  ...............             293
    Michigan biotechnology consortium.........................             481  ...............             481
    Midwest Advanced Food Manufacturing Alliance..............             452  ...............             461
    Midwest agricultural products (IA)........................             632  ...............             632
    Midwest poultry consortium................................             400  ...............  ...............
    Milk safety (PA)..........................................             600  ...............             750
    Minor use animal drugs (IR-4).............................             588             588   ...............
    Molluscan shellfish (OR)..................................             391  ...............             391
    Montana sheep institute (MT)..............................             400  ...............             675
    Multi-commodity research (OR).............................             356  ...............             356
    Multi-cropping strategies for aquaculture (HI)............             124  ...............             124
    National beef cattle genetic evaluation consortium (NY)...             343  ...............             343
    National biological impact assessment program.............             248             253              253
    Nematode resistance genetic engineering (NM)..............             147  ...............             147
    Nevada arid rangelands initiative (NV)....................             400  ...............             600
    New crop opportunities (AK)...............................             485  ...............             500
    New crop opportunities (KY)...............................             735  ...............             750
    Non-food uses of agricultural products (NE)...............              64  ...............              64
    Nursery, greenhouse and turf specialities (AL)............             320  ...............             320
    Organic Cropping (WA).....................................  ..............  ...............             300
    Organic waste utilization (NM)............................             100  ...............             100
    Oyster post harvest treatment (FL)........................             400  ...............  ...............
    Ozone air quality (CA)....................................             400  ...............             400
    Pasture and forage research (UT)..........................             244  ...............             250
    Peach tree short life (SC)................................             175  ...............             225
    Pest control alternatives (SC)............................             280  ...............             280
    Phytophthora root rot (NM)................................             135  ...............             135
    Phytoremediation Plant Research (OH)......................             280  ...............  ...............
    Pierce's disease (CA).....................................           1,960  ...............           2,500
    Plant, drought, and disease resistance gene cataloging                 244  ...............             244
     (NM).....................................................
    Potato research...........................................           1,568  ...............           1,568
    Precision agriculture (KY)................................             733  ...............             750
    Preharvest food safety (KS)...............................             208  ...............             208
    Preservation and processing research (OK).................             221  ...............             221
    Protein utilization (IA)..................................             186  ...............           1,000
    Rangeland ecosystems (NM).................................             320  ...............             320
    Red snapper research (AL).................................             960  ...............  ...............
    Regional barley gene mapping project......................             760  ...............             760
    Regionalized implications of farm programs (MO, TX).......             287  ...............             287
    Renewable Oil Resources from desert plants (NM)...........             196  ...............             196
    Ruminant nutrition consortium (MT, ND, SD, WY)............             400  ...............             500
    Rural development centers (LA, ND)........................             560  ...............             177
    Rural obesity (NY)........................................  ..............  ...............             500
    Rural Policies Research Institute (NE, IA, MO)............           1,040  ...............           1,040
    Russian wheat aphid (CO)..................................             320  ...............             320
    Satsuma mandarin orange research (AL).....................             800  ...............             800
    Seafood and aquaculture harvesting, processing, &                      298  ...............             305
     marketing (MS)...........................................
    Seafood harvesting, processing, and marketing (AK)........           1,142  ...............           1,200
    Seafood safety (MA).......................................             400  ...............             400
    Seed research (AK)........................................  ..............  ...............             350
    Small fruit research (OR, WA, ID).........................             392  ...............             400
    Soil and environmental quality (DE).......................             120  ...............             150
    Southwest consortium for plant genetics & water resources.             392  ...............             392
    Soybean cyst nematode (MO)................................             686  ...............             686
    Soybean research (IL).....................................             800  ...............             800
    STEEP III--water quality in Pacific Northwest.............             588  ...............             588
    Sudden oak death (CA).....................................  ..............  ...............             150
    Sustainable agriculture (CA)..............................             400  ...............             400
    Sustainable agriculture (MI)..............................             435  ...............             435
    Sustainable agriculture and natural resources (PA)........             123  ...............             123
    Sustainable agriculture systems (NE)......................              59  ...............              59
    Sustainable beef supply (MT)..............................           1,000  ...............           1,000
    Sustainable engineered materials from renewable resources              400  ...............             775
     (VA).....................................................
    Sustainable pest management for dryland wheat (MT)........             452  ...............             452
    Sustainable swine producing & marketing (MN)..............  ..............  ...............             275
    Synthetic gene technology (OH)............................             168  ...............  ...............
    Swine waste management (NC)...............................             489  ...............             489
    Technological development of renewable resources (MO).....             294  ...............  ...............
    Tick borne disease prevention (RI)........................  ..............  ...............             150
    Tillage, silviculture, waste management (LA)..............             400  ...............             400
    Tomato wilt virus (GA)....................................             244  ...............  ...............
    Tropical aquaculture (FL).................................             194  ...............  ...............
    Tropical and subtropical research/T STAR..................           8,000  ...............           5,781
    Tri-State joint peanut research (AL)......................             600  ...............             600
    Uniform farm management program (MN)......................  ..............  ...............             300
    Value-added product development from agricultural                      324  ...............             500
     resources (MT)...........................................
    Value-added products (IL).................................             120  ...............  ...............
    Viticulture consortium (NY, CA, PA).......................           1,600  ...............           1,600
    Water conservation (KS)...................................              79  ...............              79

[[Page 585]]

 
    Water treatment (RI)......................................  ..............  ...............             300
    Water use efficiency and water quality enhancement (GA)...             480  ...............             480
    Weed control (ND).........................................             426  ...............             435
    West Nile virus (IL)......................................  ..............  ...............             750
    Wetland plants (LA).......................................             587  ...............             600
    Wheat genetic research (KS)...............................             255  ...............             255
    Wheat sawfly research (MT)................................             505  ...............             505
    Wood utilization (AK, OR, MS, MN, NC, ME, MI, ID, TN).....           5,670  ...............           6,170
    Wool research (TX, MT, WY)................................             294  ...............             294
                                                               -------------------------------------------------
      Total, special research grants..........................          97,010           3,341          103,834
                                                               =================================================
Improved pest control:
    Emerging pests/critical issues\1\.........................             200  ...............  ...............
    Expert IPM decision support system........................             177             177              177
    Integrated pest management................................           2,725           2,725            2,725
    IR-4 minor crop pest management...........................          10,485          10,485           10,485
    Pest management alternatives..............................           1,619           1,619            1,619
                                                               -------------------------------------------------
      Total, Improved pest control............................          15,206          15,006           15,006
                                                               =================================================
National research initiative..................................         120,452         240,000          204,263
                                                               =================================================
Animal health and disease (sec. 1433).........................           5,098           5,098            5,251
Alternative crops.............................................             924  ...............           1,000
Critical Agricultural Materials Act...........................             720  ...............           1,500
1994 Institutions research program............................             998             998            1,000
Institution challenge grants..................................           4,340           5,500            4,340
Graduate fellowships grants...................................           2,993           3,500            2,993
Multicultural scholars program................................             998             998              998
Hispanic education partnership grants.........................           3,492           3,492            3,500
Capacity building grants (1890 Institutions)..................           9,479           9,479           11,479
Payments to the 1994 Institutions.............................           1,549           1,549            1,700
Alaska Native-Serving & Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions             2,997           2,997            3,500
 Education Grants.............................................
Secondary agriculture education...............................           1,000           1,000            1,000
Sustainable agriculture research and education/SARE...........          12,500           9,230           15,000
Aquaculture centers (sec. 1475)...............................           3,996           3,996            5,000
Federal administration:
    Agriculture-based industrial lubricants (IA)..............             360  ...............             400
    Agriculture development in the American Pacific...........             552  ...............             552
    Agriculture waste utilization (WV)........................             600  ...............             750
    Agriculture water policy (GA).............................             600  ...............             675
    Alternative fuels characterization laboratory (ND)........             294  ...............             310
    Animal waste management (OK)..............................             320  ...............             320
    Aquaculture (OH)..........................................             400  ...............             400
    Aquaculture (PA)..........................................  ..............  ...............             450
    Biotechnology (MS)........................................             680  ...............             800
    Botanical research (UT)...................................             640  ...............             640
    Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (IA)........             600  ...............             600
    Center for innovative food technology (OH)................             765  ...............             765
    Center for North American studies (TX)....................             200  ...............             200
    Cotton research (TX)......................................             880  ...............             880
    FECA surcharge............................................  ..............              51   ...............
    Feed efficiency (WV)......................................             160  ...............             160
    Fruit and vegetable market analysis (AZ, MO)..............             340  ...............  ...............
    Geographic information system.............................           1,199  ...............           1,600
    Germplasm development in forage grasses (OH)..............             100  ...............  ...............
    Government Paperwork Elimination Act......................  ..............           2,250            2,250
    Livestock marketing information center (CO)...............             196  ...............             196
    Mariculture (NC)..........................................             360  ...............             360
    Mississippi Valley State University.......................             633  ...............           1,200
    National Center for Peanut Competitiveness (GA)...........             391  ...............  ...............
    Office of Extramural Programs.............................             439             448              448
    Pay costs and FERS........................................           1,385           2,044            1,849
    Peer panels...............................................             342             349              349
    Phytoremediation plant research (OH)......................  ..............  ...............             280
    Plant life science (MO)...................................  ..............  ...............             200
    PM-10 air quality study (WA)..............................             426  ...............             426
    Precision agriculture/Tennessee Valley Research &                      480  ...............             480
     Extension Center (AL)....................................
    Produce pricing (AZ)......................................              76  ...............  ...............
    Rental payments to GSA....................................  ..............           1,837   ...............
    REE information system....................................           2,078           2,750            2,750
    Rural systems (MS)........................................  ..............  ...............             500
    Salmon quality standards (AK).............................             120  ...............             150
    Shrimp aquaculture (AZ, HI, MA, MS, SC,TX)................           4,214  ...............           4,214
    Sustainable agriculture development (OH)..................             490  ...............  ...............
    Urban silviculture (NY)...................................             232  ...............  ...............
    Water quality (IL)........................................             341  ...............  ...............
    Water quality (ND)........................................             417  ...............             450
    Water pollutants (WV).....................................             206  ...............             706
    Wetland plants (WV).......................................             160  ...............  ...............
                                                               -------------------------------------------------
      Total, federal administration...........................          21,676           9,729           26,310
                                                               =================================================
      TOTAL, CSREES R&E.......................................         542,062         552,549          651,411
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Critical issue is now reflected in Integrated Activities.

       Hatch Act.--The Committee acknowledges the beneficial 
     impact Hatch Act funding has on land-grant universities. 
     Hatch Act provides the base funds necessary for higher 
     education and research involving agriculture. The Committee 
     recommends a funding level of $185,553,000 for payments made 
     under the Hatch Act.
       Special research grants under Public Law 89-106.--The 
     Committee recommends a total of $103,834,000. Specifics of 
     individual grant allowances are included in the table above. 
     Special items are discussed below.
       The Committee is aware of the need for special research 
     grants in order to conduct research to facilitate or expand 
     promising breakthroughs in areas of food and agricultural 
     sciences that are awarded on a discretionary basis. In 
     addition to these grants, the Committee believes research 
     should be supplemented by additional funding that is obtained 
     on a competitive basis.
       Alternative milk policies.--The Committee that directs that 
     of funds made available to the Food and Agriculture Policy 
     Research Institute, $250,000 shall be provided for 
     collaborative work between the University of Missouri and the 
     University of Wisconsin/Madison, for an analysis of dairy 
     policy changes, including trade related matters, and assist 
     Congress in making policy decisions. This project will be a 
     one-stop shop for

[[Page 586]]

     Congressional requests for analysis of alternative dairy 
     policies.
       Aquaculture centers.--The Committee recommends $5,000,000, 
     an increase of $1,004,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level.
       The Committee is aware of and supports aquaculture research 
     efforts at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Great Lakes 
     Wisconsin Aquatic Technology and Environmental Research 
     Institute that is carried out in collaboration with the North 
     Central Regional Aquaculture Center.
       Technology transfer.--The Committee directs CSREES to 
     continue to support at the fiscal year 2002 level the cotton 
     technology transfer coordinator at Stoneville, MS.
       Aquaculture (LA).--Of the amount provided for Aquaculture 
     (LA), the Committee expects that $70,000 shall be used to 
     initiate a multi-year program to conduct clinical 
     epidemiologic research on diseases associated with intensive 
     reptile disease research in Louisiana.
       Aquaculture (Stoneville).--Of the $592,000 provided for 
     this grant, the Committee recommends at least $90,000 for 
     continued studies of the use of acoustics in aquaculture 
     research to be conducted by the National Center for Physical 
     Acoustics in cooperation with the Mississippi Agricultural 
     and Forestry Experiment Station [MAFES] and the Delta 
     Research and Extension Center in Stoneville.
       Potato research.--The Committee expects the Department to 
     ensure that funds provided to CSREES for potato research are 
     utilized for varietal development testing. Further, these 
     funds are to be awarded competitively after review by the 
     potato industry working group.
       Wood utilization research.--The Committee recommends 
     $6,170,000 for wood utilization research. Of the increase 
     provided, an additional $500,000 is made available for the 
     Mississippi Forest and Wildlife Research Center to conduct 
     forest inventories.
       Competitive research grants.--The Committee supports the 
     National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program [NRI] 
     and provides funding of $204,263,000 for the program, an 
     increase of $83,811,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $35,737,000 less than the budget request.
       The Committee remains determined to see that quality 
     research and enhanced human resources development in the 
     agricultural and related sciences be a nationwide commitment. 
     Therefore, the Committee continues its direction that not 
     less than 10 percent of the competitive research grant funds 
     be used for USDA's agricultural research enhancement awards 
     program (including USDA-EPSCoR), in accordance with 7 U.S.C. 
     450i.
       Alternative crops.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for 
     alternative crop research to continue and strengthen research 
     efforts on canola, an increase of $76,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       Sustainable agriculture.--The Committee recommends 
     $15,000,000 for sustainable agriculture, an increase of 
     $2,500,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Increased funds provided for sustainable agriculture 
     research and education should include, but in no way be 
     limited to, projects on organic agriculture. While organic 
     production practices are included under the umbrella of 
     sustainable agriculture, it is critical that funding 
     increases be directed also to research on broader sustainable 
     agriculture production systems and practices. The Committee 
     also directs the Department to allocate a portion of funding 
     increases to on-farm demonstration and producer-research 
     projects.
       Higher education.--The Committee recommends $15,331,000 for 
     higher education. The Committee provides $2,993,000 for 
     graduate fellowships; $4,340,000 for challenge grants; 
     $998,000 for multicultural scholarships; $3,500,000 for 
     grants for Hispanic education partnership grants; and 
     $3,500,000 for Alaska native-serving and native Hawaiian-
     serving institutions.
       The Committee notes that the Department's higher education 
     multicultural scholars program enhances the mentoring of 
     scholars from under-represented groups. The Committee directs 
     the Department to ensure that Alaska Natives participate 
     fully in this program.
       Alaska Native-serving and Native Hawaiian-serving 
     Institutions education grants.--The Committee provides 
     $3,500,000 for noncompetitive grants to individual eligible 
     institutions or consortia of eligible institutions in Alaska 
     and in Hawaii, with grant funds to be awarded equally between 
     Alaska and Hawaii to carry out the programs authorized in 7 
     U.S.C. 3242 (Section 759 of Public Law 106-78). The Committee 
     directs the agency to fully comply with the use of grant 
     funds as authorized.
       Federal administration.--The Committee provides $26,310,000 
     for Federal administration. The Committee's specific 
     recommendations are reflected in the table above.
       Geographic information system program.--The Committee 
     recommends $1,600,000, an increase of $401,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 level, for the Geographic Information System 
     Program. The Committee recommends the amount provided shall 
     be made available for program activities of entities in the 
     same areas as in 2002 on a proportional basis. In addition, 
     it is expected that program management costs will be kept at 
     a minimum and any remaining funds will be distributed to the 
     sites.


              NATIVE AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS ENDOWMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,100,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,100,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,100,000

       The Native American Institutions Endowment Fund authorized 
     by Public Law 103-382 provides an endowment for the 1994 
     land-grant institutions (31 tribally controlled colleges). 
     This program will enhance educational opportunity for Native 
     Americans by building educational capacity at these 
     institutions in the areas of student recruitment and 
     retention, curricula development, faculty preparation, 
     instruction delivery systems, and scientific instrumentation 
     for teaching. Beginning with 2001, income funds are also 
     available for facility renovation, repair, construction, and 
     maintenance. On the termination of each fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall withdraw the income from the endowment fund 
     for the fiscal year, and after making adjustments for the 
     cost of administering the endowment fund, distribute the 
     adjusted income as follows: 60 percent of the adjusted income 
     from these funds shall be distributed among the 1994 land-
     grant institutions on a pro rata basis, the proportionate 
     share being based on the Indian student count; and 40 percent 
     of the adjusted income shall be distributed in equal shares 
     to the 1994 land-grant institutions.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, the 
     Committee recommends $7,100,000. This is the same as the 2002 
     level and the budget request.


                          extension activities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$439,473,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\....................................419,989,000
Committee recommendation....................................452,767,000

\1\Excludes $1,046,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       Cooperative extension work was established by the Smith-
     Lever Act of May 8, 1914. The Department of Agriculture is 
     authorized to provide, through the land-grant colleges, 
     cooperative extension work that consists of the development 
     of practical applications of research knowledge and the 
     giving of instruction and practical demonstrations of 
     existing or improved practices or technologies in 
     agriculture, uses of solar energy with respect to 
     agriculture, home economics, related subjects, and to 
     encourage the application of such information by 
     demonstrations, publications, through 4-H clubs, and other 
     means to persons not in attendance or resident at the 
     colleges.
       To fulfill the requirements of the Smith-Lever Act, State 
     and county extension offices in each State, the District of 
     Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American 
     Samoa, the Northern Marianas, and Micronesia conduct 
     educational programs to improve American agriculture and 
     strengthen the Nation's families and communities.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For extension activities of the Cooperative State Research, 
     Education, and Extension Service, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $452,767,000. This amount is $13,294,000 
     more than the 2002 appropriation and $32,778,000 more than 
     the budget request. This amount does not include an increase 
     of $46,000 for FECA administrative charges, as requested in 
     the budget.
       The following table summarizes the Committee's 
     recommendations for extension activities, as compared to the 
     fiscal year 2002 and budget request levels:

           COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE (CSREES)--EXTENSION ACTIVITIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     Fiscal year      Committee
                                                                   2002 enacted     2003 budget   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith Lever 3(b) and 3(c).......................................         275,940         275,940         284,218
Smith Lever 3(d):
    Farm safety.................................................           5,250  ..............           5,250
    Food and nutrition education (EFNEP)........................          58,566          58,566          58,566
    Indian reservation agents...................................           1,996           1,996           1,996
    Pest management.............................................          10,759          10,759          10,759
    Rural development center....................................             953  ..............  ..............

[[Page 587]]

 
    Sustainable agriculture.....................................           4,750           3,792           5,000
    Youth at risk...............................................           8,481           8,481           8,481
    Youth farm safety education and certification...............             499             499             499
Renewable resources extension act...............................           4,093           4,093           4,093
1890s colleges and Tuskegee University..........................          31,181          31,181          32,117
1890s facilities grants.........................................          13,500          13,500          15,000
Rural health and safety education...............................           2,622  ..............           2,622
Extension services at 1994 institutions.........................           3,273           3,273           3,500
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..................................................         421,863         412,080         432,101
                                                                 ===============================================
Federal administration and special grants:
    General administration and pay..............................           5,227           7,309           7,133
    Ag in the classroom.........................................             600             600             700
    Agricultural & entrepreneurship education (WI)..............  ..............  ..............             260
    Agricultural telecommunications (NY)........................             339  ..............  ..............
    Alabama beef connection.....................................  ..............  ..............             200
    Avian conservation (PA).....................................             320  ..............  ..............
    Beef producers improvement (AR).............................             193  ..............             197
    Botanical garden initiative (IL)............................             232  ..............  ..............
    Conservation technology transfer (WI).......................             490  ..............             500
    Dairy education (IA)........................................             232  ..............             237
    Dairy industry revitalization (WI)..........................  ..............  ..............             375
    Diabetes detection, prevention (WA).........................             906  ..............             924
    E-Commerce (MS).............................................  ..............  ..............             750
    Efficient irrigation (NM, TX)...............................           1,960  ..............           1,960
    Extension specialist (MS)...................................             100  ..............             175
    Family farm beef industry network (OH)......................           1,372  ..............  ..............
    Food animal residue avoidance database/FARAD................             800  ..............             800
    Food preparation & marketing (AK)...........................  ..............  ..............             300
    Food product development (AK)...............................             280  ..............             500
    Health education leadership (KY)............................             800  ..............           1,000
    Income enhancement demonstration (OH).......................             241  ..............  ..............
    Integrated cow/calf management (IA).........................             294  ..............  ..............
    Iowa vitality center (IA)...................................             280  ..............             280
    National Center for Agriculture Safety (IA).................             196  ..............             198
    Pilot technology transfer (OK, MS)..........................             319  ..............             325
    Pilot technology transfer (WI)..............................             160  ..............  ..............
    Potato pest management (WI).................................             396  ..............             400
    Range improvement (NM)......................................             240  ..............             249
    Rural development (AK)......................................             637  ..............             750
    Rural development (NM)......................................             363  ..............             395
    Rural Development (ND)......................................  ..............  ..............             183
    Rural rehabilitation (GA)...................................             240  ..............  ..............
    Rural technologies (HI, WI).................................  ..............  ..............           1,000
    Urban horticulture (WI).....................................             200  ..............             875
    Wood biomass as alternative farm product (NY)...............             193  ..............  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, federal administration..........................          17,610           7,909          20,666
                                                                 ===============================================
      Total, Extension activities...............................         439,473         419,989         452,767
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Ag in the Classroom.--The Committee recommends $700,000 for 
     the Ag in the Classroom program. The Committee is aware of 
     interest in expansion of the Illinois program in cooperation 
     with the Illinois Farm Bureau.
       Farm safety.--Of the funds recommended for farm safety, the 
     Committee recommends a funding level of $4,050,000 for the 
     AgrAbility project being carried out in cooperation with the 
     National Easter Seal Society.
       Pest management.--Included in the amount provided by the 
     Committee for pest management Smith-Lever 3(d) funds is 
     continued funding at the fiscal year 2002 level for potato 
     late blight control, including $400,000 for early disease 
     identification, comprehensive composting for cull disposal, 
     and late blight research activities in Maine.
       Rural health and safety.--The Committee recommends 
     $2,622,000, the same as the fiscal year 2002 level, for rural 
     health and safety education. Included in this amount is 
     $2,190,000 for the ongoing rural health program in 
     Mississippi to train health care professionals to serve in 
     rural areas, and $432,000 for the ongoing rural health and 
     outreach initiative in Louisiana.
       Urban Horticulture.--The Committee provides $875,000 for 
     urban horticulture activities in Wisconsin. Of this total, 
     $600,000 is directed to the University of Wisconsin 
     Extension, and $275,000 is directed to Growing Power of 
     Milwaukee for community food systems.
       World Food and Health Center.--The Committee is aware of an 
     effort to establish a World Food and Health Center at the 
     University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. The Center will 
     conduct and coordinate research, technology and information 
     transfer, and educational programs related to malnutrition, 
     food insecurity, and food safety. The Committee encourages 
     the Department to provide appropriate technical assistance in 
     the development of the Center.


                         integrated activities

Appropriations, 2002........................................$42,853,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................44,865,000
Committee recommendation.....................................48,218,000

       Section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 authorizes an integrated 
     research, education, and extension competitive grants 
     program. Water Quality, Food Safety, and Regional Pest 
     Management Centers programs previously funded under Research 
     and Education and/or Extension Activities are included under 
     this account, as well as new programs that support integrated 
     or multifunctional projects.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For integrated activities of the Cooperative State 
     Research, Education, and Extension Service, the Committee 
     recommends $48,218,000. This amount is $5,365,000 more than 
     the 2002 level and $3,353,000 more than the budget request.
       The following table summarizes the Committee's 
     recommendations for integrated activities:

          COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE (CSREES)--INTEGRATED ACTIVITIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     Fiscal year      Committee
                                                                   2002 enacted     2003 budget   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical Issues--Plant & Animal Diseases\1\.....................  ..............             500             500
Rural Development Centers\1\....................................  ..............           1,513           1,513
Water Quality...................................................          12,971          12,971          12,971
Food Safety.....................................................          14,967          14,967          14,967
Pesticide Impact Assessment.....................................           4,531           4,531           4,531
International Science & Education Grants........................  ..............           1,000  ..............
Crops at Risk from FQPA: Implementation.........................           1,497           1,497           1,497
FQPA Risk Mitigation Program for Major Food Crop Systems........           4,889           4,889           4,889
Methyl Bromide Transition Program...............................           2,498           2,498           3,000

[[Page 588]]

 
Organic Transition Program......................................           1,500             499           1,750
Agriculture Technologies........................................  ..............  ..............           2,600
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................          42,853          44,865          48,218
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Critical Issue SRGs and Rural Development Centers SRG and Smith-Lever 3(d) programs that were previously
  funded under Research & Education Activities and/or Extension Activities, are now reflected in Integrated
  Activities.

       Organic transition program.--The organic transition program 
     shall be administered by the Cooperative State, Research, 
     Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) in order to address 
     all issues that are applicable to the transition process to 
     certified organic production, including soil and crop 
     fertility; marketing; weed, insect, and other pest 
     management; and other issues.


              outreach for socially disadvantaged farmers

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,243,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,243,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,493,000

       This program is authorized under section 2501 of title XXV 
     of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 
     1990. Grants are made to eligible community-based 
     organizations with demonstrated experience in providing 
     education on other agriculturally-related services to 
     socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers in their area of 
     influence. Also eligible are the 1890 land-grant colleges, 
     Tuskegee University, Indian tribal community colleges, and 
     Hispanic-serving postsecondary education facilities.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For outreach for socially disadvantaged farmers, the 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,493,000. This 
     amount is $250,000 more than the 2002 level and the budget 
     request.

  Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$654,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................780,000
Committee recommendation........................................780,000

\1\Excludes $17,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and 
     Regulatory Programs provides direction and coordination in 
     carrying out laws enacted by the Congress with respect to the 
     Department's marketing, grading, and standardization 
     activities related to grain; competitive marketing practices 
     of livestock, marketing orders, and various programs; 
     veterinary services; and plant protection and quarantine. The 
     Office has oversight and management responsibilities for the 
     Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; Agricultural 
     Marketing Service; and Grain Inspection, Packers and 
     Stockyards Administration.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and 
     Regulatory Programs, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $780,000. This is $126,000 more than the 
     2002 level and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee is aware of the nutritional and economic 
     benefits of farmers' market programs such as the WIC and 
     Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Programs, currently funded 
     through the Food and Nutrition Service. These programs 
     improve nutrition among low-income mothers, children and 
     senior citizens by giving them access to locally grown fresh 
     fruits and vegetables, as well as benefit the farmers who 
     participate. The Committee directs the Under Secretary to 
     work with the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 
     Consumer Services to study the potential for a broad Farmers' 
     Market Program within the Agricultural Marketing Service, 
     which would encompass the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition 
     Program, the Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, and 
     the recently authorized Farmers' Market Promotion Program. 
     The Committee requests a report on the the Department's 
     analysis for program recommendations, including cost 
     estimates, by March 1, 2003.

               Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service


                         salaries and expenses

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Total, APHIS
                                                                  Appropriations   User fees\1\   appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\2\.........................................    $535,677,000     $84,813,000    $620,490,000
Budget estimate, 2003\3\........................................     767,119,000  ..............     767,119,000
Committee recommendation........................................     735,673,000  ..............     735,673,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes additional resources from the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform [FAIR] Act of 1996 direct
  appropriation.
\2\Excludes $105,000,000 emergency supplemental appropriations provided by Public Law 107-117.
\3\Excludes $15,108,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Secretary of Agriculture established the Animal and 
     Plant Health Inspection Service [APHIS] on April 2, 1972, 
     under the authority of reorganization plan No. 2 of 1953, and 
     other authorities. The major objectives of APHIS are to 
     protect the animal and plant resources of the Nation from 
     diseases and pests. These objectives are carried out under 
     the major areas of activity, as follows:
       Pest and disease exclusion.--The Agency conducts inspection 
     and quarantine activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent 
     the introduction of exotic animal and plant diseases and 
     pests. The Agency also participates in inspection, survey, 
     and control activities in foreign countries to reinforce its 
     domestic activities.
       Agricultural quarantine inspection (AQI).--The agency 
     collects user fees to cover the cost of inspection and 
     quarantine activities at U.S. ports of entry to prevent the 
     introduction of exotic animal and plant diseases and pests. 
     The Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform [FAIR] Act of 
     1996 (Public Law 104-127) provides that beginning in 2003, 
     all AQI user fee collections will become available without 
     the need for annual appropriations, and the program will 
     operate like a typical user fee program, with spending 
     determined by the demand for AQI services.
       Plant and animal health monitoring.--The Agency conducts 
     programs to assess animal and plant health and to detect 
     endemic and exotic diseases and pests.
       Pest and disease management programs.--The Agency carries 
     out programs to control and eradicate pest infestations and 
     animal diseases that threaten the United States; reduce 
     agricultural losses caused by predatory animals, birds, and 
     rodents; provide technical assistance to other cooperators 
     such as States, counties, farmer or rancher groups, and 
     foundations; and ensure compliance with interstate movement 
     and other disease control regulations within the jurisdiction 
     of the Agency.
       Animal care.--The Agency conducts regulatory activities 
     that ensure the humane care and treatment of animals and 
     horses as the Animal Welfare and Horse Protection Acts 
     require. These activities include inspection of certain 
     establishments that handle animals intended for research, 
     exhibition, and as pets, and monitoring certain horse shows.
       Scientific and technical services.--The Agency performs 
     other regulatory activities, including the development of 
     standards for the licensing and testing of veterinary 
     biologicals to ensure their safety and effectiveness; 
     diagnostic activities to support the control and eradication 
     programs in other functional components; applied research to 
     reduce economic damage from vertebrate animals; development 
     of new pest and animal damage control methods and tools; and 
     regulatory oversight of genetically engineered products.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For salaries and expenses of the Animal and Plant Health 
     Inspection Service, the Committee recommends total funding of 
     $735,673,000. This is $115,183,000 more than the 2002 
     appropriation and $31,446,000 less than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $26,709,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $277,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.
       The following table reflects the Committee's specific 
     recommendations for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
     Service:

                                   ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Fiscal year
                                                                 Fiscal year      2003 budget       Committee
                                                                 2002 enacted       request       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pest and disease exclusion:
    Agricultural quarantine inspection.......................           47,254           69,591           64,188
    User fees................................................        \1\84,813            (\2\)  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------

[[Page 589]]

 
      Subtotal, agricultural quarantine inspection...........          132,067           69,591           64,188
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
    Cattle ticks.............................................            6,232            6,498            6,354
    Foot-and-mouth disease/emerging foreign animal diseases..            3,839            8,010            7,989
    Import/export............................................            8,132           10,379            9,556
    Trade issues resolution and management...................           11,367           11,605           11,527
    Fruit fly exclusion and detection........................           36,818           62,963           64,924
    Screwworm................................................           30,557           30,795           30,679
    Tropical bunt tick.......................................              415              424              422
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, pest and disease exclusion......................          229,427          200,265          195,639
                                                              ==================================================
Plant and animal health monitoring:
    Animal health monitoring and surveillance................           70,931           93,786           93,526
    Animal and plant health regulatory enforcement...........            8,101            8,479            8,538
    Emergency Management System..............................            4,044           11,133           11,043
    Pest detection...........................................            6,844           26,933           26,880
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, plant and animal health monitoring..............           89,920          140,331          139,987
                                                              ==================================================
Pest and disease management programs:
    Aquaculture..............................................            1,130              970            1,397
    Biocontrol...............................................            8,759            9,430            9,118
    Boll weevil..............................................           77,355           36,860           62,000
    Brucellosis eradication..................................            9,800            8,855           10,358
    Chronic wasting disease..................................  ...............            7,233           14,900
    Emerging plant pests.....................................        \3\39,515          129,483           69,415
    Golden nematode..........................................              810              658              630
    Grasshopper..............................................         \3\3,615            4,219            4,369
    Gypsy moth...............................................            4,559            4,838            4,677
    Imported fire ant........................................            2,868            2,232            3,000
    Johne's disease..........................................            3,000            3,122           21,000
    Noxious weeds............................................            1,255            1,182            1,611
    Pink bollworm............................................            1,866            1,732            1,666
    Plum pox.................................................  ...............            5,551            5,551
    Pseudorabies.............................................            4,151            4,379            4,286
    Scrapie eradication......................................            3,119           22,543            8,178
    Tuberculosis.............................................            8,694           19,816           14,895
    Wildlife services operations.............................           49,071           67,487           67,144
    Witchweed................................................            1,520            1,583            1,530
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, pest and disease management.....................          221,087          332,173          305,725
                                                              ==================================================
Animal care:
    Animal welfare...........................................           15,167           14,580           16,408
    Horse protection.........................................              415              499              493
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, animal care.....................................           15,582           15,079           16,901
                                                              ==================================================
Scientific and technical services:
    Biotechnology/environmental protection...................           10,516           11,273           10,997
    Information technology infrastructure....................            1,748            4,602            4,602
    Plant methods development laboratories...................            5,118            5,607            5,373
    Veterinary biologics.....................................           11,763           13,436           13,167
    Veterinary diagnostics...................................           18,278           24,336           23,921
    Wildlife services methods development....................           12,955           15,914           15,258
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, scientific and technical services...............           60,378           75,168           73,318
                                                              ==================================================
Contingency fund.............................................            4,096            4,103            4,103
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, salaries and expenses...........................          620,490          767,119          735,673
                                                              ==================================================
Recap (salaries and expenses):
    Appropriated.............................................          535,677          767,119          735,673
    Agricultural quarantine inspection user fees.............           84,813  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, salaries and expenses...........................          620,490          767,119          735,673
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not include additional AQI resources provided in the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform (FAIR)
  Act of 1996 direct appropriation.
\2\Does not require a direct appropriation in fiscal year 2003 by operation of the FAIR Act of 1996.
\3\Includes a transfer of $3,615,000 from the emerging plants pest account to the grasshopper account.

       The Committee is unable to provide the full increases 
     requested in the President's budget for the Animal and Plant 
     Health Inspection Services. However, the Committee does 
     provide increases for a number of specific animal and plant 
     health programs. The Committee does not concur with the 
     President's request to amend the Agriculture Risk Protection 
     Act to prevent the Secretary of Agriculture from transferring 
     funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation to combat 
     emergencies for plant pest or noxious weed infestations that 
     the Commodity Credit Corporation funded the previous year. 
     The Committee directs the Secretary to continue use of 
     contingency funding from Commodity Credit Corporation monies, 
     as in past fiscal years, to cover needs as identified in the 
     President's budget and any additional emergencies as the 
     Secretary determines necessary.
     Pest and Disease Exclusion
       AQI.--For fiscal year 2003, the Committee provides an 
     appropriation of $64,188,000 for the AQI appropriated 
     account. The Committee provides an increase of $3,000,000 
     above the budget request to conduct preclearance quarantine 
     inspections of persons, baggage, cargo, and other articles 
     destined for movement from the State of Hawaii to the 
     continental United States, Guam, Puerto Rico, or the United 
     States Virgin Islands.
       The Committee urges the Department to establish protocols 
     that allow shipment of untreated fruits and vegetables grown 
     in Hawaii to cold-weather States during winter months while 
     maintaining reasonable assurances that potential 
     transshipment of such produce will not jeopardize the 
     phytosanitary standards of warm weather States.
       The Committee continues its interest in more efficient and 
     less disruptive inspection of passengers and cargo at Hawaii 
     airports and, from within available funds, directs APHIS to 
     provide not less than the number of inspectors and inspection 
     equipment required in the APHIS-Hawaii staffing plan for 
     fiscal year 2002. The Committee also encourages the agency to 
     aggressively identify and evaluate flexible hiring and staff 
     deployment arrangements, such as the Senior Environmental 
     Employment Program, to minimize overtime rates charged to 
     agricultural shippers. The Committee further encourages APHIS 
     to acquire and deploy commercially available, state-of-the 
     art inspection technology and equipment for key ports of 
     entry, such as Hawaii, to screen passenger luggage for banned 
     agricultural products to reduce the introduction of dangerous 
     agricultural pests and diseases in the United States.

[[Page 590]]

       The Committee urges APHIS to continue working closely with 
     U.S. avocado growers to implement procedures for the 
     importation of Mexican avocados. The Committee directs APHIS 
     to report on the status of Mexican avocado imports, including 
     problems in pest surveys, oversight by APHIS personnel, and 
     the diversion of Mexican avocados to other than approved 
     destinations. The Committee directs APHIS to include 
     independent, third party scientists in the development of any 
     pest risk assessment for Mexican avocados, prior to the 
     publication of any such pest risk assessment in the Federal 
     Register. The Committee also directs APHIS to report to 
     Congress prior to publishing any rules expanding the approved 
     areas or lengthening time periods for the importation of 
     Mexican avocados.
       Fruit fly exclusion and detection.--The Committee provides 
     $64,924,000 for the fruit fly exclusion and detection 
     program, which includes an increase of $23,258,000 to enhance 
     international activities to prevent Medflies from moving into 
     the United States, and an increase of $3,182,000 to enhance 
     activities at U.S. borders.
     Plant and animal health monitoring
       Animal health monitoring and surveillance.--The Committee 
     provides $93,526,000 for the Animal Health Monitoring and 
     Surveillance account. The Committee provides continued 
     funding of $750,000 for a cooperative agreement with the 
     Wisconsin Animal Health Consortium for ongoing activities 
     related to animal and animal-based product tracking and 
     database management. The Committee also provides continued 
     funding of $500,000 for the National Farm Animal 
     Identification and Records Project, and an increase of 
     $300,000 for the New Mexico Rapid Syndrome Validation Program 
     to develop an early detection and reporting system for 
     infectious animal diseases. The Committee encourages APHIS to 
     work with the Wisconsin Animal Health Consortium, the 
     National Farm Animal Identification and Records Project, and 
     the Rapid Syndrome Validation Program to ensure that program 
     duplication does not occur, and to develop a coordinated, 
     comprehensive plan for future activities. The Committee 
     requests a report on the progress on the development of this 
     plan by April 1, 2003.
       The Committee provides $100,000, an increase of $50,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 level, to continue the cooperative 
     agreement with the Murray State University, Breathitt 
     Veterinary Center, Hopkinsville, KY, to determine the impact 
     on animal health from common agricultural chemical usage.
       The Committee provides an increase of $1,000,000 toward the 
     placement of alkaline digesters for destroying and disposing 
     of animal carcasses suspected of transmissible spongiform 
     encephalopathy infection and other animal diseases. Of this 
     amount, the Committee provides $750,000 for Auburn University 
     College of Veterinary Medicine at the J.B. Taylor Diagnostic 
     Laboratory in Elba, AL, and $250,000 for the Mississippi 
     Animal Disease and Research Diagnostic Laboratory in Jackson, 
     MS.
       The Committee is concerned about the recent avian influenza 
     outbreak that has resulted in the destruction of poultry 
     flocks in order to contain the disease. The Committee 
     recommends that the Department implement a program to control 
     and eradicate this disease, with inclusion of such a program 
     in the President's fiscal year 2004 budget request.
       Animal and plant health regulatory enforcement.--The 
     Committee provides an increase of $160,000 for the animal and 
     plant health regulatory enforcement account for additional 
     activities in support of increased Animal Welfare Act 
     compliance inspections.
       The Committee is very concerned about reports of illegal 
     animal fighting activities and directs the Secretary to work 
     with relevant agencies on the most effective and proper means 
     for investigating and enforcing laws and regulations 
     regarding these activities. The Committee requests that the 
     Secretary provide a report by March 1, 2003, on actions taken 
     to address this matter.
       Emergency management systems.--The Committee provides 
     $11,043,000 for the emergency management systems program. The 
     Committee encourages APHIS to work with the North Carolina 
     Department of Agriculture's Emergency Programs Division to 
     establish a viable and effective disease surveillance and 
     detection program for the prevention or rapid control of 
     potential foreign animal diseases, plant pests, or similarly 
     dangerous pathogens, toxins, and hazardous substances.
       Pest detection.--The Committee provides an increase of 
     $175,000 above the budget request for the pest detection 
     program for a baseline survey of pinewood nematode in Alaska 
     to comply with phytosanitary export requirements necessary to 
     export timber.
     Pest and disease management
       Aquaculture.--The Committee provides $1,397,000 for the 
     aquaculture program, an increase of $247,000 above the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. The Committee provides an increase of 
     $100,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level to expand telemetry 
     and population dynamics studies to develop environmentally 
     and economically sustainable methods to help catfish farmers 
     manage cormorant and pelican populations. The Committee also 
     provides an increase of $150,000 to create, manage, and 
     operate an Invasive Aquatic Species Program with the Florida 
     Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
       Boll weevil.--The Committee provides $62,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 2003 to continue the Boll Weevil Eradication Program. 
     This funding will provide the active eradication zone areas 
     with a 30 percent cost share and possible exceptions to 
     address special funding requirements arising from 
     extraordinary circumstances in some States.
       Brucellosis eradication.--The Committee provides $558,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 level for the bruccellosis 
     program. This amount continues funding of $750,000 for the 
     State of Montana to protect the State's brucellosis-free 
     status and for the operation of the bison quarantine facility 
     and the testing of bison that surround Yellowstone National 
     Park.
       The Committee provides $900,000, an increase of $300,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 level, for the Greater Yellowstone 
     Interagency Brucellosis Committee, and encourages the 
     coordination of Federal, State, and private actions to 
     eliminate brucellosis from wildlife in the Greater 
     Yellowstone area. This amount shall be equally divided 
     between the States of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming.
       The Committee provides an increase of $100,000 for the 
     Arkansas Livestock and Poultry Commission Brucellosis 
     Program.
       Chronic wasting disease.--The Committee is very concerned 
     about the escalating number of deer and elk in different 
     regions of the U.S. testing positive for chronic wasting 
     disease and provides $14,900,000, which is $7,667,000 above 
     the budget request, to expand the chronic wasting disease 
     certification and control program to include additional 
     surveillance and disease control activities with free-ranging 
     cervids, and to increase State testing capacity for the 
     timely identification of the presence of this disease.
       The Committee is aware of the development of a rapid prion 
     assay that would more effectively test for BSE in meat 
     processing facilities and for Chronic Wasting Disease in the 
     field for evaluating wild game. The Committee directs the 
     Department to undertake a review of this testing technology 
     and, if warranted, to move forward with a pilot program using 
     this technology.
       Emerging plant pests.--The Committee provides an increase 
     of $29,900,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level for emerging 
     plant pests. Within this total, the Committee provides 
     $9,000,000 for Pierce's disease; $8,000,000 for the Asian 
     long-horned beetle program in Illinois and New York, of which 
     no less than $1,500,000 shall be for activities in the area 
     of Chicago, IL; $10,000,000 for citrus canker; and $2,000,000 
     for sudden oak death syndrome. The Committee expects the 
     Secretary to make funds available from the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation for activities related to these and other plant 
     pests in fiscal year 2003, as necessary.
       The Committee is aware that APHIS has a compensation 
     program in place for wheat producers, grain handlers, and 
     facilities that Karnal Bunt impacts. However, the 
     compensation provided for handlers and facilities does not 
     adequately represent the costs these facilities incur when 
     they receive deliveries of Karnal Bunt-infected wheat. This 
     inadequate compensation has led to many facilities refusing 
     to participate in activities to prevent the spread of Karnal 
     Bunt in the United States. Due to the serious threat that 
     Karnal Bunt poses to U.S. wheat production and exports, the 
     Committee expects APHIS to work with the grain handling 
     industry to develop an adequate compensation plan, and to 
     report back to the Committee on its recommendations and 
     actions no later than March 1, 2003.
       The Committee notes that APHIS signed a cooperative 
     agreement with the Washington State Department of Agriculture 
     to survey and eradicate the citrus longhorned beetle. The 
     Committee recognizes that the citrus longhorned beetle 
     presents a severe threat to hardwood trees and tree fruit 
     crops, and urges APHIS to direct the resources necessary to 
     eradicate the citrus longhorned beetle.
       Grasshopper.--The Committee provides $4,369,000 for the 
     grasshopper account, an increase of $150,000 above the budget 
     request. Of this amount, no less than $650,000 shall be for 
     grasshopper and Mormon cricket activities in the State of 
     Utah: $150,000 to prepare necessary environmental documents, 
     and $500,000 to continue control measures; and no less than 
     $300,000 shall be for grasshopper and Mormon cricket 
     activities in the State of Nevada, including survey, control, 
     and eradication of crickets.
       Imported fire ant.--The Committee provides $3,000,000 for 
     the imported fire ant account, $868,000 above the budget 
     request, to continue sharing responsibility with the States 
     to conduct detection and nursery surveys; compliance 
     monitoring; enforcement for quarantine of nursery stock; and 
     production, field release, and evaluation of promising 
     control agents. This amount includes an increase of $260,000 
     to the State of Tennessee for additional control activities.
       Johne's disease.--The Committee provides $21,000,000 for 
     Johne's disease, which is $17,946,000 above the budget 
     request, to expand the agency's efforts to coordinate State 
     certification programs for herd-testing, and

[[Page 591]]

     to provide additional assistance to States to develop herd 
     management plans that comply with APHIS's national standards 
     for certification. The Committee expects APHIS to work with 
     the Agricultural Research Service to coordinate activities to 
     research and develop an effective diagnostic test for Johne's 
     disease with appropriate field validation and methods 
     development.
       Noxious weeds.--The Committee provides $1,611,000 for the 
     noxious weeds account, which is an increase of $356,000 above 
     the fiscal year 2002 level. This amount includes an increase 
     of $100,000 for the Nez Perce Bio-Control Center to increase 
     the availability and distribution of biological control 
     organisms used in an integrated weed management system. The 
     Committee provides an increase of $250,000 for implementation 
     of an invasive species program to prevent the spread of 
     cogongrass in Mississippi, and requests that the agency take 
     necessary steps to address this invasive weed as a regional 
     infestation problem, and provide a report on those activities 
     by March 1, 2003.
       The Committee continues its concern for the serious threat 
     to pastures and watersheds resulting from the introduction of 
     alien weed pests, such as gorse and miconia, into Hawaii, and 
     directs APHIS to work with the Hawaii Department of 
     Agriculture and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to 
     develop an integrated approach, including environmentally 
     safe biological controls, for eradicating these pests, and to 
     provide funds as necessary.
       Scrapie eradication.--The Committee provides $8,178,000, an 
     increase of $5,059,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level, for 
     the scrapie eradication program, and directs the Secretary to 
     use funds from the CCC, as necessary, for additional 
     eradication activities in fiscal year 2003.
       Tuberculosis.--The Committee provides $14,895,000 for the 
     tuberculosis program. Of this amount, no less than $5,000,000 
     shall be for activities in Michigan. The Committee is 
     concerned about the potential threats that wildlife poses for 
     transmitting tuberculosis to domestic livestock and directs 
     the agency to increase technical and operational assistance 
     to Michigan producers to prevent or reduce the transmission 
     of tuberculosis between wildlife and cattle. The Committee 
     also encourages the agency to continue its research for 
     developing methods to minimize the interaction between 
     wildlife and livestock. The Committee directs the Secretary 
     to use funds from the CCC, as necessary, for additional 
     surveillance and eradication activities in fiscal year 2003.
       Wildlife services operations.--The Committee does not 
     concur with the President's request to reduce funding in the 
     wildlife services operations account to allow cooperators to 
     assume a larger share of the costs associated with preventing 
     and reducing wildlife damage. The Committee restores fiscal 
     year 2002 funding to continue cooperating with States to 
     conduct wildlife management programs such as livestock 
     protection, migratory bird damage to crops, invasive species 
     damage, property damage, human health and safety, and 
     threatened and endangered species protection.
       The Committee is pleased with the success of the oral 
     rabies vaccination program and provides an increase of 
     $6,600,000 for rabies control activities in fiscal year 2003. 
     The Committee directs the Secretary to use funds from the 
     CCC, as necessary, for additional control activities in 
     fiscal year 2003. Of the amount provided, no less than 
     $350,000 shall be for operations in Maryland.
       The Committee provides an increase of $1,636,000 to fully 
     implement the recommendations of the Aviation Safety Review 
     Committee.
       The Committee provides an increase of $6,225,000 to conduct 
     wildlife monitoring and surveillance activities to prevent 
     the spread of foreign animal diseases in the United States. 
     Of this amount, $2,000,000 is for remote diagnostic and 
     wildlife disease surveillance activities with North Dakota 
     State University and Dickinson State University.
       The Committee is concerned about the growing number of 
     livestock that are killed or injured by preying animals, 
     especially wolves, in the Western Great Lakes and Southwest 
     regions of the United States. The Committee provides an 
     increase of $1,400,000 for integrated predation management 
     activities in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and 
     New Mexico. Of this amount, no less than $1,200,000 shall be 
     available for activities in the Western Great Lakes States.
       The Committee provides continued funding of $1,300,000 for 
     the Tri-state predator control program for livestock 
     operators in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Due to the increase 
     in federally listed endangered species, the States' 
     operations accounts for wildlife services have suffered 
     financially.
       The Committee provides continued funding of $625,000 for a 
     cooperative agreement with the University of Georgia, Auburn 
     University, and the Wildlife Services Operations in the State 
     of Georgia to address the fluctuations in game bird and 
     predator species resulting from recent changes in land use 
     throughout the southeastern United States.
       The Committee provides continued funding of $300,000 for 
     the operation of the State Wildlife Services office in Hawaii 
     to provide on-site coordination of prevention and control 
     activities in Hawaii and the American Pacific. The Committee 
     also continues funding of $500,000 for the Hawaii Department 
     of Agriculture to coordinate and operate a comprehensive 
     brown tree snake prevention and detection program for Hawaii 
     and to initiate eradication and control of coqui frogs.
       The Committee provides $750,000, an increase of $150,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 funding level, for wildlife 
     service operations with the South Dakota Department of Game, 
     Fish, and Parks to meet the growing demands of controlling 
     predatory, nuisance, and diseased animals.
       The Committee provides $550,000, an increase of $100,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 level, for the management of 
     beavers in Mississippi. The Committee commends the agency's 
     assistance in cooperative relationships with local and 
     Federal partners to reduce beaver damage to cropland and 
     forests.
       The Committee provides an increase of $200,000 to support 
     the establishment of a USDA, APHIS, Wildlife Services State 
     Office in Pennsylvania to address escalating wildlife-related 
     nuisance and property damage complaints in rural and urban 
     Pennsylvania.
       The Committee provided $240,000 in fiscal year 2002 for the 
     agency to conduct an environmental impact study for cattail 
     management and blackbird control activities. The Committee 
     provides continued funding at the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     $240,000 to implement control measures for minimizing 
     blackbird damage to sunflowers in North Dakota and South 
     Dakota. The Committee continues the fiscal year 2002 funding 
     level of $150,000 for blackbird management efforts in 
     Louisiana.
       The Committee provides an increase of $500,000 to assist 
     the Nevada Division of Wildlife with returning displaced 
     wildlife back to its natural habitat. This rescue initiative 
     shall be a cooperative effort between Federal, State, local, 
     and private sources.
       The Committee provides an increase of $300,000 for a 
     cooperative agreement with the Eastern Idaho Sandhill Crane 
     Lure Crop Project for integrated predator management 
     activities to reduce sandhill crane depredations and grain 
     crop damage in Eastern Idaho.
     Animal Care
       Animal welfare.--The Committee provides an increase of 
     $800,000 from the fiscal year 2002 funding level for the 
     Animal Care Unit for enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act.
       The Committee does not assume collections from unauthorized 
     animal welfare inspection user fees, as proposed in the 
     President's budget.
     Scientific and Technical Services
       Veterinary diagnostics.--The Committee provides $23,921,000 
     for the veterinary diagnostics account for fiscal year 2003. 
     The Committee notes that the Secretary is utilizing 
     $10,000,000 from Public Law 107-117 to coordinate a 
     comprehensive, modernized national animal health laboratory 
     network for addressing emergent biological and chemical 
     threats to animal agriculture and the U.S. food supply, and 
     encourages the department to continue efforts for this 
     activity.
       Wildlife services methods development.--The Committee 
     provides $15,258,000 for wildlife services methods 
     development, which is $1,836,000 above the budget request. Of 
     this amount, the Committee provides an increase of $300,000 
     from the fiscal year 2002 level to enhance existing research 
     efforts at the National Wildlife Research Center field 
     station in Starkville, MS, for resolving problems regarding 
     bird damage to aquaculture farms in the Southeast. The 
     Committee also provides an increase of $700,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 level to expand the existing program at the 
     Jack Berryman Institute for addressing wildlife damage 
     management issues, including wildlife disease threats and 
     wildlife economics, and facilitating a cooperative 
     relationship with the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry 
     Experiment Station. The Committee emphasizes the importance 
     of close collaboration between the Jack Berryman Institute 
     and the National Wildlife Research Center. The remaining 
     increase, beyond pay costs, is for maintenance and operations 
     necessary to support wildlife methods development at the 
     National Wildlife Research Center in Fort Collins, CO.
       The Committee provides continued funding of $240,000 for 
     the cooperative agreement with the Hawaii Agriculture 
     Research Center for rodent control only in active 
     agricultural areas.
       Projects identified in Senate Report 107-41 and Conference 
     Report 107-275 that the Committee directed to be funded for 
     fiscal year 2002 are not funded for fiscal year 2003 unless 
     specifically mentioned herein.
       In complying with the Committee's directives, the Committee 
     expects APHIS not to redirect support for programs and 
     activities without prior notification to and approval by the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in accordance 
     with the reprogramming procedures specified in the Act. 
     Unless otherwise directed, the Animal and Plant Health 
     Inspection Service shall implement appropriations by 
     programs, projects, and activities as specified by the 
     Appropriations Committees. Unspecified reductions necessary 
     to carry out the provisions of this Act are to be implemented 
     in accordance with the definitions contained in the 
     ``Program, project, and activity'' section of this report.

[[Page 592]]




                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 2002\1\......................................$7,189,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................13,189,000
Committee recommendation.....................................13,189,000

\1\Excludes $14,081,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations 
provided by Public Law 107-117.

       The APHIS appropriation for ``Buildings and Facilities'' 
     funds major nonrecurring construction projects in support of 
     specific program activities and recurring construction, 
     alterations, preventive maintenance, and repairs of existing 
     APHIS facilities.
       The following table represents the Committee's specific 
     recommendation for this account as compared to the fiscal 
     year 2002 and budget request levels:

               ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Fiscal
                                    Fiscal     year 2003     Committee
                                   year 2002    budget    recommendation
                                    enacted     request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basic buildings and facilities        1,996       4,996         4,996
 repair, alterations, and
 preventative maintenance.......
Plum Island, NY.................      3,193       3,193         3,193
Miami Animal Import Center, FL..      2,000       5,000         5,000
                                 ---------------------------------------
      Total, Buildings and            7,189      13,189        13,189
       Facilities...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For buildings and facilities of the Animal and Plant Health 
     Inspection Service, the Committee recommends an appropriation 
     of $13,189,000. This amount is $6,000,000 more than the 2002 
     level and the same as the budget request.

                     Agricultural Marketing Service


                           marketing services

Appropriations, 2002........................................$71,430,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................75,411,000
Committee recommendation.....................................75,411,000

\1\Excludes $2,278,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Agricultural Marketing Service was established by the 
     Secretary of Agriculture on April 2, 1972. AMS carries out 
     programs authorized by some 31 different statutory 
     authorities, the primary ones being the Agricultural 
     Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627); the U.S. Cotton 
     Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 51-65); the Cotton Statistics and 
     Estimates Act (7 U.S.C. 471-476); the Tobacco Inspection Act 
     (7 U.S.C. 511-511q); the Perishable Agricultural Commodities 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 499a-499s); the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 
     U.S.C. 1031-1056); and section 32 (15 U.S.C. 713c).
       Programs administered by this Agency include the market 
     news services, payments to States for marketing activities, 
     the Plant Variety Protection Act, the Federal administration 
     of marketing agreements and orders, standardization, grading, 
     classing, and shell egg surveillance services, transportation 
     services, and market protection and promotion.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For marketing services of the Agricultural Marketing 
     Service, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $75,411,000. This amount is $3,981,000 more than the 2002 
     appropriation and the same as the budget request. This amount 
     does not include an increase of $709,000 for rental payments 
     to GSA, or $167,000 for FECA administrative charges, as 
     requested in the budget.
       The Committee provides $14,843,000 for the Pesticide Data 
     Program, as requested in the budget. The Committee recognizes 
     the importance of the Pesticide Data Program (PDP) to collect 
     reliable, scientific-based pesticide residue data that 
     benefits consumers, food processors, crop protection, 
     pesticide producers, and farmers. The PDP is of particular 
     importance since the passage of the Food Quality Protection 
     Act, which requires thorough re-evaluation of agricultural 
     pesticides and tolerances for uses on individual crops. The 
     PDP is an effective tool to maintain the availability of 
     critical products which allow the production of safe and 
     affordable foods.
       The Committee encourages the Department to make grants to 
     the Kenai Peninsula Borough and Alaska regional marketing 
     organizations to promote wild salmon.
       The Committee provides $6,000,000 for costs associated with 
     implementing the Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 
     1999.
       The State of Alaska has developed the Alaska Grown Program 
     to promote the sale of Alaskan products in both military and 
     civilian markets. The Committee fully supports this program 
     and expects the Department again to give full consideration 
     to funding applications submitted for the Alaska Grown 
     Program, which includes Alaska agricultural products and 
     seafood harvested in the State. The Alaska Grown Program 
     should coordinate with other regional marketing entities such 
     as the Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation and the Lower 
     Kuskokwim Economic Development Council.
       The amount provided also includes $6,256,000 for the 
     microbiological data program so that baselines may be 
     established for the incidence, number and types of food-borne 
     microorganisms. The Committee expects AMS to coordinate with 
     other agencies of USDA, other public health agencies of the 
     government, and industry to avoid duplication of effort and 
     to ensure that the data collected can be used by all 
     interested parties.
       The Committee is aware of the unique factors that affect 
     dairy production in Alaska. Because of these factors, only 51 
     percent of Alaska's dairy needs can be produced in-State. 
     Further, because of the perishable nature of milk and the 
     cost to ship it, alternatives to increase milk production at 
     Alaska's existing State-owned facility, Matanuska Maid Dairy, 
     must be sought. Therefore, the Committee expects AMS, working 
     with other USDA agencies, to continue its assistance to the 
     State of Alaska in addressing this unique problem.
       The Committee requests a report on the treatment of organic 
     agricultural products under Federal marketing order 
     regulations.
       The Committee is concerned with the allocation of 
     independent voting members on the Cranberry Marketing 
     Committee and encourages the Secretary, beginning with the 
     2003 nominations, to allocate independent voting members 
     seats on the Cranberry Marketing Committee in a manner that 
     provides for representation by District to the total 
     Independent Cranberry crop. Districts may be combined in 
     order to obtain this result. Allocation of Alternate Voting 
     members should be utilized to guarantee that each District 
     will have at a minimum an Alternate Member as a 
     representative of the Committee.


                 limitation on administrative expenses

Limitation, 2002..........................................($60,596,000)
Budget limitation, 2003\1\.................................(61,619,000)
Committee recommendation...................................(61,619,000)

\1\Excludes $1,836,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 
     97-35) initiated a system of user fees for the cost of 
     grading and classing tobacco, cotton, naval stores, and for 
     warehouse examination. These activities, authorized under the 
     U.S. Cotton Standards Act, the Tobacco Inspection Act, the 
     Naval Stores Act, the U.S. Warehouse Act, and other 
     provisions of law are designed to facilitate commerce and to 
     protect participants in the industry.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends a limitation on administrative 
     expenses of the Agricultural Marketing Service of 
     $61,619,000. This amount is $1,023,000 more than the 2002 
     funding level and the same as the budget request.


          funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply

                              (section 32)

                    marketing agreements and orders

Appropriations, 2002........................................$13,995,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................\1\14,910,000
Committee recommendation.....................................14,910,000

\1\Excludes $575,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       Under section 32 of the act of August 24, 1935, (7 U.S.C. 
     612c), an amount equal to 30 percent of customs receipts 
     collected during each preceding calendar year and unused 
     balances are available for encouraging the domestic 
     consumption and exportation of agricultural commodities. An 
     amount equal to 30 percent of receipts collected on fishery 
     products is transferred to the Department of Commerce. 
     Additional transfers to the child nutrition programs of the 
     Food and Nutrition Service have been provided in recent 
     appropriations Acts.
       The following table reflects the status of this fund for 
     fiscal years 2001-2003:

         SECTION 32 ESTIMATED TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE AND BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD--FISCAL YEARS 2001-2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Fiscal year--
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
                                                             2001 actual       2002 estimate      2003 estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation (30 percent of Customs Receipts)..........    $5,738,448,921      $6,139,942,369    $5,798,093,321
Agricultural Risk Protection Act (Public Law 106-224)...       200,000,000  ..................  ................
    Less Rescission.....................................  ................
Less Transfers:
    Food and Nutrition Service..........................    -5,127,579,000      -5,172,458,000    -4,745,663,000
    Commerce Department.................................       -72,827,819         -79,126,813       -75,223,977
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Transfers..................................    -5,200,406,819      -5,251,584,813    -4,820,886,977
                                                         =======================================================

[[Page 593]]

 
Budget Authority........................................       738,042,102         888,357,556       977,206,344
Unobligated Balance Available, Start of Year............       241,269,708         107,824,527       131,935,093
Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations....................         3,254,060                   0                 0
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
Available for Obligation................................       982,565,870         996,182,083     1,109,141,437
                                                         =======================================================
Less Obligations:
    Commodity Procurement:
        Child Nutrition Purchases.......................       400,000,000         400,000,000     \1\15,000,000
        State Option Contract...........................  ................             878,000         5,000,000
        Removal of Defective Commodities................  ................                   0         1,000,000
        Fruit and Vegetable Pilot Project...............                 0           6,000,000                 0
        Emergency Surplus Removal.......................       200,234,102         260,000,000        56,800,000
        Diversion Payments..............................        11,900,000                   0                 0
        Direct Payments.................................        39,700,000         172,867,307       937,000,000
        Lamb Grading and Certification Support..........           957,317             592,683         1,000,000
        Specialty Crop Purchases........................       199,990,628                   0                 0
        Estimated Future Purchases......................  ................                   0        67,698,437
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Commodity Procurement..................       852,782,047         840,337,990     1,083,498,437
                                                         =======================================================
    Administrative Funds:
        Commodity Purchase Service......................         8,964,131           9,914,000        10,733,000
        Marketing Agreements & Orders...................        12,995,165          13,995,000        14,910,000
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Administrative Funds...................        21,959,296          23,909,000        25,643,000
                                                         =======================================================
          Total, Obligations............................       874,741,343         864,246,990     1,109,141,437
                                                         =======================================================
Unobligated Balance Available, End Of Year..............       107,824,527         131,935,093                 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The remainder of Child Nutrition entitlement purchases will be made using unobligated balances in the Child
  Nutrition Programs and the Commodity Credit Corporation.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends a transfer from section 32 funds 
     of $14,910,000 for the formulation and administration of 
     marketing agreements and orders. This amount is $915,000 more 
     than the 2002 level and the same as the budget estimate.
       In previous fiscal years, section 32 funds have been spent 
     to purchase and distribute salmon for donation to schools, 
     institutions, and other domestic feeding programs. The 
     Committee expects the Agricultural Marketing Service [AMS] to 
     continue to assess the existing inventories of pink salmon, 
     salmon nuggets, and pouched salmon and determine whether or 
     not there is a surplus and continued low prices in fiscal 
     year 2003. The Committee also expects the AMS to assess 
     existing inventories of surplus Alaska grown potatoes. If 
     there is a surplus of potatoes or a surplus of salmon and 
     continued low prices in fiscal year 2003, the Committee 
     expects the Department to purchase surplus salmon for use in 
     the aforementioned feeding programs or for humanitarian food 
     aid.


                   payments to states and possessions

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,347,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,347,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,347,000

       The Federal-State Marketing Improvement Program [FSMIP] is 
     authorized by section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing 
     Act of 1946 and is also funded from appropriations. Payments 
     are made to State marketing agencies to: identify and test 
     market alternative farm commodities; determine methods of 
     providing more reliable market information, and develop 
     better commodity grading standards. This program has made 
     possible many types of projects, such as electronic marketing 
     and agricultural product diversification. Current projects 
     are focused on the improvement of marketing efficiency and 
     effectiveness, and seeking new outlets for existing farm 
     produced commodities. The legislation grants the U.S. 
     Department of Agriculture authority to establish cooperative 
     agreements with State departments of agriculture or similar 
     State agencies to improve the efficiency of the agricultural 
     marketing chain. The States perform the work or contract it 
     to others, and must contribute at least one-half of the cost 
     of the projects.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For payments to States and possessions for Federal-State 
     marketing projects and activities, the Committee provides 
     $1,347,000. This amount is the same as the 2002 appropriation 
     and the budget request.

        Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$33,117,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................41,164,000
Committee recommendation.....................................44,475,000

\1\Excludes $1,744,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration 
     [GIPSA] was established pursuant to the Secretary's 1994 
     reorganization. Grain inspection and weighing programs are 
     carried out under the U.S. Grain Standards Act and other 
     programs under the authority of the Agricultural Marketing 
     Act of 1946, including the inspection and grading of rice and 
     grain-related products; conducting official weighing and 
     grain inspection activities; and grading dry beans and peas, 
     and processed grain products. Under the Packers and 
     Stockyards Act, assurance of the financial integrity of the 
     livestock, meat, and poultry markets is provided. The 
     administration monitors competition in order to protect 
     producers, consumers, and industry from deceptive and 
     fraudulent practices which affect meat and poultry prices.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For salaries and expenses of the Grain Inspection, Packers 
     and Stockyards Administration, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $44,475,000. This amount is $11,358,000 more 
     than the 2002 appropriation and $3,311,000 more than the 
     budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $1,418,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $41,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.
       The Committee provides $400,000 for market contract catalog 
     reporting activities. Additional increases are provided to 
     enhance concentration and other anti-competitve investigative 
     activities.
       The Committee does not assume the $28,848,000 in net 
     savings from collections from new user fees proposed in the 
     budget.
       The Committee expects the Department to continue the market 
     catalog reporting.
       The Committee provides an increase to GIPSA of $2,311,000 
     for fiscal year 2003 and includes funds for the agency to 
     work with the Iowa Corn Growers Association and the Iowa 
     Department of Agriculture to further develop a pilot process 
     verification program. The program will establish agricultural 
     interpretation of ISO standards, so that the principles can 
     be used on-farm as well as train farmers to participate in 
     quality assurance program based on ISO 9000 principles during 
     the planning, planting, harvest, and handling of feed grains. 
     The program could also be used to assist with the orderly 
     handling of new biotech varieties.


        limitation on inspection and weighing services expenses

Limitation, 2002..........................................($42,463,000)
Budget limitation, 2003....................................(42,463,000)
Committee recommendation...................................(42,463,000)

       The Agency provides an official grain inspection and 
     weighing system under the U.S. Grain Standards Act [USGSA], 
     and official inspection of rice and grain-related products 
     under the Agricultural Marketing Act [AMA] of 1946. The USGSA 
     was amended in 1981 to require the collection of user fees to 
     fund the costs associated with the operation, supervision, 
     and administration of Federal grain inspection and weighing 
     activities.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends a $42,463,000 limitation on 
     inspection and weighing services expenses. This amount is the 
     same as the 2002 level and the budget request.

             Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$476,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................780,000
Committee recommendation........................................780,000

\1\Excludes $17,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.


[[Page 594]]

       The Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety provides 
     direction and coordination in carrying out the laws enacted 
     by the Congress with respect to the Department's inspection 
     of meat, poultry, and egg products. The Office has oversight 
     and management responsibilities for the Food Safety and 
     Inspection Service.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, the 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $780,000. This 
     amount is $304,000 more than the 2002 level and the same as 
     the budget request.

                   Food Safety and Inspection Service

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$715,642,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\....................................763,049,000
Committee recommendation....................................759,759,000

\1\Excludes $15,000,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations 
provided by Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes $40,549,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The major objectives of the Food Safety and Inspection 
     Service are to assure that meat and poultry products are 
     wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged, 
     as required by the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the 
     Poultry Products Inspection Act; and to provide continuous 
     in-plant inspection to egg processing plants under the Egg 
     Products Inspection Act.
       The Food Safety and Inspection Service was established on 
     June 17, 1981, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1000-1, issued 
     pursuant to Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953.
       The inspection program of the Food Safety and Inspection 
     Service provides continuous in-plant inspection of all 
     domestic plants preparing meat, poultry or egg products for 
     sale or distribution; reviews foreign inspection systems and 
     establishments that prepare meat or poultry products for 
     export to the United States; and provides technical and 
     financial assistance to States which maintain meat and 
     poultry inspection programs.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $759,759,000. This amount is 
     $44,117,000 more than the 2002 level and $3,290,000 less than 
     the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $7,256,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $1,035,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.
       The Committee has provided an increase of $97,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 funding level for activities related to the 
     Codex Alimentarius.
       The Committee provides an increase of $5,000,000 for FSIS 
     to hire inspection personnel to work solely on enforcement of 
     the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA). The Committee is 
     extremely concerned that although the HMSA requires that 
     livestock be rendered unconscious before they are 
     slaughtered, FSIS does not have adequate inspection personnel 
     dedicated to checking for or reporting violations of the 
     HMSA. The Committee recognizes that all inspectors are 
     instructed to stop the production line as soon as an HMSA 
     violation is observed. However, the Committee does not 
     believe this is the most effective and efficient tool to 
     prevent these violations. The Committee strongly believes 
     that stronger HMSA enforcement will not only reduce animal 
     suffering, but also decrease the chances that plant workers 
     and inspection personnel will be injured by an animal 
     conscious and reacting to pain. Therefore, the Committee 
     directs that these funds be used to hire at least 50 
     additional inspection personnel to work solely on HMSA 
     enforcement through full-time ante-mortem inspection, 
     particularly unloading, handling, stunning and killing of 
     animals at slaughter plants. The Committee further expects 
     that the 17 District Veterinary Medical Specialist positions 
     created in fiscal year 2001 will continue in fiscal year 
     2003.
       The Committee is aware that FSIS uses two methods to 
     determine whether the inspection systems of foreign countries 
     that sell meat and poultry to the United States meet the same 
     standards as our domestic meat inspection system. These 
     methods include USDA audits of foreign plants and 
     laboratories, and USDA inspection of foreign meat and poultry 
     at the U.S. border. While all meat and poultry items which 
     cross the border are subject to inspection, the Committee 
     understands that less than 1 percent of all such food items 
     are currently inspected. The Committee believes that both of 
     these activities need to be enhanced in order to protect 
     consumers from intentionally or unintentionally contaminated 
     foreign meat and poultry, and supplemental funds were 
     provided in fiscal year 2002 to enhance these activities. 
     Accordingly, when a significant number of plants initially 
     audited in a particular country fail to meet U.S. safety 
     standards, the Committee expects the Department to exercise 
     all authorities to appropriately limit imports from all 
     plants in that country that have not been audited in the 
     previous 12 months, as well as imports from those plants that 
     failed initial audits until subsequent findings establish 
     that proper inspection systems are in place.
       The Committee is extremely concerned with recent reports of 
     food safety violations and the quantity of product recalls 
     necessary to ensure public safety and consumer confidence. As 
     the Federal agency charged with ensuring the safety of meat 
     and poultry in this country, the Committee fully expects FSIS 
     to stringently enforce its safety standards, and to work with 
     industry to diligently fulfill its responsibilities to 
     American consumers. The Committee notes that the General 
     Accounting Office (GAO) is preparing to release a report 
     regarding FSIS and its inspection services, and strongly 
     encourages FSIS to promptly and fully respond to 
     recommendations made in that report. The Committee directs 
     FSIS to provide a detailed report to the Committee within 60 
     days of the publication of the GAO report on the FSIS 
     response, and all activities FSIS is undertaking to correct 
     any problems identified.
       The Committee directs FSIS to submit a report on the status 
     of its regulatory effort to establish science-based 
     performance standards for on-line antimicrobial reprocessing 
     of pre-chill poultry carcasses, including a timeline for 
     completion, within 60 days of enactment of this Act.
       The following table represents the Committee's specific 
     recommendations for the Food Safety and Inspection Service as 
     compared to the fiscal year 2002 and budget request levels:

                            FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     Fiscal year
                                                                       2002         2003 budget      Committee
                                                                    enacted\1\      request\2\    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal food inspection.........................................         608,730         651,816         649,082
Import/export inspection........................................          12,127          12,907          12,767
Laboratory services.............................................          36,548          38,829          38,440
Field automation................................................           8,005           8,005           8,005
Grants to States................................................          42,517          43,672          43,672
Special assistance for State programs...........................           5,220           5,220           5,220
Codex Alimentarius..............................................           2,495           2,600           2,573
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................         715,642         763,049         759,759
                                                                 ===============================================
Food safety inspection:
    Federal.....................................................         638,513         682,624         679,502
    State.......................................................          47,418          49,702          49,702
    International...............................................          15,344          16,251          16,110
Codex...........................................................           2,495           2,600           2,573
FAIM............................................................          11,872          11,872          11,872
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................         715,642         763,049         759,759
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $15,000,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations provided by Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes $40,549,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

    Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural 
                                Services

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$606,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................899,000
Committee recommendation........................................899,000

\1\Excludes $24,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
     Agricultural Services provides direction and coordination in 
     carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
     the Department's international affairs (except for foreign 
     economics development) and commodity programs. The Office

[[Page 595]]

     has oversight and management responsibilities for the Farm 
     Service Agency, including the Commodity Credit Corporation, 
     Risk Management Agency, and the Foreign Agricultural Service.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign 
     Agricultural Services, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $899,000. This amount is $293,000 more than 
     the 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee is concerned that allocation of section 416 
     funds for humanitarian assistance programs may disadvantage 
     certain private voluntary organizations in regard to the 
     amount of those funds allowable for administrative costs. In 
     addition, the Committee continues to urge the Secretary to 
     work with representatives of the dairy industry and 
     appropriate non-governmental organizations to increase the 
     amount of fortified dry milk exported under humanitarian 
     assistance programs.
       The Committee urges USAID and USDA to manage the Food 
     Security Commodity Reserve effectively to meet international 
     food aid commitments of the United States, including 
     supplementing Public Law 480 title II funds to meet emergency 
     food needs.

                          Farm Service Agency

       The Farm Service Agency [FSA] was established by the 
     Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, Public 
     Law 103-354, enacted October 13, 1994. Originally called the 
     Consolidated Farm Service Agency, the name was changed to the 
     Farm Service Agency on November 8, 1995. The FSA administers 
     the commodity price support and production adjustment 
     programs financed by the Commodity Credit Corporation, the 
     warehouse examination function, the Conservation Reserve 
     Program [CRP], and several other cost-share programs; the 
     Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program [NAP]; and farm 
     ownership and operating, and emergency disaster and other 
     loan programs.
       Agricultural market transition program.--The Federal 
     Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, Public Law 
     104-127 (1996 act), enacted April 4, 1996, mandates that the 
     Secretary offer individuals with eligible cropland acreage 
     the opportunity for a one-time signup in a 7-year, production 
     flexibility contract. Depending on each contract 
     participant's prior contract-crop acreage history and payment 
     yield as well as total program participation, each contract 
     participant shares a portion of a statutorily specified, 
     annual dollar amount. In return, participants must comply 
     with certain requirements regarding land conservation, 
     wetland protection, planting flexibility, and agricultural 
     use. Contract crops, for the purposes of determining eligible 
     cropland and payments, include wheat, corn, grain sorghum, 
     barley, oats, upland cotton, and rice. This program does not 
     include any production adjustment requirements or related 
     provisions, except for restrictions on the planting of fruits 
     and vegetables.
       Marketing assistance loan program, price support programs, 
     and other loan and related programs.--The 1996 act provides 
     for marketing assistance loans to producers of contract 
     commodities, extra long staple [ELS] cotton, and oilseeds for 
     the 1996 through 2002 crops. With the exception of ELS 
     cotton, these nonrecourse loans are characterized by loan 
     repayment rates that may be determined to be less than the 
     principal plus accrued interest per unit of the commodity. 
     However, with respect to cotton and rice, the Secretary must 
     allow repayment of marketing loans at the adjusted world 
     price. And, specifically with respect to the cotton marketing 
     assistance loan, the program continues to provide for 
     redemption at the lower of the loan principal plus accrued 
     storage and interest, or the adjusted world price. The three-
     step competitiveness provisions are unchanged.
       The 1996 act also provides for a loan program for sugar for 
     the 1996 through 2002 crops of sugar beets and sugarcane. The 
     Fiscal Year 2001 Agriculture Appropriations Act eliminated 
     the recourse feature. The 1996 act provides for a milk price 
     support program, whereby the price of milk is supported 
     through December 31, 1999, via purchases of butter, cheese, 
     and nonfat dry milk. The rate of support is fixed each 
     calendar year, starting at $10.35 per hundredweight in 1996 
     and declining each year to $9.90 per hundredweight in 1999. 
     The milk price support program is extended through May 31, 
     2002. The 1996 act and the 1938 act provide for a peanut loan 
     and poundage quota program for the 1996 through 2002 crops of 
     peanuts. Finally, the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended 
     (1949 act), and the 1938 act provide for a price support, 
     quota, and allotment program for tobacco.
       The interest rate on commodity loans secured on or after 
     October 1, 1996, will be 1 percentage point higher than the 
     formula which was used to calculate commodity loans secured 
     prior to fiscal year 1997. The CCC monthly commodity loan 
     interest rate will in effect be 1 percentage point higher 
     than CCC's cost of money for that month.
       The 1996 act amended the payment limitation provisions in 
     the Food Security Act of 1985, as amended (1985 act), by 
     changing the annual $50,000 payment limit per person for 
     deficiency and diversion payments to an annual $40,000 
     payment limit per person for contract payments. The annual 
     $75,000 payment limit per person applicable to combined 
     marketing loan gains (MLG's) and loan deficiency payments 
     (LDP's) for all commodities that was in effect for the 1991 
     through 1995 crop years continues through the 2002 crop year. 
     Similarly, the three-entity rule is continued.
       For combined MLG's plus LDP's received for the 1999, 2000, 
     and 2001 crops, the payment limit was increased to $150,000 
     per person in separate pieces of legislation. Moreover, 
     Congress enacted discretionary authority in 1999 for the 
     Secretary of Agriculture to offer commodity certificate 
     exchanges for loan repayment purposes. Indirect gains 
     received by producers due to a certificate exchange are not 
     subject to the MLG and LDP payment limitation.
       Commodity Credit Corporation program activities.--Various 
     price support and related programs have been authorized in 
     numerous legislative enactments since the early 1930's. 
     Operations under these programs are financed through the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation. Personnel and facilities of the 
     Farm Service Agency are utilized in the administration of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation, and the Administrator of the 
     Agency is also Executive Vice President of the Corporation.
       The 1996 act created new conservation programs to address 
     high-priority environmental protection goals and authorizes 
     CCC funding for many of the existing and new conservation 
     programs. The Natural Resources Conservation Service 
     administers many of the programs financed through CCC.
       Foreign assistance programs and other special activities.--
     Various surplus disposal programs and other special 
     activities are conducted pursuant to specific statutory 
     authorizations and directives. These laws authorize the use 
     of CCC funds and facilities to implement the programs. 
     Appropriations for these programs are transferred or paid to 
     the Corporation for its costs incurred in connection with 
     these activities, such as Public Law 480.
       Farm credit programs.--FSA reviews applications, makes and 
     collects loans, and provides technical assistance and 
     guidance to borrowers. Under credit reform, administrative 
     costs associated with agricultural credit insurance fund 
     [ACIF] loans are appropriated to the ACIF program account and 
     transferred to FSA salaries and expenses.
       Risk management.--FSA administers the noninsured Crop 
     Disaster Assistance Program [NAP] which provides crop loss 
     protection for growers of many crops for which crop insurance 
     is not available.


                         salaries and expenses

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Transfers   Total, FSA,
                                                    from       salaries
                                Appropriations    program        and
                                                  accounts     expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002..........       939,030      (274,357)  (1,213,387)
Budget estimate, 2003\1\......       993,620      (281,036)  (1,274,656)
Committee recommendation......       986,913      (281,036)  (1,267,949)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $69,092,000 requested for employee pension and health
  benefits.

       The account ``Salaries and expenses, Farm Service Agency,'' 
     funds the administrative expenses of program administration 
     and other functions assigned to FSA. The funds consist of 
     appropriations and transfers from the CCC export credit 
     guarantees, Public Law 480 loans, and agricultural credit 
     insurance fund program accounts, and miscellaneous advances 
     from other sources. All administrative funds used by FSA are 
     consolidated into one account. The consolidation provides 
     clarity and better management and control of funds, and 
     facilitates accounting, fiscal, and budgetary work by 
     eliminating the necessity for making individual allocations 
     and allotments and maintaining and recording obligations and 
     expenditures under numerous separate accounts.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For salaries and expenses of the Farm Service Agency [FSA], 
     including funds transferred from other program accounts, the 
     Committee recommends $1,267,949,000. This is $54,562,000 more 
     than the 2002 level and $6,707,000 less than the budget 
     request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $16,882,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $110,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget. The Committee includes 
     funds to assist agency implementation of the newly enacted 
     farm bill.
       The Committee recognizes the pressures FSA has been under 
     to downsize staff levels. However, concerns have been raised 
     about the criteria being used for further staff reductions 
     and the potential impact these reductions will have on farm 
     services in all States. Until these concerns have been 
     addressed, States in compliance with the original Espy 
     reorganization plan should not be required to undertake 
     further staff reductions.
       The Committee is concerned that FSA should allocate more 
     staff resources to the farm loan programs in both the field 
     and in the St. Louis Information Technology and Finance 
     Center. Without more farm loan staff in the field, FSA cannot 
     adequately perform the supervised credit functions which 
     ensure the success of the program, including but not limited 
     to such functions as

[[Page 596]]

     real estate appraisals, chattel appraisals, and year-end farm 
     analysis. The Committee directs the Department to report on 
     the numbers of staff positions, by type and location, and to 
     provide a detailed explanation by object class, of funds 
     obligated from the Salaries & Expenses Account, to support 
     the farm loan programs by April 1, 2003.
       The Committee supports farmer participation in the 
     Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) as a means to 
     coordinate conservation and producer objectives of natural 
     resource stewardship. The Committee encourages the 
     Department, acting through the Farm Service Agency, to 
     improve outreach and technical assistance for CREP in States 
     where enrollment and participation is not commensurate with 
     enrollment expectations.
       The Committee is concerned with the reluctancy on the part 
     of the Agency to grant producers relief from farm program 
     fines or penalties who unintentionally violated program 
     rules. The Committee expects the Department to exercise the 
     authorities granted in current law to provide appropriate 
     relief in determining penalties in cases involving 
     unintentional violations.
       In addition, the Committee notes the difficulty of States 
     with high land values competing for enrollment in CREP. The 
     Committee urges the agency to evaluate the conservation 
     benefits of CREP enrollment in all States and not give undue 
     consideration to enrollment opportunities based on land 
     values or rental rates.
       The Committee is concerned that many county governments are 
     given the responsibility of implementing the Conservation 
     Reserve Enhancement Program. The Committee encourages the 
     Farm Service Agency to work with participating States that 
     use counties as the local administering unit to ensure 
     counties are fairly reimbursed for the costs associated with 
     CREP implementation.
       The Committee encourages for Agency to examine the 
     possibility to cost-sharing through existing conservation 
     program types of cover (including plastic mulch) that would 
     promote the successful establishment of tree shrub and other 
     prescribed plantings used for wind erosion practices.


                         state mediation grants

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,493,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,000,000

       This program is authorized under title V of the 
     Agricultural Credit Act of 1987. Originally designed to 
     address agricultural credit disputes, the program was 
     expanded by the Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department 
     of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 to include other 
     agricultural issues such as wetland determinations, 
     conservation compliance, rural water loan programs, grazing 
     on National Forest System lands, and pesticides. Grants are 
     made to States whose mediation programs have been certified 
     by the Farm Service Agency [FSA]. Grants will be solely for 
     operation and administration of the State's agricultural 
     mediation program.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for State mediation 
     grants. This is $507,000 more than the 2002 level and the 
     same as the budget request.


                        dairy indemnity program

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$100,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................100,000
Committee recommendation........................................100,000

       Under the program, the Department makes indemnification 
     payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products 
     who, through no fault of their own, suffer losses because 
     they are directed to remove their milk from commercial 
     markets due to contamination of their products by registered 
     pesticides. The program also authorizes indemnity payments to 
     dairy farmers for losses resulting from the removal of cows 
     or dairy products from the market due to nuclear radiation or 
     fallout.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the dairy indemnity program, the Committee recommends 
     $100,000. This is the same as the 2002 level and the same as 
     the budget request.


           Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account

       The Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund Program Account is 
     used to insure or guarantee farm ownership, farm operating, 
     and emergency loans to individuals, as well as the following 
     types of loans to associations: irrigation and drainage, 
     grazing, Indian tribe land acquisition and boll weevil 
     eradication. The insurance endorsement on each insured loan 
     may include an agreement by the Government to purchase the 
     loan after a specified initial period.
       FSA is also authorized to provide financial assistance to 
     borrowers by guaranteeing loans made by private lenders 
     having a contract of guarantee from FSA as approved by the 
     Secretary of Agriculture.
       The following programs are financed through this fund:
       Farm ownership loans.--Made to borrowers who cannot obtain 
     credit elsewhere to restructure their debts, improve or 
     purchase farms, refinance nonfarm enterprises which 
     supplement but do not supplant farm income, or make additions 
     to farms. Total indebtedness to FSA may not exceed $200,000 
     for direct loans and $759,000 for guaranteed loans. Loans are 
     made for 40 years or less.
       Farm operating loans.--Provide short-to-intermediate term 
     production or chattel credit to farmers who cannot obtain 
     credit elsewhere, to improve their farm and home operations, 
     and to develop or maintain a reasonable standard of living. 
     Total indebtedness to FSA may not exceed $200,000 for direct 
     loans and $759,000 for guaranteed loans. The term of the loan 
     varies from 1 to 7 years.
       Emergency disaster loans.--Made available in designated 
     areas (counties) and in contiguous counties where property 
     damage and/or severe production losses have occurred as a 
     direct result of a natural disaster. Areas may be declared by 
     the President or designated for emergency loan assistance by 
     the Secretary of Agriculture. The loan may be up to $500,000.
       Credit sales of acquired property.--Property is sold out of 
     inventory and is made to an eligible buyer by providing FSA 
     loans.
       Indian tribe land acquisition loans.--Made to any Indian 
     tribe recognized by the Secretary of the Interior or tribal 
     corporation established pursuant to the Indian Reorganization 
     Act which does not have adequate uncommitted funds to acquire 
     lands or interest in lands within the tribe's reservation or 
     Alaskan Indian community, as determined by the Secretary of 
     the Interior, for use of the tribe or the corporation or the 
     members thereof.
       Boll weevil eradication loans.--Made to assist foundations 
     in financing the operations of the boll weevil eradication 
     programs provided to farmers.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends a total level for farm loans of 
     $4,065,725,000. This is $175,000,000 more than the 2002 level 
     and $263,725,000 more than the budget request.
       The following table reflects the program levels for farm 
     credit programs administered by the Farm Service Agency 
     recommended by the Committee, as compared to the fiscal year 
     2002 and the budget request levels:

                                    AGRICULTURAL CREDIT PROGRAMS--LOAN LEVELS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003      Committee
                                                                 enacted           budget        recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Farm ownership:
    Direct................................................         (146,996)         (100,000)         (146,996)
    Guaranteed............................................       (1,000,000)       (1,000,000)       (1,000,000)
Farm operating:
    Direct................................................         (611,198)         (600,000)         (611,198)
    Guaranteed unsubsidized...............................       (1,500,000)       (1,700,000)       (1,700,000)
    Guaranteed subsidized.................................         (505,531)         (300,000)         (505,531)
Indian tribe land acquisition.............................           (2,000)           (2,000)           (2,000)
Emergency disaster........................................          (25,000)  ................  ................
Boll weevil eradication loans.............................         (100,000)         (100,000)         (100,000)
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, farm loans...................................       (3,890,725)       (3,802,000)       (4,065,725)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 597]]

           loan subsidies and administrative expenses levels

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Subsidies                         Administrative expenses
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Insured     Guaranteed                               Transfer to
                                     loan         loan        Total     Appropriations      FSA       Total ACIF
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002...........       61,927      125,700      187,627          8,000       272,595      468,222
Budget estimate, 2003..........      115,349       96,790      212,139          8,000       279,176      499,315
Committee recommendation.......      117,993      108,769      243,781          8,000       279,176      513,938
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
     program account. Appropriations to this account are used to 
     cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the direct 
     loans obligated and loan guarantees committed, as well as for 
     administrative expenses.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The following table reflects the cost of loan programs 
     under credit reform:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                                 2002 enacted     2003 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:
    Farm ownership:
        Direct...............................................            3,866           11,610           17,066
        Guaranteed...........................................            4,500            7,500            7,500
    Farm operating:
        Direct...............................................           54,580          103,560          105,493
        Guaranteed unsubsidized..............................           52,650           53,890           53,890
        Guaranteed subsidized................................           68,550           35,400           59,653
    Indian tribe land acquisition............................              118              179              179
    Emergency disaster.......................................            3,363  ...............  ...............
    Boll weevil eradication loans\1\.........................  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Total, loan subsidies................................          187,627          212,139          243,781
ACIF expenses................................................          280,595          287,176          287,176
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\No cost since subsidy rate is negative.

                         Risk Management Agency

Appropriations, 2002........................................$74,752,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................72,771,000
Committee recommendation.....................................70,708,000

\1\Excludes $3,291,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Risk Management Agency performs administrative 
     functions relative to the Federal crop insurance program that 
     is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 
     1508), as amended by the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 
     2000 (ARPA), Public Law 106-224, and the Farm Security and 
     Rural Investment Act of 2002 (2002 Act), Public Law 107-171.
       ARPA authorized significant changes in the crop insurance 
     program. This Act provides higher government subsidies for 
     producer premiums to make coverage more affordable; expands 
     research and development for new insurance products and 
     under-served areas through contracts with the private sector; 
     and tightens compliance. Functional areas of risk management 
     are: research and development; insurance services; and 
     compliance, whose functions include policy formulation and 
     procedures and regulations development.
       The 2002 Act maintains the basic crop insurance program 
     largely without change. This Act also requires the 
     continuation of the Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) pilot 
     program, which provides insurance coverage for crops for 
     which traditional crop insurance is not available. However, 
     the 2002 Act eliminates the ARPA provision that allowed 
     selection of continuous coverage levels, rather than coverage 
     levels at fixed intervals.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For administrative and operating expenses for the Risk 
     Management Agency, the Committee recommends an appropriation 
     of $70,708,000. This is $4,044,000 less than the 2002 level 
     and $2,063,000 less than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $2,045,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA, or $18,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.
       The Committee does not agree with the President's 
     legislative proposal to cap the underwriting gain on crop 
     insurance at 12.5 percent. As opposed to an arbitrary change 
     in legislation, the Committee feels that the Administration 
     should follow the procedures set forth in the current 
     Standard Reinsurance Agreement. Notice of intent to cancel 
     the current agreement should be given by December 13, 2002, 
     and all interested parties should then be allowed to 
     negotiate a new agreement.
       The Risk Management Agency is currently developing a Cost 
     of Production (COP) crop insurance pilot program that 
     includes 12 crops: almonds, apricots, cotton, corn, 
     cranberries, nectarines, onions, peaches, soybeans, 
     sugarcane, rice, and wheat. The Committee instructs RMA to 
     include hard, soft, and durum sub-classes of wheat when 
     implementing the COP pilot program for wheat.
       The Committee is aware of the benefits to producers of risk 
     management programs like the Dairy Options Pilot Program. The 
     program introduces dairy farmers to the futures and options 
     markets and gives producers first-hand experience in buying 
     put options contracts to ensure a minimum price for their 
     milk. The Committee encourages the Agency to continue funding 
     this important risk management program.

                              CORPORATIONS

                Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund

       The Federal Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994 was designed 
     to replace the combination of crop insurance and ad hoc 
     disaster payment programs with a strengthened crop insurance 
     program.
       Producers of insurable crops are eligible to receive a 
     basic level of protection against catastrophic losses, which 
     cover 50 percent of the normal yield at 55 percent of the 
     expected price. The only cost to the producer is an 
     administrative fee of $100 per crop per policy. At least 
     catastrophic [CAT] coverage was required for producers who 
     participate in the commodity support, farm credit, and 
     certain other farm programs. Under the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform [FAIR] Act of 1996, producers are 
     offered the option of waiving their eligibility for emergency 
     crop loss assistance instead of obtaining CAT coverage to 
     meet program requirements. Emergency loss assistance does not 
     include emergency loans or payment under the Noninsured 
     Assistance Program [NAP]. Beginning with the 1997 crop, the 
     Secretary began phasing out delivery of CAT coverage through 
     the FSA offices, and in 1998 designated the private insurance 
     providers as the sole source provider of CAT coverage.
       The Reform Act of 1994 also provides increased subsidies 
     for additional buy-up coverage levels which producers may 
     obtain from private insurance companies. The amount of 
     subsidy is equivalent to the amount of premium established 
     for catastrophic risk protection coverage for coverage up to 
     65 percent level at 100 percent price. For coverage equal to 
     or greater than 65 percent at 100 percent of the price, the 
     amount is equivalent to an amount equal to the premium 
     established for 50 percent yield indemnified at 75 percent of 
     the expected market price.
       The reform legislation included the NAP program for 
     producers of crops for which there is currently no insurance 
     available. NAP was established to ensure that most producers 
     of crops not yet insurable will have protection against crop 
     catastrophes comparable to protection previously provided by 
     ad hoc disaster assistance programs. While the NAP program 
     was implemented under the Deputy Administrator for Risk 
     Management, under the FAIR Act of 1996, the NAP program will 
     remain with the Farm Service Agency and be incorporated into 
     the Commodity Credit Corporation program activities.
       The Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 (ARPA) amended 
     the Federal Crop Insurance Act to strengthen the safety net 
     for agricultural producers by providing greater access to 
     more affordable risk management tools and improved protection 
     from production and income loss, and to improve the 
     efficiency and integrity of the Federal crop insurance 
     program. ARPA allows for the improvement of basic crop 
     insurance products by implementing higher premium subsidies

[[Page 598]]

     to make buy-up coverage more affordable for producers; make 
     adjustments in actual production history guarantees; and 
     revise the administrative fees for catastrophic (CAT) 
     coverage. More crops and commodities have become insurable 
     through pilot programs effective with the 2001 crop year. 
     ARPA provides for an investment for over $8.2 billion in five 
     years to further improve Federal crop insurance.


                federal crop insurance corporation fund

Appropriations, 2002\1\..................................$2,900,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\\2\...............................2,886,000,000
Committee recommendation\1\...............................2,886,000,000

\1\Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary, to remain available 
until expended, are provided.
\2\Does not include a reduction of $115,154,000 to reflect the impact 
of proposed Section 722.

       The Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended by the Federal 
     Crop Insurance Reform Act of 1994, authorizes the payment of 
     expenses which may include indemnity payments, loss 
     adjustment, delivery expenses, program-related research and 
     development, startup costs for implementing this legislation 
     such as studies, pilot projects, data processing 
     improvements, public outreach, and related tasks and 
     functions.
       All program costs, except for Federal salaries and 
     expenses, are mandatory expenditures subject to 
     appropriation.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation fund, the 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of such sums as may be 
     necessary, estimated to be $2,886,000,000. This is 
     $14,000,000 less than the current fiscal year 2002 estimate 
     and the same as the budget request.


                   commodity credit corporation fund

       The Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] is a wholly owned 
     Government corporation created in 1933 to stabilize, support, 
     and protect farm income and prices; to help maintain balanced 
     and adequate supplies of agricultural commodities, including 
     products, foods, feeds, and fibers; and to help in the 
     orderly distribution of these commodities. CCC was originally 
     incorporated under a Delaware charter and was reincorporated 
     June 30, 1948, as a Federal corporation within the Department 
     of Agriculture by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter 
     Act, approved June 29, 1948 (15 U.S.C. 714).
       The Commodity Credit Corporation engages in buying, 
     selling, lending, and other activities with respect to 
     agricultural commodities, their products, food, feed, and 
     fibers. Its purposes include stabilizing, supporting, and 
     protecting farm income and prices; maintaining the balance 
     and adequate supplies of selected commodities; and 
     facilitating the orderly distribution of such commodities. In 
     addition, the Corporation makes available materials and 
     facilities required in connection with the storage and 
     distribution of such commodities. The Corporation also 
     disburses funds for sharing of costs with producers for the 
     establishment of approved conservation practices on 
     environmentally sensitive land and subsequent rental payments 
     for such land for the duration of Conservation Reserve 
     Program contracts.
       Corporation activities are primarily governed by the 
     following statutes: the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter 
     Act, as amended; the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended 
     (1949 Act); the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as 
     amended (the 1938 Act); the Food Security Act of 1985, as 
     amended (1985 Act); and the Farm Security and Rural 
     Investment Act of 2002 (2002 Act), enacted May 13, 2002.
       Under the 2002 Act, the Secretary is required to offer a 
     program of direct and counter-cyclical payments and extend 
     nonrecourse marketing assistance loans and loan deficiency 
     payments for contract commodities (soybeans, wheat, corn, 
     grain sorghum, barley, oats, upland cotton, rice, other 
     oilseeds, and peanuts). The 2002 Act also provides for 
     marketing loans for wool, mohair, honey, small chickpeas, 
     lentils and dry peas. A national Dairy Market Loss Payment 
     (DMLP) program is established by the 2002 Act, providing that 
     producers enter into contracts extending through September 
     30, 2005. A milk price support program is also provided to 
     support the price of milk via purchases of butter, cheese, 
     and nonfat dry milk. The rate of support is $9.90 per 
     hundredweight.
       The 2002 Act directs the Secretary to operate the sugar 
     program at no cost to the U.S. Treasury by avoiding sugar 
     loan forfeitures in the nonrecourse loan program. The 
     nonrecourse loan program is reauthorized through fiscal year 
     2007 at 18 cents per pound for raw cane sugar and 22.9 cents 
     per pound for refined beet sugar.
       In the conservation area, the 2002 Act extends and expands 
     the conservation reserve program (CRP), the wetlands reserve 
     program (WRP), the environmental quality incentives program 
     (EQIP), the farmland protection program (FPP), and the 
     wildlife habitat incentives program (WHIP). Each of these 
     programs is funded through the CCC.
       The 2002 Act also authorizes and provides CCC funding for 
     other conservation programs, including the conservation 
     security program and the grassland reserve program.
       Management of the Corporation is vested in a board of 
     directors, subject to the general supervision and direction 
     of the Secretary of Agriculture, who is an ex-officio 
     director and chairman of the board. The board consists of 
     seven members, in addition to the Secretary, who are 
     appointed by the President of the United States with the 
     advice and consent of the Senate. Officers of the Corporation 
     are designated according to their positions in the Department 
     of Agriculture.
       The activities of the Corporation are carried out mainly by 
     the personnel and through the facilities of the Farm Service 
     Agency [FSA] and the Farm Service Agency State and county 
     committees. The Foreign Agricultural Service, the General 
     Sales Manager, other agencies and offices of the Department, 
     and commercial agents are also used to carry out certain 
     aspects of the Corporation's activities.
       The Corporation's capital stock of $100,000,000 is held by 
     the United States. Under present law, up to $30,000,000,000 
     may be borrowed from the U.S. Treasury, from private lending 
     agencies, and from others at any one time. The Corporation 
     reserves a sufficient amount of its borrowing authority to 
     purchase at any time all notes and other obligations 
     evidencing loans made by such agencies and others. All bonds, 
     notes, debentures, and similar obligations issued by the 
     Corporation are subject to approval by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury.
       Under Public Law 87-155 (15 U.S.C. 713a-11, 713a-12), 
     annual appropriations are authorized for each fiscal year, 
     commencing with fiscal year 1961. These appropriations are to 
     reimburse the Corporation for net realized losses.


                 reimbursement for net realized losses

Appropriations, 2002\1\.................................$20,279,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.................................16,285,000,000
Committee recommendation\1\..............................16,285,000,000

\1\Current estimate. Such sums as may be necessary are provided.

                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the payment to reimburse the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation (CCC) for net realized losses, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of such sums as may be necessary, 
     estimated in fiscal year 2003 to be $16,285,000,000. This is 
     $3,994,000,000 less than the current estimated level and the 
     same as the budget request.


                       hazardous waste management

Limitation, 2002...........................................($5,000,000)
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................(5,000,000)
Committee recommendation....................................(5,000,000)

       The Commodity Credit Corporation's [CCC] hazardous waste 
     management program is intended to ensure compliance with the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 
     The CCC funds operations and maintenance costs as well as 
     site investigation and cleanup expenses. Investigative and 
     cleanup costs associated with the management of CCC hazardous 
     waste are also paid from USDA's hazardous waste management 
     appropriation.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For Commodity Credit Corporation hazardous waste 
     management, the Committee provides a limitation of 
     $5,000,000. This amount is the same as the 2002 level and the 
     budget request.

                    TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

  Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$730,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................902,000
Committee recommendation........................................902,000

\1\Excludes $21,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and 
     Environment provides direction and coordination in carrying 
     out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to natural 
     resources and the environment. The Office has oversight and 
     management responsibilities for the Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service and the Forest Service.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources 
     and Environment, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $902,000. This amount is $172,000 more than the 2002 
     appropriation and the same as the budget request.

                 Natural Resources Conservation Service

       The Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] was 
     established pursuant to Public Law 103-354, the Department of 
     Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6962). NRCS 
     combines the authorities of the former Soil Conservation 
     Service as well as five natural resource conservation cost-
     share programs previously administered by the Agricultural 
     Stabilization and Conservation Service. Through the years, 
     this Service, together with the agricultural conservation 
     programs and over 2 million conservation district 
     cooperatives, has been a major factor in reducing pollution. 
     The Natural Resources Conservation Service works with 
     conservation districts, watershed groups, and the Federal and 
     State agencies having related responsibilities to bring about 
     physical adjustments in land use that will conserve soil and 
     water resources, provide for

[[Page 599]]

     agricultural production on a sustained basis, and reduce 
     damage by flood and sedimentation. The Service, with its 
     dams, debris basins, and planned watersheds, provides 
     technical advice to the agricultural conservation programs, 
     where the Federal Government pays about one-third of the 
     cost, and, through these programs, has done perhaps more to 
     minimize pollution than any other activity. These programs 
     and water sewage systems in rural areas tend to minimize 
     pollution in the areas of greatest damage, the rivers and 
     harbors near our cities.
       The conservation activities of the Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service are guided by the priorities and 
     objectives as set forth in the National Conservation Program 
     [NCP] which was prepared in response to the provisions of the 
     Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act of 1977 [RCA] 
     (Public Law 95-192). The long-term objectives of the program 
     are designed to maintain and improve the soil, water, and 
     related resources of the Nation's nonpublic lands by: 
     reducing excessive soil erosion, improving irrigation 
     efficiencies, improving water management, reducing upstream 
     flood damages, improving range condition, and improving water 
     quality.

                        conservation operations

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$779,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\....................................840,963,000
Committee recommendation....................................840,002,000

\1\Excludes $56,227,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       Conservation operations are authorized by Public Law 74-46 
     (16 U.S.C. 590a-590f). Activities include:
       Conservation technical assistance.--Provides assistance to 
     district cooperators and other land users in the planning and 
     application of conservation treatments to control erosion and 
     improve the quantity and quality of soil resources, improve 
     and conserve water, enhance fish and wildlife habitat, 
     conserve energy, improve woodland, pasture and range 
     conditions, and reduce upstream flooding; all to protect and 
     enhance the natural resource base.
       Inventory and monitoring provides soil, water, and related 
     resource data for land conservation, use, and development; 
     guidance of community development; identification of prime 
     agricultural producing areas that should be protected; 
     environmental quality protection; and for the issuance of 
     periodic inventory reports of resource conditions.
       Resource appraisal and program development ensures that 
     programs administered by the Secretary of Agriculture for the 
     conservation of soil, water, and related resources shall 
     respond to the Nation's long-term needs.
       Soil surveys.--Inventories the Nation's basic soil 
     resources and determines land capabilities and conservation 
     treatment needs. Soil survey publications include 
     interpretations useful to cooperators, other Federal 
     agencies, State, and local organizations.
       Snow survey and water forecasting.--Provides estimates of 
     annual water availability from high mountain snow packs and 
     relates to summer stream flow in the Western States and 
     Alaska. Information is used by agriculture, industry, and 
     cities in estimating future water supplies.
       Plant materials centers.--Assembles, tests, and encourages 
     increased use of plant species which show promise for use in 
     the treatment of conservation problem areas.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For conservation operations, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $840,002,000. This amount is $61,002,000 
     more than the 2002 level and $961,000 less than the budget 
     request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $18,289,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA or $189,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.
       For fiscal year 2003, the Committee recommends funding 
     increases, as specified below, for new and ongoing 
     conservation activities. Amounts provided by the Committee 
     for specific conservation measures shall be in addition to 
     levels otherwise made available to States.
       Projects identified in Senate Report 107-41 and Conference 
     Report 107-275 that were directed to be funded by the 
     Committee for fiscal year 2002 are not funded for fiscal year 
     2003, unless specifically mentioned herein.
       The Committee is aware of the severe water problems 
     occurring in the State of Georgia, especially in the Flint 
     River watershed in Southwest Georgia and the coastal 
     watershed in Southeast Georgia. Surface and ground water are 
     being severely depleted by drought and further exacerbated by 
     salt water intrusion into coastal agriculture areas. The 
     Committee provides $1,500,000 in fiscal year 2003 funding for 
     the Georgia Agricultural Water Conservation Initiative.
       The Committee directs the agency to maintain a national 
     priority area pilot program under the guidelines of the 
     Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) in the delta 
     of the State of Mississippi.
       The Committee provides $800,000 for fiscal year 2003 for a 
     study to characterize the on-site consequences, estimate off-
     site impacts, and develop strategies to facilitate land use 
     change while preserving critical natural resources. The 
     agency is directed to work in cooperation with Clemson 
     University in conducting this study.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding to expand the cooperative efforts with the Claude E. 
     Phillips Herbarium, Delaware.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding to maintain a partnership between USDA and the 
     National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
       The Committee provides $2,500,000 to continue work on the 
     Great Lakes Basin Program for soil and erosion sediment 
     control.
       The Committee provides $23,500,000 for fiscal year 2003 
     level for the grazing lands conservation assistance program, 
     of which no less than $250,000 shall be for grazing land 
     conservation activities in Wisconsin.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding for the National Water Management Center in Arkansas.
       The Comittee provides the fiscal year 2002 level for the 
     Chesapeake Bay Program.
       The Committee continues its concern for the serious threat 
     to pastures and watersheds resulting from the introduction of 
     alien weed pests into Hawaii. The Committee directs the 
     agency to work with the Hawaii Department of Agriculture and 
     the Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service to develop an 
     integrated approach, including environmentally-safe 
     biological controls, for eradicating these pests.
       The Committee provides $350,000 to obtain and evaluate 
     materials and seeds of plants indigenous to regions north of 
     52 degrees North Latitude and equivalent vegetated regions in 
     the Southern Hemisphere (south of 52 degrees South Latitude). 
     The Committee directs the agency to continue working in 
     conjunction with the Alaska Division of Agriculture in this 
     effort.
       The Committee continues funding at the fiscal year 2002 
     level of funding for plant material centers and continued 
     development of warm season grasses for use in the 
     Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and the Wildlife Habitat 
     Initiatives Program (WHIP).
       The Committee encourages the agency to provide $300,000 to 
     support the emerging alternative technology to reduce 
     phosphorous loading into Lake Champlain.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding to continue support of agricultural development and 
     resource conservation on the Island of Molokai and the 
     transition from small-scale conservation projects to those 
     that benefit the community through sustainable economic 
     impact.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level for the 
     Kenai streambank restoration water project for fiscal year 
     2003.
       The Committee recognizes the need for a special outreach 
     effort so that USDA can serve small-scale Appalachian farmers 
     in sustaining agriculture production while protecting natural 
     resources. The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level 
     of funding for the Appalachian Small Farmer Outreach Program. 
     Sound economic grazing systems, marketing strategies, and 
     uniformity of production quality will ensure the 
     competitiveness of livestock operations and help maintain 
     small farm enterprises. This initiative will provide 
     livestock producers access to the needed one-on-one 
     assistance.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding for technical assistance for Franklin County Lake, 
     MS.
       The Committee continues the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding for existing NRCS offices in Alaska and includes 
     funding for new offices in Kodiak and Dillingham at a level 
     of $250,000 each in fiscal year 2003. Also, the Committee 
     provides funding necessary to support at least one staff 
     position for each soil and water conservation district, a 
     public information program, and assistance in rural Alaska.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding to complete the Squirrel Branch Drainage Project, 
     Mississippi.
       The Committee continues funding for the implementation of 
     the Delta Study at the fiscal year 2002 level. Local sponsors 
     are to work cooperatively with the NRCS so that water 
     conservation, water supply evaluations, and environmental 
     planning can proceed.
       The Committee directs the agency to work with soil 
     scientists at regional land-grant universities to continue 
     the pilot project in Washington, Sharkey and Yazoo Counties, 
     Mississippi, to determine the proper classification and 
     taxonomic characteristics of Sharkey soils.
       The Committee provides $1,200,000 to address the erosion in 
     the Loess Hills/Hungry Canyon area in western Iowa. The 
     Committee is aware that the Eastern Red Cedar and other 
     invasive species of woody plants are having a very negative 
     effect on prairies in the Loess Hills, a unique soil 
     important to many rare animals and plants. The Committee 
     encourages the Department to support efforts to reduce this 
     problem.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding to conduct nitrogen soil tests and plant-available 
     nitrogen tests, and to demonstrate poultry litter and wood 
     composting in an effort to improve farmers' economic returns 
     and minimize potential water quality conditions resulting 
     from excess application of nutrients from manure and 
     fertilizers on West Virginia's cropland.
       The Committee provides an increase of $125,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 funding level for the Delta Conservation 
     Demonstration Center, Washington County, MS.

[[Page 600]]

       The Committee provides $200,000 for fiscal year 2003 for 
     the Idaho One-Plan, a test of the prototype Conservation 
     Planning Module in the field with farmers and ranchers in 
     Canyon County, ID.
       The Committee provides funding to continue the expansion of 
     the Potomac and Ohio River Basins Soil Nutrient Project to 
     include Jefferson, Berkeley, and Greenbrier Counties. This 
     funding will enable the NRCS, in cooperation with West 
     Virginia University and the Appalachian Small Farming 
     Research Center, to identify and characterize phosphorous 
     movement in soils to determine appropriate transportation, 
     the holding capacity, and the management of phosphorous. This 
     information is critical in helping Appalachian farmers deal 
     with nutrient loading issues and in protecting the Chesapeake 
     Bay from eutrophication and the Ohio River, Mississippi 
     River, and Gulf of Mexico from depletion of life-sustaining 
     oxygen.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding for evaluating and increasing native plant materials 
     in Alaska.
       The Committee provides $1,000,000 for technical assistance 
     for the Seward/Resurrection River watershed project, Alaska.
       The Committee provides $800,000 for the continued 
     development of a geographic information system (GIS)-based 
     model in South Carolina to integrate commodity and 
     conservation program data at the field level for watershed 
     analysis purposes.
       The Committee provides $8,707,000 for Snow Survey and Water 
     Supply Forecasting, which includes full funding for 
     activities related to SNOwpack TELemetry (SNOTEL).
       The Committee provides $1,750,000 for the Little Wood River 
     Irrigation District Gravity Pressure Delivery System in 
     Idaho.
       The Committee provides $400,000 for the Backyard 
     Conservation Program as part of the National Cooperative Soil 
     Program. This funding is to be used to provide technical 
     assistance on grazing lands and backyard containment of water 
     runoff in order to improve nutrient management and protect 
     water resources in the Lake Tahoe Basin.
       The Committee provides $375,000 for the Little Red River 
     Irrigation Project in Arkansas.
       Recurring floods along the Red River in recent years have 
     resulted in tremendous loss of property and have endangered 
     residents throughout the basin. A number of methods, such as 
     enhanced water storage capacity, more efficient drainage, and 
     shifts in agricultural land use, may be employed to retard 
     the flow of flood waters and reduce downstream flooding. It 
     is important that these improvements be pursued in a manner 
     beneficial to agriculture and result in minimal loss of 
     productive farm land. Accordingly, the Committee provides 
     $1,500,000 for the Red River Basin Flood Prevention Project 
     in North Dakota in cooperation with the Energy and 
     Environmental Research Center.
       The Committee provides $3,000,000 to provide technical 
     assistance for the Kentucky Soil Erosion Control/Soil Survey 
     Program.
       The Committee provides an increase above the fiscal year 
     2002 level of $525,000 for cattle and nutrient management in 
     stream crossings in cooperation with Mississippi conservation 
     districts.
       The Committee provides $300,000 to implement the Certified 
     Environmental Management Systems for Agriculture (CEMSA) in 
     cooperation with the Iowa Soybean Association. CEMSA will be 
     designed to assist producers to voluntarily adopt certifiable 
     conservation plans, with additional funds to be provided from 
     non-Federal sources.
       The Committee provides $300,000 for planning and design 
     associated with the Walnut Bayou Irrigation Project, 
     Arkansas.
       The Committee directs the NRCS to develop a plan to 
     establish a Geographic Information Systems Center of 
     Excellence in cooperation with West Virginia University that 
     will provide expertise to design, field, and support new 
     applications for capturing, managing, analyzing, and 
     delivering soil survey information in an easily accessible 
     manner.
       The Committee encourages the agency to support watershed 
     management and demonstration projects in cooperation with the 
     National Pork Producers Council.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level for a 
     cooperative agreement between NRCS and Alcorn State 
     University to analyze soil erosion and water quality by using 
     demonstration sites.
       The Committee provides an increase of $850,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 level of funding for the Wildlife Habitat 
     Management Institute (WHMI) for developing and transferring 
     fish and wildlife technology to States and field offices. Of 
     the funds made available for the WHMI, the Committee expects 
     WHMI to develop a pilot program to provide technical 
     assistance to landowners to enhance the natural habitats' of 
     bobwhite quail.
       The Committee provides $1,000,000 to assist in the 
     conversion to sprinkler irrigation in the vicinity of 
     Minidoka, ID, in order to reduce water quality impairments 
     resulting from the return of water runoff to the aquifer by 
     way of agricultural drain wells.
       The Committee provides $100,000 for fiscal year 2003 to 
     perform a feasibility study for a surface impoundment in 
     Choctaw County, MS.
       The Committee is aware of the additional demands for 
     conservation technical assistance resulting from the New 
     Jersey State Conservation Cost Share Program and provides an 
     additional $900,000 for assistance in cooperation with that 
     program.
       The Committee encourages NRCS to continue assistance for 
     conservation programs related to cranberry production in the 
     States of Massachusetts and Wisconsin.
       The Committee provides $150,000 for the Upper Petit Jean 
     Watershed Project, Arkansas.
       The Committee expects the National Resource Conservation 
     Service (NRCS) to continue to support the work of the 
     Southwest Strategy and its coordinated effort to help address 
     the natural resource, cultural resource, and economic issues 
     facing the people of New Mexico and Arizona.
       The Committee encourages the Agency to examine the 
     possibility of cost-sharing through existing conservation 
     program types of cover (including plastic mulch) that would 
     promote the successful establishment of tree shrub and other 
     prescribed plantings used for wind erosion practices.
       The Committee provides $900,000 to proceed with the Bayou 
     Meto project in Arkansas.
       The Committee provides $500,000 to provide expedited 
     conservation planning of the Lake Okeechobee Watershed 
     project in Florida. It is expected the agency will work in 
     cooperation with the Florida Department of Agriculture and 
     Consumer Services.
       The Committee provides $400,000 to provide assistance to 
     the Waynewood Drainage project in Illinois.
       The Committee provides $50,000 to provide assistance for 
     the Native Seed Program which has been developed in 
     cooperation with Oregon State University and the Native Plant 
     Society of Oregon.
       The Committee provides $250,000 for fiscal year 2003 for 
     repair of Askalmore Watershed Dam Y-17a-11, Tallahatchie 
     County, MS.
       The Committee expects the NRCS to provide $150,000 for the 
     State of Rhode Island to address drought-related issues, 
     including ways in which producers can minimize their risks, 
     diversify their operations, and expand into alternative 
     practices such as organic farming.
       The Committee provides $400,000 for fiscal year 2003 for 
     flood protection around the Humphreys County Hospital and the 
     City of Belzoni, Humphreys County, MS.
       The Committee provides $325,000 for reach at the Oregon 
     Garden, including studying of wetland plant mateials for non-
     point source run-off, point-source treatment of drainage from 
     parking lots, sewage waste treatment, carbon storage 
     crediting, reestablishment of wetlands, and for other 
     environmental sustainability purposes.
       The Committee provides $250,000 for the Utah CAFO/AFO pilot 
     project.
       The Committee provides $150,000 to continue implementation 
     of pilot projects designed for nutrient reducing waste 
     treatment systems for dairy operations in Florida. The 
     Committee provides $500,000 for fiscal year 2003 for drainage 
     improvements in the City of Petal, MS.
       The Committee provides and increase of $1,000,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 level for increased technical assistance in 
     the State of Oregon.
       The Committee provides $300,000 for assistance to the Dry 
     Creek/Neff's Grove project in the State of Utah. The 
     Committee provides $100,000 for fiscal year 2003 for drainage 
     improvements on Watkins Drive in the City of Jackson, MS.
       The Committee provides $650,000 to assist the Lincoln 
     Parish in the development of a stormwater and conservation 
     management program.
       The Committee encourages NRCS to provide assistance for 
     activities in the following counties in Kentucky: Knott 
     County for technical assistance relating to water and sewer 
     disposal for $250,000; Boone County for conservation projects 
     in the amount of $300,000; and Kenton County relating to 
     flood prevention in the amount of $250,000.
       The Committee provides $300,000 for fiscal year 2003 for 
     drainage improvements in the City of Port Gibson, MS.
       The Committee provides $400,000 for assistance regarding 
     the Jefferson River Watershed in Montana.
       The Committee provides $200,000 in regard to an 
     Environmental Impact Statement for Leslie County, KY.
       The Committee encourages the Secretary to promulgate rules 
     and regulations pursuant to section 1001D of Farm Security 
     and Rural Investment Act of 2002 on payment eligibility based 
     on adjusted gross income in a manner that allows non-profit 
     entities to continue to receive a payment, including through 
     direct participation, cooperative agreements, or as providers 
     of technical assistance in conservation programs under Title 
     XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 or Title II of the Farm 
     Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002.
       The Committee provides $450,000 for assistance regarding 
     the St. John the Baptist Parish Lakes Bank Retention project 
     in Louisiana.
       The Committee provides $500,000 for a study to examine the 
     environmental benefits of using vegetative buffers along 
     waterways. The agency is directed to work in cooperation with 
     the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

[[Page 601]]

       The Committee provides $150,000 for fiscal year 2003 for 
     drainage improvements in the City of Mount Olive, MS.
       The Committee provides $500,000 to conduct a Great Lakes 
     pilot in Michigan for conservation program decision support 
     capability to better evaluate and implement conservation 
     programs in the Great Lakes Watershed. The Committee provides 
     $500,000 for fiscal year 2003 for drainage improvements in 
     the City of Meridian, MS.
       The Committee expects the NRCS to work in conjunction with 
     the ARS Dairy Forage Laboratory in Madison, WI, regarding 
     dairy waste management and in the development of a working 
     arrangement regarding planned expansion of the Dairy Forage 
     Laboratory activities at Marshfield, WI and the possible 
     establishment of a NRCS Waste Management Institute at that 
     location.
       The Committee provides $150,000 to assist in the False 
     River Sedimentation Reduction project in Louisiana.
       The Committee provides $1,500,000 to assist in the Montana 
     Watershed Planning project.
       The Committee provides $1,000,000 to implement the Source 
     Water Protection Program and encourages that these funds be 
     used in the State with the greatest need.
       The Committee provides $300,000 to assist in the Wyoming 
     Soil Survey Mapping project.
       The Committee provides $120,000 for the Conservation Land 
     Internship Program in Wisconsin to help students learn about 
     resource conservation.
       The Committee provides $500,000 for a study to examine the 
     environmental benefits of using nutrient management plans for 
     phosphorus and related conservation practices. The agency is 
     directed to work in cooperation with the University of 
     Wisconsin-Madison.
       The Committee provides $500,000 for fiscal year 2003 for 
     technical assistance in North Carolina to address concerns 
     with the application of phosphorous on agricultural lands.
       The Committee provides $500,000 for assistance to the Walla 
     Walla Watershed Alliance in Washington.
       The Committee provides $800,000 to provide additional 
     Conservation Technical Assistance funding for NRCS in 
     Kentucky to provide grants to Kentucky Soil Conservation 
     Districts.
       The Committee encourages the Secretary to enter into a 
     stewardship agreement with the Iowa Department of Agriculture 
     and Land Stewardship and the Iowa Corn Growers Association to 
     initiate a stewardship program focusing on nutrient best 
     management practices to reduce the environmental impact of 
     nitrogen in the State of Iowa pursuant to the authority under 
     Partnerships and Cooperation [subsection (f) of Section 1243 
     of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3843)].
       The Committee provides no less than the same level 
     available in fiscal year 2002 to support NRCS Plant Materials 
     Centers. The Committee provides the fiscal year 2002 level 
     for improvements to the existing building and facilities at 
     the Jamie Whitten Plant Materials Center.
       The Committee opposes the Department's obligation of 
     Conservation Operations (CO) appropriations to pay for 
     technical assistance for conservation programs reauthorized 
     by Public Law 107-171. The General Accounting Office (GAO), 
     in a legal opinion issued October 8, 2002, found that the 
     Conservation Operations appropriation is not available to 
     provide technical assistance to carry out conservation 
     programs authorized by Section 2701 of Public Law 107-171. In 
     a further opinion issued December 13, 2002, GAO found that 
     the United States Department of Agriculture improperly 
     obligated funds in violation of the Antideficiency Act, 31 
     U.S.C. 1341(a). The Committee urges the Department to take 
     immediate corrective action to properly report this 
     violation, and to adjust the appropriations account 
     accordingly by deobligating the improper amount charged to 
     the CO appropriation and instead charging that amount to the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation.
       The Committee has included a prohibition in the CO account 
     to prevent further misuse of these funds.


                     watershed surveys and planning

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,960,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................10,960,000

       The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, Public 
     Law 83-566, August 4, 1954, provided for the establishment of 
     the Small Watershed Program (16 U.S.C. 1001-1008), and 
     section 6 of the act provided for the establishment of the 
     River Basin Surveys and Investigation Program (16 U.S.C. 
     1006-1009). A separate appropriation funded the two programs 
     until fiscal year 1996 when they were combined into a single 
     appropriation, watershed surveys and planning.
       River basin activities provide for cooperation with other 
     Federal, State, and local agencies in making investigations 
     and surveys of the watersheds of rivers and other waterways 
     as a basis for the development of coordinated programs. 
     Reports of the investigations and surveys are prepared to 
     serve as a guide for the development of agricultural, rural, 
     and upstream watershed aspects of water and related land 
     resources, and as a basis for coordination of this 
     development with downstream and other phases of water 
     development.
       Watershed planning activities provide for cooperation 
     between the Federal Government and the States and their 
     political subdivisions in a program of watershed planning. 
     Watershed plans form the basis for installing works of 
     improvement for floodwater retardation, erosion control, and 
     reduction of sedimentation in the watersheds of rivers and 
     streams and to further the conservation, development, 
     utilization, and disposal of water. The work of the 
     Department in watershed planning consists of assisting local 
     organizations to develop their watershed work plan by making 
     investigations and surveys in response to requests made by 
     sponsoring local organizations. These plans describe the soil 
     erosion, water management, and sedimentation problems in a 
     watershed and works of improvement proposed to alleviate 
     these problems. Plans also include estimated benefits and 
     costs, cost-sharing and operating and maintenance 
     arrangements, and other appropriate information necessary to 
     justify Federal assistance for carrying out the plan.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For watershed surveys and planning, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $10,960,000. This amount is 
     the same as the 2002 appropriation and $10,960,000 more than 
     the budget request.

               watershed and flood prevention operations

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$106,590,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation....................................105,000,000

       The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public 
     Law 566, 83d Cong.) (16 U.S.C. 1001-1005, 1007-1009) provides 
     for cooperation between the Federal Government and the States 
     and their political subdivisions in a program to prevent 
     erosion, floodwater, and sediment damages in the watersheds 
     or rivers and streams and to further the conservation, 
     development, utilization, and disposal of water.
       The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
     responsibility for administration of activities, which 
     include cooperation with local sponsors, State, and other 
     public agencies in the installation of planned works of 
     improvement to reduce erosion, floodwater, and sediment 
     damage; conserve, develop, utilize, and dispose of water; 
     plan and install works of improvement for flood prevention, 
     including the development of recreational facilities and the 
     improvement of fish and wildlife habitat; and loans to local 
     organizations to help finance the local share of the cost of 
     carrying out planned watershed and flood prevention works of 
     improvement.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For watershed and flood prevention operations, the 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $105,000,000. This 
     amount is $1,590,000 less than the 2002 appropriation and 
     $105,000,000 more than the budget request.
       The Committee continues the fiscal year 2002 level of 
     funding for the Little Sioux Watershed and Mosquito Creek 
     Watershed projects, Iowa.
       The Committee encourages the agency to provide assistance 
     for the Seward Resurrection River Flood Mitigation Project 
     and the Matanuska River, AK erosion control project.
       The Committee encourages the agency to support the 
     increased demands for project completions dedicated to 
     increasing water storage capacity, improving the efficiency 
     of delivery systems, and conserving water through flood 
     control projects, Hawaii. In particular, the Committee 
     recommends that the agency provide funding to complete design 
     and construction for the following approved watershed 
     projects: Lower Hamakua Ditch Watershed, Upcountry Maui 
     Watershed, Lahaina Watershed, and the Wailuku-Alenaio 
     Watershed. In addition, the Committee recommends providing 
     sufficient staff to complete the planning and design of these 
     projects. The Committee also urges the agency to continue to 
     provide leadership to coordinate water use and conservation 
     activities of agencies of government and the private sector 
     in Hawaii.
       The Committee expects the agency to provide funds for 
     continuing work in connection with the Big Creek/Hurricane 
     Creek, Grassy Creek, Moniteau Creek, East Locust Creek, West 
     Fork of Big Creek, East Yellow Creek, McKenzie Creek, Hickory 
     Creek, East Fork of Grand River, Troublesome Creek and the 
     Upper Locust Creek projects, all located in Missouri.
       The agency is encouraged to fund completion of construction 
     of the Bayou Bourbeaux Watershed Project in Opelousas, LA.
       The Committee urges the agency to complete design and 
     initiate construction of the Upper Tygart Valley Watershed 
     project in West Virginia. In addition, the agency is provided 
     funds to proceed with Phase III of the Little Whitestick 
     Creek Channel Improvements in Raleigh County, WV. Also, the 
     agency should continue to provide assistance to carry out the 
     Potomac Headwaters Land Treatment Watershed project in West 
     Virginia at no less than the fiscal year 2002 level.

[[Page 602]]

       The Committee provides funds for NRCS to provide assistance 
     for bank stabilization and channel improvement work in 
     Mississippi in the Tillatoba Creek Watershed, Yalobusha 
     County; Oaklimeter Creek Watershed; and the Skuna River 
     Watershed.
       The Committee provides funds for the completion of Phase II 
     of the Kuhn Bayou (Point Remove) project, Arkansas.
       The Committee continues to be aware of flooding in the 
     Devils Lake basin in North Dakota, and notes that the lake 
     has risen more than 25 feet since 1993. The Committee 
     encourages the agency, with the cooperation of the Farm 
     Service Agency, to assist in the locally coordinated flood 
     response and water management activities. NRCS and FSA should 
     continue to utilize conservation programs in providing water 
     holding and storage areas on private land as necessary 
     intermediate measures in watershed management.
       The Committee urges NRCS to proceed with construction of 
     Phase II of the watershed flood control project in the 
     vicinity of Truth or Consequences, NM.
       The Committee encourages the NRCS to continue assistance 
     for watershed projects in Iowa for which funds were provided 
     in fiscal year 2002 in addition to the following projects: 
     Fox River, Upper Locust, Turkey Creek, Indian Creek, Mill-
     Picayune Creek, Hacklebarney, and A&T Longbranch.
       The Committee continues funding in order to complete the 
     Pocasset River watershed project, Rhode Island.
       The Committee provides funds to provide assistance to 
     construct grade control structures in the Piney Creek 
     Watershed, Yazoo County, MS, and to provide assistance for 
     construction of Town Creek Floodwater Retarding Structure #8, 
     Lee County, MS.
       The Committee provides funding for the Square Butte project 
     in North Dakota.


                    WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................30,000,000

       The Committee recommends a new watershed rehabilitation 
     program account for technical and financial assistance to 
     carry out rehabilitation of structural measures, in 
     accordance with Section 14 of the Watershed Protection and 
     Flood Prevention Act, approved August 4, 1954 (U.S.C. 1001 et 
     seq.), as amended by Section 313 of Public Law 106-472, 
     November 9, 2000 (16 U.S.C. 1012), and by section 2505 of the 
     Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 
     107-171).


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the watershed rehabilitation program, the Committee 
     recommends $30,000,000. This amount is $20,000,000 more than 
     the fiscal year 2002 level and $30,000,000 more than the 
     budget request.
       The Committee directs that funding under this program be 
     provided for rehabilitation of structures determined to be of 
     high priority need in order to protect property and ensure 
     public safety.

                 resource conservation and development

Appropriations, 2002........................................$48,048,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................49,079,000
Committee recommendation.....................................50,000,000

\1\Excludes $2,952,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Natural Resources Conservation Service has general 
     responsibility under provisions of section 102, title I of 
     the Food and Agriculture Act of 1962, for developing overall 
     work plans for resource conservation and development projects 
     in cooperation with local sponsors; to help develop local 
     programs of land conservation and utilization; to assist 
     local groups and individuals in carrying out such plans and 
     programs; to conduct surveys and investigations relating to 
     the conditions and factors affecting such work on private 
     lands; and to make loans to project sponsors for conservation 
     and development purposes and to individual operators for 
     establishing soil and water conservation practices.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For resource conservation and development, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $50,000,000. This amount is 
     $1,952,000 more than the 2002 level and $921,000 more than 
     the budget request. The full increase is intended to provide 
     additional support for existing resource conservation and 
     development councils and to allow for consideration of newly 
     authorized areas in states.
       The Committee is aware of applications for the 
     establishment of new RC&D areas and encourages the Secretary 
     to give consideration to those requests.


                      forestry incentives program

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,811,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Forestry Incentives Program is authorized by the 
     Cooperative Forest Assistance Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-
     313), as amended by section 1214, title XII, of the Food, 
     Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 and the 
     Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996. Its 
     purpose is to encourage the development, management, and 
     protection of nonindustrial private forest lands. This 
     program is carried out by providing technical assistance and 
     long-term cost-sharing agreements with private landowners.


                       committee recommendations

       The Committee does not provide funding for the Forestry 
     Incentive Program. The authorization for this program was 
     repealed by section 8001 of Public Law 107-171. Section 8002 
     of that Act established the Forest Land Enhancement Program 
     which provides assistance to owners of non-industrial private 
     forest lands in a manner similar to the Forestry Incentives 
     Program. Public Law 107-171 makes available $100,000,000 from 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation during the period 
     2002 through 2007.

                 TITLE III--RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

       The Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of 
     Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354) 
     abolished the Farmers Home Administration, Rural Development 
     Administration, and Rural Electrification Administration and 
     replaced those agencies with the Rural Housing and Community 
     Development Service, (currently, the Rural Housing Service), 
     Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service 
     (currently, the Rural Business-Cooperative Service), and 
     Rural Utilities Service and placed them under the oversight 
     of the Under Secretary for Rural Economic and Community 
     Development, (currently, Rural Development). These agencies 
     deliver a variety of programs through a network of State, 
     district, and county offices.
       In the 1930's and 1940's, these agencies were primarily 
     involved in making small loans to farmers; however, today 
     these agencies have a multi-billion dollar assistance program 
     throughout all America providing loans and grants for single-
     family, multi-family housing, and special housing needs, a 
     variety of community facilities, infrastructure, and business 
     development programs.

          Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$623,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................898,000
Committee recommendation........................................898,000

\1\Excludes $25,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development 
     provides direction and coordination in carrying out the laws 
     enacted by the Congress with respect to the Department's 
     rural economic and community development activities. The 
     Office has oversight and management responsibilities for the 
     Rural Housing Service, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, 
     and the Rural Utilities Service.


                       committee recommendations

       For the Office of the Under Secretary for Rural 
     Development, the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $898,000. This amount is $275,000 more than the 2002 level 
     and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee is aware the Department has previously 
     provided funding for the National Rural Development 
     Partnership (NRDP). The NRDP, and its associated State Rural 
     Development Councils, provide technical support and guidance 
     for rural development at the State and local level. The 
     Committee encourages the Department to continue support for 
     this important organization from within available funds.
       The Committee provides the Department $1,000,000 to conduct 
     a capital needs assessment as outlined in the GAO report, 
     GAO-02-397. The Committee expects the Department to document 
     the need for additional affordable housing in rural areas. 
     The Committee also expects the Department to compare the 
     costs associated with the Section 515 program with other 
     Federal programs and incentives serving the same eligible 
     rural population.
       The Committee is aware of a proposal for a Rural Economic 
     Area Partnership (REAP) Zone designation for 17 southern 
     Illinois counties. The proposal was drafted by a coalition of 
     regional planning and development organizations in Southern 
     Illinois. The Committee encourages the Department to give the 
     proposal serious review and to provide appropriate funding 
     and technical assistance.
       The Committee is aware of and supports the ongoing efforts 
     and activities of the Farm Worker Institute for Education and 
     Leadership Development (FIELD). The Committee encourages the 
     Secretary to work with FIELD through ongoing outreach and 
     technical assistance programs to enhance ongoing research, 
     skill set and workforce development.

                  Rural Community Advancement Program

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$806,557,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................791,499,000
Committee recommendation....................................867,176,000

       The Rural Community Advancement Program [RCAP], authorized 
     by the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 
     (Public Law 104-127), consolidates funding for the following 
     programs: direct and guaranteed water and waste disposal 
     loans, water and waste disposal grants, emergency

[[Page 603]]

     community water assistance grants, solid waste management 
     grants, direct and guaranteed community facility loans, 
     community facility grants, direct and guaranteed business and 
     industry loans, rural business enterprise grants, and rural 
     business opportunity grants. This proposal is in accordance 
     with the provisions set forth in the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, Public Law 104-127. 
     Consolidating funding for these 12 rural development loan and 
     grant programs under RCAP provides greater flexibility to 
     tailor financial assistance to applicant needs.
       With the exception of the 10 percent in the ``National 
     office reserve'' account, funding is allocated to rural 
     development State directors for their priority setting on a 
     State-by-State basis. State directors are authorized to 
     transfer not more than 25 percent of the amount in the 
     account that is allocated for the State for the fiscal year 
     to any other account in which amounts are allocated for the 
     State for the fiscal year, with up to 10 percent of funds 
     allowed to be reallocated nationwide.
       Community facility loans were created by the Rural 
     Development Act of 1972 to finance a variety of rural 
     community facilities. Loans are made to organizations, 
     including certain Indian tribes and corporations not operated 
     for profit and public and quasipublic agencies, to construct, 
     enlarge, extend, or otherwise improve community facilities 
     providing essential services to rural residents. Such 
     facilities include those providing or supporting overall 
     community development, such as fire and rescue services, 
     health care, transportation, traffic control, and community, 
     social, cultural, and recreational benefits. Loans are made 
     for facilities which primarily serve rural residents of open 
     country and rural towns and villages of not more than 20,000 
     people. Health care and fire and rescue facilities are the 
     priorities of the program and receive the majority of 
     available funds.
       The Community Facility Grant Program authorized in the 
     Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 
     (Public Law 104-127), is used in conjunction with the 
     existing direct and guaranteed loan programs for the 
     development of community facilities, such as hospitals, fire 
     stations, and community centers. Grants are targeted to the 
     lowest income communities. Communities that have lower 
     population and income levels receive a higher cost-share 
     contribution through these grants, to a maximum contribution 
     of 75 percent of the cost of developing the facility.
       The Rural Business and Industry Loans Program was created 
     by the Rural Development Act of 1972, and finances a variety 
     of rural industrial development loans. Loans are made for 
     rural industrialization and rural community facilities under 
     Rural Development Act amendments to the Consolidated Farm and 
     Rural Development Act authorities. Business and industrial 
     loans are made to public, private, or cooperative 
     organizations organized for profit, to certain Indian tribes, 
     or to individuals for the purpose of improving, developing or 
     financing business, industry, and employment or improving the 
     economic and environmental climate in rural areas. Such 
     purposes include financing business and industrial 
     acquisition, construction, enlargement, repair or 
     modernization, financing the purchase and development of 
     land, easements, rights-of-way, buildings, payment of startup 
     costs, and supplying working capital. Industrial development 
     loans may be made in any area that is not within the outer 
     boundary of any city having a population of 50,000 or more 
     and its immediately adjacent urbanized and urbanizing areas 
     with a population density of more than 100 persons per square 
     mile. Special consideration for such loans is given to rural 
     areas and cities having a population of less than 25,000.
       Rural business enterprise grants were authorized by the 
     Rural Development Act of 1972. Grants are made to public 
     bodies and nonprofit organizations to facilitate development 
     of small and emerging business enterprises in rural areas, 
     including the acquisition and development of land; the 
     construction of buildings, plants, equipment, access streets 
     and roads, parking areas, and utility extensions; refinancing 
     fees; technical assistance; and startup operating costs and 
     working capital.
       Rural business opportunity grants are authorized under 
     section 306(a)(11) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act, as amended. Grants may be made, not to 
     exceed $1,500,000 annually, to public bodies and private 
     nonprofit community development corporations or entities. 
     Grants are made to identify and analyze business 
     opportunities that will use local rural economic and human 
     resources; to identify, train, and provide technical 
     assistance to rural entrepreneurs and managers; to establish 
     business support centers; to conduct economic development 
     planning and coordination, and leadership development; and to 
     establish centers for training, technology, and trade that 
     will provide training to rural businesses in the utilization 
     of interactive communications technologies.
       The water and waste disposal program is authorized by 
     sections 306, 306A, 309A, 306C, 306D, and 310B of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921 et 
     seq., as amended). This program makes loans for water and 
     waste development costs. Development loans are made to 
     associations, including corporations operating on a nonprofit 
     basis, municipalities and similar organizations, generally 
     designated as public or quasipublic agencies, that propose 
     projects for the development, storage, treatment, 
     purification, and distribution of domestic water or the 
     collection, treatment, or disposal of waste in rural areas. 
     Such grants may not exceed 75 percent of the development cost 
     of the projects and can supplement other funds borrowed or 
     furnished by applicants to pay development costs.
       The solid waste grant program is authorized under section 
     310B(b) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act. 
     Grants are made to public bodies and private nonprofit 
     organizations to provide technical assistance to local and 
     regional governments for the purpose of reducing or 
     eliminating pollution of water resources and for improving 
     the planning and management of solid waste disposal 
     facilities.


                       committee recommendations

       For the Rural Community Advancement Program [RCAP], the 
     Committee recommends $867,176,000. This amount is $60,619,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 level and $75,677,000 more 
     than the budget request.
       The following table provides the Committee's 
     recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2002 and 
     budget request levels:

                                       RURAL COMMUNITY ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM
                                   [Budget authority in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                     2002         2003 budget     recommendation
                                                                appropriation       request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community:
    Community facility direct loan subsidies.................           13,545           15,600           15,600
    Community facility grants................................           20,000           17,000           27,000
    Economic impact initiative grants........................           20,000  ...............           25,000
    High energy costs grants.................................           30,000  ...............           30,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, community....................................           83,545           32,600           97,600
                                                              ==================================================
Business:
    Business and industry loan subsidies:
        Direct...............................................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Guaranteed...........................................           27,400           29,085           35,730
    Rural business enterprise grants.........................           41,000           44,000           47,032
    Rural business opportunity grants........................            5,100            3,000            4,000
    Department of Energy matching grants.....................            3,000  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, business.....................................           76,500           76,085           86,762
                                                              ==================================================
Utilities:
    Water and waste disposal loan subsidies: Direct..........           60,497           92,302           92,302
    Water and waste disposal grants..........................          582,515          587,012          587,012
    Solid waste management grants............................            3,500            3,500            3,500
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, utilities....................................          646,512          682,814          682,814
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, loan subsidies and grants.......................          806,557          791,499          867,176
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 604]]

       Rural Community Advancement Program.--The Committee 
     provides the fiscal year 2002 level of funding for 
     transportation technical assistance.
       The Committee directs the Department to continue the Rural 
     Economic Area Partnership [REAP] initiative.
       The Committee directs that of the $24,000,000 provided for 
     loans and grants to benefit Federally Recognized Native 
     American Tribes, $250,000 be used to implement an American 
     Indian and Alaska Native passenger transportation development 
     and assistance initiative.
       Community facility loans and grants.--The Committee is 
     aware of and encourages the Department to give consideration 
     to applications relating to community facilities for 
     structural and other essential needs of the following: the 
     City of Craig's Marine Industrial Park, AK; City of Park 
     Falls, WI; Town of Sunset, LA; Dillingham Dock, AK; Cave City 
     Agricultural Center, Barren County, KY; Rosebud Sioux Tribe 
     Headquarters Facility, South Dakota; USC Salkehatchie 
     Leadership Center, South Carolina; West Baton Rouge Paris 
     Agriculture Facility, Louisiana; Fort Peck Interpretative 
     Center, Montana; Casey County Agricultural Center, Kentucky; 
     Union and Wallowa Counties Rail Line, Oregon; Mashantucket 
     Pequot Tribe, Connecticut; and the Freewoods Farm, South 
     Carolina.
       Economic impact initiative grants.--The Committee includes 
     bill language to provide $25,000,000 for the Rural Community 
     Facilities Grant Program for areas of extreme unemployment or 
     severe economic depression.
       High energy cost grants.--The Committee includes bill 
     language to provide $30,000,000 for the Rural Community 
     Advancement Program for communities with extremely high 
     energy costs which is to be administered by the Rural 
     Utilities Service.
       Business and Industry Loan Program.--The Committee 
     encourages the Department to give consideration to 
     applications for rural business opportunity grants (RBOG) 
     from the following: The Menomiee Tribal Enterprises, Rural 
     Technical Assistance Program, Iowa; Wisconsin; Missouri 
     Regional Councils; and the Quinebaug-Shetucket Corridor, 
     Connecticut.
       Rural business enterprise grants.--The Committee is also 
     aware of and encourages the Department to give consideration 
     to applications for rural business enterprise grants (RBEG) 
     from the following: Agricultural Heritage & Resources, Inc., 
     Wisconsin; The City of Crandon Industrial Park, WI; Louisiana 
     Biobased Technology Development and Commercialization 
     Initiative; Cumberland Valley Milling Cooperative, Kentucky; 
     Value-Added Pork Products, Springfield, KY; Boone-Sang 
     Cooperative Association, Kentucky; Sustainable Woods 
     Cooperative, Wisconsin; Walla Walla Community College, 
     Washington; Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Buffalo Jerky 
     Processing Plant, South Dakota; Salem County Storage 
     Facililty, New Jersey; Shorebank Enterprise Pacific, 
     Washington; Forest Enterprises Technology Center, Wisconsin; 
     Mission Valley Market, Montana; Grants to Public Broadcasting 
     Systems Programs; Hibbins Technology Business Center, 
     Minnesota; University of Montana Business Incubators; City of 
     Park Hills, MO; South Dakota Public Broadcasting; Business 
     and Technology Extension Program, Oregon; Dairy Value-Added 
     Cheese Manufacturing, Kentucky; Vermont Maple Industry 
     Council; Cape Fox Native Corporation, Alaska; Chesterfield 
     County Industrial Park, South Carolina; Old North State 
     Winegrowers Cooperative Association, North Carolina; and the 
     Power Applications Resource Center at Montana State 
     University-Northern.
       The Committee expects the Department to ensure that the 
     system by which applications for rural business enterprise 
     grants are considered does not discriminate against 
     applications which may benefit multiple States.
       Water and waste disposal loans and grants.--The Committee 
     is aware of and encourages the Department to consider 
     applications for water and waste disposal loans and grants 
     relating to the following projects: The Chimayo, Bloomfield, 
     Truth or Consequences and Carnuel communities in New Mexico; 
     Tell City Branchville Sewer Line Project, IN; Nashville, AR; 
     Fort Belknap Reservation, MT; Neuse North Carolina Regional 
     Water System; Abbeville County Development Board, South 
     Carolina; South Kona, HI; La Pine County Waste System, 
     Oregon; Connect Peculiar and Raymore Water Systems, Missouri; 
     Lake County Wastewater, Illinois; Port Orford Drinking Water 
     and Sewer District, Oregon; and the Belknap Heights Community 
     Water System, New Hampshire.
       The Committee also includes language in the bill to make up 
     to $30,000,000 in water and waste disposal loans and grants 
     available for village safe water for the development of water 
     systems for rural communities and native villages in Alaska. 
     In addition, the Committee is aware of and encourages the 
     Department to consider applications to the national program 
     from small, regional hub villages in Alaska with a 
     populations less than 5,000 which are not able to compete for 
     village safe water funding; $20,000,000 for water and waste 
     systems for the colonias along the United States-Mexico 
     border; and $18,000,000 for water and waste disposal systems 
     for Federally Recognized Native American Tribes. In addition, 
     the Committee makes up to $12,100,000 available for the 
     circuit rider program of which the $1,100,000 increase from 
     fiscal year 2002 shall be provided to those States that have 
     the most water and waste needs including coverage of their 
     existing systems.
       The Committee encourages the Department to continue working 
     with the city of Blaine, Washington, on water and 
     infrastructure needs and to use existing funds to help with 
     environmental remediation of Semiahmah.
       Water and waste technical assistance training grants.--The 
     Committee encourages the Rural Utilities Service to consider 
     an increase in the grant request from the National Drinking 
     Water of Clearinghouse, for which an increase in this account 
     is provided. The Committee is aware of and encourages the 
     Department to consider applications from the Alaska Village 
     Safe Water Program to provide statewide training in water and 
     waste systems operation and maintenance.
       The Committee encourages the Department to consider a pilot 
     program within available funds to offer inspector training 
     and certification program that would include proper well 
     construction, maintenance, sampling, treatment and ensuring 
     the overall safety of private wells in rural areas.
       Solid Waste Management Grants.--The Committee is aware of 
     the need for landfill improvements for Point Barrow, Alaska, 
     and urges the Department to give priority consideration for 
     an application for a solid waste management grant.
       The Committee expects the Department to consider only those 
     applications judged meritorious when subjected to the 
     established review process.

                                     RURAL DEVELOPMENT SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Fiscal year--
                                                           ------------------------------------     Committee
                                                                  2002           2003 budget     recommendation
                                                              appropriation        request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations............................................          133,722        \1\145,736           127,502
Transfer from:
    Rural Housing Insurance Fund Loan Program Account.....         (422,241)         (455,630)         (455,630)
    Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans              (36,000)          (38,035)          (38,035)
     Program Account......................................
    Rural Telephone Bank Program Account..................           (3,082)           (3,082)           (3,082)
    Rural Local Television Program Account................           (2,000)  ................  ................
    Rural Development Loan Fund Program Account...........           (3,733)           (4,290)           (4,290)
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, RD salaries and expenses.....................          600,778           646,773           628,539
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $38,603,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       These funds are used to administer the loan and grant 
     programs of the Rural Utilities Service, the Rural Housing 
     Service, and the Rural Business-Cooperative Service, 
     including reviewing applications, making and collecting loans 
     and providing technical assistance and guidance to borrowers; 
     and to assist in extending other Federal programs to people 
     in rural areas.
       Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
     loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts. 
     Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be 
     for costs associated with grant programs.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends $628,539,000 for salaries and 
     expenses for the Rural Economic and Community Development 
     Programs. This amount is $27,761,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and $18,234,000 less than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $17,065,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA or $169,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.

[[Page 605]]

       The Committee expects that none of the funds provided for 
     Rural Development, Salaries and Expenses should be used to 
     enter into or renew a contract for any activity that is best 
     suited as an inherent function of Government, without prior 
     approval from the Committees on Appropriations of the House 
     and Senate. Such activities may include, but are not limited 
     to, any function that affects eligibility determination, 
     disbursement, collection or accounting for Government 
     subsidies provided under any of the direct or guaranteed loan 
     programs of the Rural Development mission area or the Farm 
     Service Agency.

                         Rural Housing Service

       The Rural Housing Service [RHS] was established under 
     Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture 
     Reorganization Act of 1994, dated October 13, 1994.
       The mission of the Service is to improve the quality of 
     life in rural America by assisting rural residents and 
     communities in obtaining adequate and affordable housing and 
     access to needed community facilities. The goals and 
     objectives of the Service are: (1) facilitate the economic 
     revitalization of rural areas by providing direct and 
     indirect economic benefits to individual borrowers, families, 
     and rural communities; (2) assure that benefits are 
     communicated to all program eligible customers with special 
     outreach efforts to target resources to underserved, 
     impoverished, or economically declining rural areas; (3) 
     lower the cost of programs while retaining the benefits by 
     redesigning more effective programs that work in partnership 
     with State and local governments and the private sector; and 
     (4) leverage the economic benefits through the use of low-
     cost credit programs, especially guaranteed loans.


                       committee recommendations

       The Committee recommends total appropriations of 
     $1,585,266,000 for the Rural Housing Service. This is 
     $110,789,000 more than the 2002 level and $56,749,000 more 
     than the budget request.
       The Committee encourages the Department to continue to set-
     aside of funds within rural housing programs to support self-
     help housing, home ownership partnerships, housing 
     preservation and State rental assistance, and other related 
     activities that facilitate the development of housing in 
     rural areas.
       The following table presents loan and grant program levels 
     recommended by the Committee, as compared to the fiscal year 
     2002 levels and the 2003 budget request:

                                              LOAN AND GRANT LEVELS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                     2002         2003 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program Account loan levels:
    Single family housing (sec. 502):
        Direct...............................................      (1,079,848)        (957,300)      (1,005,162)
        Unsubsidized guaranteed..............................      (3,137,969)      (2,750,000)      (2,750,000)
    Housing repair (sec. 504)................................         (32,325)         (35,000)         (35,000)
    Multifamily housing guarantees (sec. 538)................         (99,771)        (100,000)  ...............
    Rental housing (sec. 515)................................        (114,069)         (60,000)        (120,000)
    Site loans (sec. 524)....................................          (5,091)          (5,000)          (5,000)
    Credit sales of acquired property........................         (11,778)         (12,000)         (12,000)
    Self-help housing land development fund..................          (5,000)          (5,011)          (5,011)
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, RHIF............................................      (4,485,851)      (3,924,311)      (3,932,173)
                                                              ==================================================
Farm Labor Program:
    Farm labor housing loan level............................         (28,459)         (36,000)         (36,000)
    Farm labor housing grants................................          17,967           16,968           16,968
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Farm Labor Program..............................         (46,426)         (52,968)         (52,968)
                                                              ==================================================
Grants and payments:
    Mutual and self-help housing.............................          35,000           34,000           35,000
    Rental assistance........................................         701,004          712,000          730,000
    Rural housing assistance grants [RHAG]...................          38,914           42,498           47,498
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, rural housing grants and payments...............         774,918          788,498          812,498
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, RHS loans and grants............................      (5,307,195)      (4,765,777)      (4,797,639)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              RURAL HOUSING INSURANCE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

       This fund was established in 1965 (Public Law 89-117) 
     pursuant to section 517 of title V of the Housing Act of 
     1949, as amended. This fund may be used to insure or 
     guarantee rural housing loans for single-family homes, rental 
     and cooperative housing, and rural housing sites. Rural 
     housing loans are made to construct, improve, alter, repair, 
     or replace dwellings and essential farm service buildings 
     that are modest in size, design, and cost. Rental housing 
     insured loans are made to individuals, corporations, 
     associations, trusts, or partnerships to provide moderate-
     cost rental housing and related facilities for elderly 
     persons in rural areas. These loans are repayable in not to 
     exceed 30 years. Loan programs are limited to rural areas, 
     which include towns, villages, and other places of not more 
     than 10,000 population, which are not part of an urban area. 
     Loans may also be made in areas with a population in excess 
     of 10,000, but less than 20,000, if the area is not included 
     in a standard metropolitan statistical area and has a serious 
     lack of mortgage credit for low- and moderate-income 
     borrowers.
       An increased priority should be placed on long term 
     rehabilitation needs within the existing multi-family housing 
     portfolio including increased equity loan activity and 
     financial and technical assistance support for acquisition of 
     existing projects.
       The Committee urges the Department to consider decreasing 
     the guarantee fee in the single family unsubsidized 
     guaranteed program consistent with other Federal housing 
     programs including fees charged for refinancing existing 
     loans.


            LOAN SUBSIDY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES LEVELS

       The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
     program account. Appropriations to this account will be used 
     to cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the 
     direct loans obligated and loan guarantees committed in 2002, 
     as well as for administrative expenses. The following table 
     presents the loan subsidy levels as compared to the 2002 
     levels and the 2003 budget request:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Fiscal year--
                                                             -----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                 2002 level       2003 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan subsidies:
    Single family (sec. 502):
        Direct..............................................          142,108           185,429          194,700
        Unsubsidized guaranteed.............................           40,166            19,800           19,800
    Housing repair (sec. 504)...............................           10,386            10,857           10,857
    Multifamily housing guarantees (sec. 538)...............            3,921             4,500  ...............
    Rental housing (sec. 515)...............................           48,274            27,978           55,956
    Site loans (sec. 524)...................................               28                55               55
    Credit sales of acquired property.......................              750               934              934
    Self-help housing land development fund.................              254               221              221
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Total, loan subsidies.................................          245,887           249,774          282,523
                                                             ===================================================
Administrative expenses.....................................          422,241           455,630          455,630
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 606]]

                       RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$701,004,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................712,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................730,000,000


       The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 
     established a rural rental assistance program to be 
     administered through the rural housing loans program. The 
     objective of the program is to reduce rents paid by low-
     income families living in Rural Housing Service financed 
     rental projects and farm labor housing projects. Under this 
     program, low-income tenants will contribute the higher of: 
     (1) 30 percent of monthly adjusted income; (2) 10 percent of 
     monthly income; or (3) designated housing payments from a 
     welfare agency.

       Payments from the fund are made to the project owner for 
     the difference between the tenant's payment and the approved 
     rental rate established for the unit.

       The program is administered in tandem with Rural Housing 
     Service section 515 rural rental and cooperative housing 
     programs and the farm labor loan and grant programs. Priority 
     is given to existing projects for units occupied by rent over 
     burdened low-income families and projects experiencing 
     financial difficulties beyond the control of the owner; any 
     remaining authority will be used for projects receiving new 
     construction commitments under sections 514, 515, or 516 for 
     very low-income families with certain limitations.

                       committee recommendations

       For rural rental assistance payments, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $730,000,000. This amount is 
     $28,996,000 more than the 2002 level and $18,000,000 more 
     than the budget request.

       The Committee provides an increase in this account and 
     expects the Department to provide rental assistance for new 
     construction, servicing and debt forgiveness including 
     offering assistance to units that are occupied by tenants 
     that are rent overburdened and projects experiencing 
     financial difficulties beyond the control of the owner.

                  MUTUAL AND SELF-HELP HOUSING GRANTS

Appropriations, 2002........................................$35,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................34,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................35,000,000


       This grant program is authorized by title V of the Housing 
     Act of 1949. Grants are made to local organizations to 
     promote the development of mutual or self-help programs under 
     which groups of usually 6 to 10 families build their own 
     homes by mutually exchanging labor. Funds may be used to pay 
     the cost of construction supervisors who will work with 
     families in the construction of their homes and for 
     administrative expenses of the organizations providing the 
     self-help assistance.

                       Committee Recommendations

       The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for mutual and self-
     help housing grants. This is the same as the 2002 level and 
     $1,000,000 more than the budget request.

                    rural housing assistance grants

Appropriations, 2002........................................$38,914,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................42,498,000
Committee recommendation.....................................47,498,000


       This program consolidates funding for rural housing grant 
     programs. This consolidation of housing grant funding 
     provides greater flexibility to tailor financial assistance 
     to applicant needs.

       Very low-income housing repair grants.--The Very Low-Income 
     Housing Repair Grants Program is authorized under section 504 
     of title V of the Housing Act of 1949. The rural housing 
     repair grant program is carried out by making grants to very 
     low-income families to make necessary repairs to their homes 
     in order to make such dwellings safe and sanitary, and remove 
     hazards to the health of the occupants, their families, or 
     the community.

       These grants may be made to cover the cost of improvements 
     or additions, such as repairing roofs, providing toilet 
     facilities, providing a convenient and sanitary water supply, 
     supplying screens, repairing or providing structural supports 
     or making similar repairs, additions, or improvements, 
     including all preliminary and installation costs in obtaining 
     central water and sewer service. A grant can be made in 
     combination with a section 504 very low-income housing repair 
     loan.

       No assistance can be extended to any one individual in the 
     form of a loan, grant, or combined loans and grants in excess 
     of $27,500, and grant assistance is limited to persons, or 
     families headed by persons who are 62 years of age or older.

       Supervisory and technical assistance grants.--Supervisory 
     and technical assistance grants are made to public and 
     private nonprofit organizations for packaging loan 
     applications for housing assistance under sections 502, 504, 
     514/516, 515, and 533 of the Housing Act of 1949. The 
     assistance is directed to very low-income families in 
     underserved areas where at least 20 percent of the population 
     is below the poverty level and at least 10 percent or more of 
     the population resides in substandard housing. In fiscal year 
     1994 a Homebuyer Education Program was implemented under this 
     authority. This program provides low-income individuals and 
     families education and counseling on obtaining and/or 
     maintaining occupancy of adequate housing and supervised 
     credit assistance to become successful homeowners.

       Compensation for construction defects.--Compensation for 
     construction defects provides funds for grants to eligible 
     section 502 borrowers to correct structural defects, or to 
     pay claims of owners arising from such defects on a newly 
     constructed dwelling purchased with RHS financial assistance. 
     Claims are not paid until provisions under the builder's 
     warranty have been fully pursued. Requests for compensation 
     for construction defects must be made by the owner of the 
     property within 18 months after the date financial assistance 
     was granted.

       Rural housing preservation grants.--Rural housing 
     preservation grants (section 522) of the Housing and Urban-
     Rural Recovery Act of 1983 authorizes the Rural Housing 
     Service to administer a program of home repair directed at 
     low- and very low-income people.

       The purpose of the preservation program is to improve the 
     delivery of rehabilitation assistance by employing the 
     expertise of housing organizations at the local level. 
     Eligible applicants will compete on a State-by-State basis 
     for grants funds. These funds may be administered as loans, 
     loan write-downs, or grants to finance home repair. The 
     program will be administered by local grantees.

       The Committee is also aware of and encourages the 
     Department to give consideration to applications for rural 
     housing preservation grants from the following. The 
     Campbellsville University of Kentucky Heartland Outreach.

                       Committee Recommendations


       For the Rural Housing Assistance Grants Program the 
     Committee recommends $47,498,000. This is $8,584,000 more 
     than the 2002 level and $5,000,000 more than the budget 
     request.

       The Committee encourages the Secretary to administer the 
     Demonstration Housing Grants for Agriculture Processing 
     Workers through non-profits community based organizations, 
     including cooperatives, and allow grant funding up to 75 
     percent total development costs for each project awarded. The 
     Department should also require on-site tenant services in the 
     selection criteria. The Committee provided funding for this 
     purpose in fiscal year 2001 and requests that the Department 
     make necessary changes in any notice for available funds from 
     lessons learned.

       The following table compares the grant program levels 
     recommended by the Committee to the fiscal year 2002 levels 
     and the budget request:


                                         RURAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE GRANTS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                                                                  2002 level      2003 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very low-income housing repair grants........................           29,934           31,500           31,500
Supervisory and technical assistance.........................              998              998              998
Rural housing preservation grants............................            7,982           10,000           10,000
Demonstration housing grants for agriculture processing        ...............  ...............            5,000
 workers.....................................................
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................           38,914           42,498           47,498
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 607]]

                       FARM LABOR PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Subsidy
                                        Loan level    level      Grants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002..................    (28,459)     13,464     17,967
Budget estimate, 2003.................    (36,000)     17,647     16,968
Committee recommendation..............    (36,000)     17,647     16,968
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The direct farm labor housing loan program is authorized 
     under section 514 and the rural housing for domestic farm 
     labor housing grant program is authorized under section 516 
     of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended. The loans, grants, 
     and contracts are made to public and private nonprofit 
     organizations for low-rent housing and related facilities for 
     domestic farm labor. Grant assistance may not exceed 90 
     percent of the cost of a project. Loans and grants may be 
     used for construction of new structures, site acquisition and 
     development, rehabilitation of existing structures, and 
     purchase of furnishings and equipment for dwellings, dining 
     halls, community rooms, and infirmaries.
       Under credit reform, administrative costs associated with 
     loan programs are appropriated to the program accounts. 
     Appropriations to the salaries and expenses account will be 
     for costs associated with grant programs.


                       committee recommendations

       For the cost of direct farm labor housing loans and grants, 
     the Committee recommends $34,615,000. This is $3,184,000 more 
     than the 2002 level and the same as the budget request.

                   Rural Business-Cooperative Service

       The Rural Business-Cooperative Service [RBS] was 
     established by Public Law 103-354, Federal Crop Insurance 
     Reform and Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 
     1994, dated October 13, 1994. Its programs were previously 
     administered by the Rural Development Administration, the 
     Rural Electrification Administration, and the Agricultural 
     Cooperative Service.
       The mission of the Rural Business-Cooperative Service is to 
     enhance the quality of life for all rural residents by 
     assisting new and existing cooperatives and other businesses 
     through partnership with rural communities. The goals and 
     objectives are to: (1) promote a stable business environment 
     in rural America through financial assistance, sound business 
     planning, technical assistance, appropriate research, 
     education, and information; (2) support environmentally 
     sensitive economic growth that meets the needs of the entire 
     community; and (3) assure that the Service benefits are 
     available to all segments of the rural community, with 
     emphasis on those most in need.


              RURAL DEVELOPMENT LOAN FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Fiscal year--
                             ----------------------------    Committee
                               2002 level   2003 request  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level........      (38,171)      (40,000)       (40,000)
Direct loan subsidy.........       16,494        19,304         19,304
Administrative expenses.....        3,733         4,290          4,290
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The rural development (intermediary relending) loan program 
     was originally authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act of 
     1964 (Public Law 88-452). The making of rural development 
     loans by the Department of Agriculture was reauthorized by 
     Public Law 99-425, the Human Services Reauthorization Act of 
     1986.
       Loans are made to intermediary borrowers (this is, small 
     investment groups) who in turn will reloan the funds to rural 
     businesses, community development corporations, private 
     nonprofit organizations, public agencies, et cetera, for the 
     purpose of improving business, industry, community 
     facilities, and employment opportunities and diversification 
     of the economy in rural areas.
       The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
     program account. Appropriations to this account will be used 
     to cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the 
     direct loans obligated in 2003, as well as for administrative 
     expenses.


                       Committee Recommendations

       For rural development (intermediary relending) loans, the 
     Committee recommends a total loan level of $40,000,000. This 
     is $1,829,000 more than the 2002 loan level and the same as 
     the budget request.
       The Committee encourages the agency to consider the 
     following for intermediary relending loans: The Menominee 
     Tribal Enterprises, Wisconsin; Impact Seven, Inc., Wisconsin; 
     Northern Economic Initiatives Corporation, Michigan; Southern 
     Financial Partners, Arkansas; and the Southwestern 
     Pennsylvania Progress Fund.


            RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Fiscal year--
                             ----------------------------    Committee
                               2002 level   2003 request  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated loan level........      (14,966)      (14,967)       (14,967)
Direct loan subsidy\1\......        3,616         3,197          3,197
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Offset by a rescission from interest on the cushion of credit
  payments as authorized by section 313 of the Rural Electrification Act
  of 1936.

       The rural economic development loans program was 
     established by the Reconciliation Act of December 1987 
     (Public Law 100-203), which amended the Rural Electrification 
     Act of 1936, by establishing a new section 313. This section 
     of the Rural Electrification Act (7 U.S.C. 901) established a 
     cushion of credits payment program and created the rural 
     economic development subaccount. The Administrator of RUS is 
     authorized under the act to utilize funds in this program to 
     provide zero interest loans to electric and 
     telecommunications borrowers for the purpose of promoting 
     rural economic development and job creation projects, 
     including funding for feasibility studies, startup costs, and 
     other reasonable expenses for the purpose of fostering rural 
     economic development.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends a direct loan subsidy 
     appropriation for rural economic development loans of 
     $3,197,000. This amount is $419,000 less than the 2002 level 
     and the same as the budget request. As proposed in the 
     budget, the $3,197,000 provided is derived by transfer from 
     interest on the cushion of credit payments.


                  RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,750,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,000,000

       Rural cooperative development grants are authorized under 
     section 310B(e) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act, as amended. Grants are made to fund the 
     establishment and operation centers for rural cooperative 
     development with their primary purpose being the improvement 
     of economic conditions in rural areas. Grants may be made to 
     nonprofit institutions or institutions of higher education. 
     Grants may be used to pay up to 75 percent of the cost of the 
     project and associated administrative costs. The applicant 
     must contribute at least 25 percent from non-Federal sources, 
     except 1994 institutions, which only need to provide 5 
     percent. Grants are competitive and are awarded based on 
     specific selection criteria.
       Cooperative research agreements are authorized by 7 U.S.C. 
     2204b. The funds are used for cooperative research 
     agreements, primarily with colleges and universities, on 
     critical operational, organizational, and structural issues 
     facing cooperatives.
       Cooperative agreements are authorized under 7 U.S.C. 2201 
     to any qualified State departments of agriculture, 
     university, and other State entity to conduct research that 
     will strengthen and enhance the operations of agricultural 
     marketing cooperatives in rural areas.
       The Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA) 
     program was first authorized by the Food Security Act of 
     1985. The program provides information and technical 
     assistance to agricultural producers to adopt sustainable 
     agricultural practices that are environmentally friendly and 
     lower production costs.


                       Committee Recommendations

       The Committee recommends $9,000,000 for rural cooperative 
     development grants. This is $1,250,000 more than the 2002 
     level and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee is aware of and encourages the Department to 
     consider the following applications for cooperative 
     development grants: the Alaska Network Systems for Internet 
     Facilities Mission Valley, Montana; Montana State University-
     Northern Cooperative Development Center; Mississippi 
     Association of Cooperatives; and a rural cooperative located 
     in Elko, Pershing, and Humboldt Counties, Nevada.
       Of the funds provided, $2,500,000 is provided for the 
     Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas program 
     through a cooperative agreement with the National Center for 
     Appropriate Technology.
       The Committee has included language in the bill that not 
     more than $1,500,000 shall be made available to cooperatives 
     or associations of cooperatives whose primary focus is to 
     provide assistance to small, minority producers.


       RURAL EMPOWERMENT ZONES AND ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES GRANTS

Appropriations, 2002........................................$14,967,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................14,967,000

                       Committee Recommendations

       The Committee recommends $14,967,000 for Rural Empowerment 
     Zones and Enterprise Communities Grants. This amount is the 
     same as the 2002 level and $14,967,000 more than the budget 
     request.

                        Rural Utilities Service

       The Rural Utilities Service [RUS] was established under the 
     Federal Crop Insurance Reform and Department of Agriculture 
     Reorganization Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-354), October 13, 
     1994. RUS administers the electric and telephone programs of 
     the former Rural Electrification Administration and the water 
     and waste programs of the former Rural Development 
     Administration.
       The mission of the RUS is to serve a leading role in 
     improving the quality of life in rural America by 
     administering its electric, telecommunications, and water and 
     waste programs in a service oriented, forward looking, and 
     financially responsible manner. All three programs have the 
     common goal of

[[Page 608]]

     modernizing and revitalizing rural communities. RUS provides 
     funding and support service for utilities serving rural 
     areas. The public-private partnerships established by RUS and 
     local utilities assist rural communities in modernizing local 
     infrastructure. RUS programs are also characterized by the 
     substantial amount of private investment which is leveraged 
     by the public funds invested into infrastructure and 
     technology, resulting in the creation of new sources of 
     employment.


   RURAL ELECTRIFICATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

       The Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et 
     seq.) provides the statutory authority for the electric and 
     telecommunications programs.
       The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
     program account. An appropriation to this account will be 
     used to cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the 
     direct loans obligated and loan guarantees committed in 2003, 
     as well as for administrative expenses.


                       committee recommendations

       The following table reflects the Committee's recommendation 
     for the ``Rural electrification and telecommunications loans 
     program'' account, the loan subsidy and administrative 
     expenses, as compared to the fiscal year 2002 and budget 
     request levels:


                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                                                                   ----------------------------     Committee
                                                                     2002 level   2003 request   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loan authorizations:
    Electric:
        Direct, 5 percent.........................................     (121,107)     (121,103)         (121,103)
        Direct, Muni..............................................     (500,000)     (100,000)         (100,000)
        Direct, FFB...............................................   (2,600,000)   (1,600,000)       (2,600,000)
        Direct, Treasury rate.....................................     (750,000)     (700,000)       (1,150,000)
        Guaranteed................................................     (100,000)     (100,000)         (100,000)
        Guaranteed, Underwriting..................................  ............  ............       (1,000,000)
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
          Subtotal................................................   (4,071,107)   (2,621,103)       (5,071,103)
                                                                   =============================================
    Telecommunications:
        Direct, 5 percent.........................................      (74,827)      (75,029)          (75,029)
        Direct, Treasury rate.....................................     (300,000)     (300,000)         (300,000)
        Direct, FFB...............................................     (120,000)     (120,000)         (120,000)
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
          Subtotal................................................     (494,827)     (495,029)         (495,029)
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
          Total, loan authorizations..............................   (4,565,934)   (3,116,132)       (5,566,132)
                                                                   =============================================
Loan Subsidies:
    Electric:
        Direct, 5 percent.........................................        3,609         6,915             6,915
        Direct, Muni\1\...........................................  ............        4,030             4,030
        Direct, FFB\2\............................................  ............  ............  ................
        Direct, Treasury rate\2\..................................  ............  ............  ................
        Guaranteed................................................           80            80                80
        Guaranteed, Underwriting\3\...............................  ............  ............  ................
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
          Subtotal................................................        3,689        11,025            11,025
                                                                   =============================================
    Telecommunications:
        Direct, 5 percent.........................................        1,736         1,283             1,283
        Direct, Treasury rate.....................................          300           150               150
        Direct, FFB\2\............................................  ............  ............  ................
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
          Subtotal................................................        2,036         1,433             1,433
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
          Total, loan subsidies...................................        5,725        12,458            12,458
                                                                   =============================================
Administrative expenses...........................................       36,000        38,035            38,035
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
      Total, Rural Electrification and Telecommunications Loans          41,725        50,493            50,493
       Programs Account...........................................
                                                                   =============================================
          (Loan authorization)....................................   (4,565,934)   (3,116,132)       (5,566,132)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Negative subsidy rate for fiscal year 2002 is calculated for this program.
\2\Negative subsidy rates for fiscal years 2002 and 2003 are calculated for these programs.
\3\Negative subsidy rate for fiscal year 2003 is calculated for this program.


                  RURAL TELEPHONE BANK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Direct loan  Administrative
                                Loan level     subsidy       expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002.........     (174,615)        3,737          3,082
Budget estimate, 2003........  ............  ...........          3,082
Committee recommendation.....     (174,615)        2,410          3,082
------------------------------------------------------------------------


       The Rural Telephone Bank [RTB] is required by law to begin 
     privatization (repurchase of federally owned stock) in fiscal 
     year 1996. RTB borrowers are able to borrow at private market 
     rates and no longer require Federal assistance.

       The Rural Telephone Bank is managed by a 13-member board of 
     directors. The Administrator of RUS serves as Governor of the 
     Bank until conversion to private ownership, control, and 
     operation. This will take place when 51 percent of the class 
     A stock issued to the United States and outstanding at any 
     time after September 30, 1996, has been fully redeemed and 
     retired. Activities of the Bank are carried out by RUS 
     employees and the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. 
     Department of Agriculture.

       The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
     program account. Appropriations to this account will be used 
     to cover the lifetime subsidy costs associated with the 
     direct loans obligated in 2003, as well as for administrative 
     expenses.

                       committee recommendations

       The Committee recommends $2,410,000 which supports a loan 
     level of $174,615,000. This amount is $1,327,000 less than 
     the 2002 level and $2,410,000 more than the budget request.


               DISTANCE LEARNING AND telemedicine program

                            loans and grants

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Fiscal year--
                             ----------------------------    Committee
                               2002 level   2003 request  recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance learning and            (300,000)      (50,000)       (50,000)
 telemedicine direct loan...
Broadband telecommunications      (80,000)      (79,535)       (79,535)
 direct loans...............
Direct loan subsidy\1\......  ............        4,104          4,104
Grants......................       49,441        26,945         47,837
                             -------------------------------------------
    Total Budget Authority..       49,441        31,049         51,941
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Negative subsidy rate for fiscal year 2002 is calculated for this
  program.


       The Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program is 
     authorized by the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade 
     Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 4017, 7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.), as 
     amended by the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act 
     of 1996. This program provides incentives to improve the 
     quality of phone services, to provide access to advanced 
     telecommunications services

[[Page 609]]

     and computer networks, and to improve rural opportunities.
       This program provides the facilities and equipment to link 
     rural education and medical facilities with more urban 
     centers and other facilities providing rural residents access 
     to better health care through technology and increasing 
     educational opportunities for rural students. These funds are 
     available for loans and grants.


                       Committee Recommendations

       For the Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program, the 
     Committee recommends $51,941,000. This amount is $2,500,000 
     more than the 2002 level and $20,892,000 more than the budget 
     request.
       The Committee is aware that public television stations are 
     facing a deadline of May, 2003 to meet the Federal 
     Communications Commission's mandate to broadcast digital 
     television signals and understands the difficulty that many 
     stations will incur in meeting that deadline. Of the funds 
     provided for Distance Learning and Telemedicine, the 
     Committee has provided $15,000,000 in grants for pubic 
     broadcasting systems to meet this goal.
       In addition, of the funds provided, $10,000,000 in grants 
     shall be made available to support broadband transmission and 
     local dial-up Internet services for rural areas. The 
     Department should continue to provide financial support in 
     addition to the Distance Learning and Telemedicine grant and 
     loan accounts.
       The Committee is aware of and encourages the Department to 
     give consideration to the following applications for grants 
     and loans: The Lakeshore Technical College, Wisconsin; Alaska 
     Federal Health Care Access Network; South Dakota Community 
     Healthcare Association's Integrated Management Information 
     System; Kentucky Telehealth Network; Maui Community College 
     Sky Bridge Interactive Television Network, Hawaii; Farm 
     Resource Center, Illinois; Montana Agriculture Knowledge 
     Network; Lane County, OR; Fresno Community Medical Centers, 
     California; City of Jackson, TN; Troy State Alabama 
     Technology Network; Huntington College, Alabama; and the 
     Educational Services District 105, Washington.
       The Committee encourages the Department to fund a 
     demonstration project to build upon existing resources and to 
     further the use of advanced telecommunications by rural 
     communities.

                    TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS

Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$587,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................774,000
Committee recommendation........................................774,000

\1\Excludes $23,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.
       The Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 
     Consumer Services provides direction and coordination in 
     carrying out the laws enacted by the Congress with respect to 
     the Department's food and consumer activities. The Office has 
     oversight and management responsibilities for the Food and 
     Nutrition Service.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition 
     and Consumer Services, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $774,000. This amount is $187,000 more than 
     the 2002 level and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee remains aware of innovative work in Wisconsin 
     and Iowa making milk available through school vending 
     machines as an alternative to other beverages. In 2002, the 
     Under Secretary was directed to examine the merits of these 
     experiments and their potential to improve child health and 
     nutrition. Based upon that information, the Under Secretary 
     is now directed to expand these efforts as pilot programs in 
     these States.
       The Committee is aware of the benefits of programs such as 
     the WIC and Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Programs, which 
     improve nutrition among low-income mothers, children and 
     senior citizens by giving them access to locally grown fresh 
     fruits and vegetables. The Committee also recognizes the 
     benefits these and all farmers' markets provide for local 
     farmers. Therefore, the Committee directs the Under Secretary 
     to work with the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 
     Programs to study the potential for a broad Farmers' Market 
     Program within the Agricultural Marketing Service, which 
     would encompass the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, 
     the Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, and the 
     recently authorized Farmers' Market Promotion Program. The 
     Committee requests a report on the potential of such a 
     program, including cost estimates, by March 1, 2003.
       The Committee is alarmed at the level of obesity in this 
     country, and the health-related problems this causes. It has 
     been recently reported that over 300,000 Americans die each 
     year from obesity-related causes, and the economic costs of 
     these illnesses is significant. The FNS mission area is 
     directed to help Americans follow the Dietary Guidelines, 
     including guidelines urging Americans to ``aim for a healthy 
     weight'' and ``be physically active.'' The Committee is 
     pleased that FNS is currently planning specific program 
     directions and activities for ``Breaking the Barriers: 
     Practical Approaches to Improve Americans' Eating 
     Behaviors,'' an initiative that will focus on changing 
     Americans' eating behaviors and exercise patterns, and 
     encourages FNS to continue these activities.
       Further, the Committee is aware that the administration is 
     developing its Healthier U.S. Initative, promoting nutritious 
     diets, physical activity, preventative screenings, and 
     healthy lifestyles as means to combat increasing obesity and 
     diabetes rates, particularly among children. The Committee is 
     encouraged by this approach, and believes that a media 
     component, including in-school educational networks, would be 
     an effective part of this initiative.

                       Food and Nutrition Service

       The Food and Nutrition Service represents an organizational 
     effort to eliminate hunger and malnutrition in this country. 
     Nutrition assistance programs provide access to a 
     nutritionally adequate diet for families and persons with low 
     incomes and encourage better eating patterns among the 
     Nation's children. These programs include:
       Child Nutrition Programs.--The National School Lunch and 
     School Breakfast, Summer Food Service, and Child and Adult 
     Care Food programs provide funding to the States, Puerto 
     Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam for use in serving 
     nutritious lunches and breakfasts to children attending 
     schools of high school grades and under, to children of 
     preschool age in child care centers, and to children in other 
     institutions in order to improve the health and well-being of 
     the Nation's children, and broaden the markets for 
     agricultural food commodities. Through the Special Milk 
     Program, assistance is provided to the States for making 
     reimbursement payments to eligible schools and child care 
     institutions which institute or expand milk service in order 
     to increase the consumption of fluid milk by children. Funds 
     for this program are provided by direct appropriation and 
     transfer from section 32.
       Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, 
     and Children [WIC].--This program safeguards the health of 
     pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding women, infants, and 
     children up to age 5 who are at nutritional risk because of 
     inadequate nutrition and income by providing supplemental 
     foods. The delivery of supplemental foods may be done through 
     health clinics, vouchers redeemable at retail food stores, or 
     other approved methods which a cooperating State health 
     agency may select. Funds for this program are provided by 
     direct appropriation.
       Food Stamp Program.--This program seeks to improve 
     nutritional standards of needy persons and families. 
     Assistance is provided to eligible households to enable them 
     to obtain a better diet by increasing their food purchasing 
     capability, usually by furnishing benefits in the form of 
     electronic access to funds. The program also includes 
     Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico. The Farm Security and 
     Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171) authorizes 
     block grants for Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico and 
     American Samoa, which provide broad flexibility in 
     establishing nutrition assistance programs specifically 
     tailored to the needs of their low-income households.
       The program also includes the Food Distribution Program on 
     Indian Reservations which provides nutritious agricultural 
     commodities to low-income persons living on or near Indian 
     reservations who choose not to participate in the Food Stamp 
     Program.
       The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public 
     Law 107-171, enacted May 13, 2002, provides that $140,000,000 
     from funds appropriated in the Food Stamp account be used to 
     purchase commodities for The Emergency Food Assistance 
     Program.
       Commodity Assistance Program [CAP].--This program provides 
     funding for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP], 
     and administrative expenses for The Emergency Food Assistance 
     Program [TEFAP].
       CSFP provides supplemental foods to infants and children up 
     to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding 
     women with low incomes, and who reside in approved project 
     areas. In addition, this program operates commodity 
     distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons.
       TEFAP provides commodities and grant funds to State 
     agencies to assist in the cost of storage and distribution of 
     donated commodities. The Soup Kitchen/Food Bank Program was 
     absorbed into TEFAP under the Personal Responsibility and 
     Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-
     193), by an amendment to section 201A of the Emergency Food 
     Assistance Act.
       Food Donations Programs.--Nutritious agricultural 
     commodities are provided to residents of the Federated States 
     of Micronesia and the Marshall Islands. Cash assistance is 
     provided to distributing agencies to assist them in meeting 
     administrative expenses incurred. It also provides funding 
     for use in non-Presidentially declared disasters, and for 
     FNS' administrative costs in connection with relief for all 
     disasters. Funds for this program are provided by direct 
     appropriation.
       Food Program Administration.--Most salaries and Federal 
     operating expenses of the

[[Page 610]]

     Food and Nutrition Service are funded from this account. Also 
     included is the Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion 
     [CNPP] which oversees improvements in and revisions to the 
     food and guidance systems, and serves as the focal point for 
     advancing and coordinating nutrition promotion and education 
     policy to improve the health of all Americans. As of 
     September 30, 2001, there were 1,504 full-time permanent and 
     72 part-time and temporary employees in the agency. FNS's 
     headquarters staff, which is located in Alexandria, VA, 
     totals 555, and 1,021 FNS employees are located in the field. 
     There are 7 regional offices employing 637 employees, and the 
     balance of the agency is located in 4 food stamp compliance 
     offices, 1 computer support center in Minneapolis, MN, 1 
     administrative review office, and 69 field offices. Funds for 
     this program are provided by direct appropriation.

                        child nutrition programs

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Section 32
                                   Appropriation   transfers     Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002.............     4,914,788    5,172,458  10,087,246
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.........     5,382,179    5,193,990  10,576,169
Committee recommendation.........     5,834,506    4,745,663  10,580,169
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $553,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.

       The Child Nutrition Programs, authorized by the Richard B. 
     Russell National School Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act 
     of 1966, provide Federal assistance to State agencies in the 
     form of cash and commodities for use in preparing and serving 
     nutritious meals to children while they are attending school, 
     residing in service institutions, or participating in other 
     organized activities away from home. The purpose of these 
     programs is to help maintain the health and proper physical 
     development of America's children. Milk is provided to 
     children either free or at a low cost, depending on their 
     family income level. FNS provides cash subsidies to States 
     administering the programs and directly administers the 
     program in the States which choose not to do so. Grants are 
     also made for nutritional training and surveys and for State 
     administrative expenses. Under current law, most of these 
     payments are made on the basis of reimbursement rates 
     established by law and applied to lunches and breakfasts 
     actually served by the States. The reimbursement rates are 
     adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price 
     Index for food away from home.
       The William F. Goodling Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act 
     of 1998, Public Law 105-336, contains a number of child 
     nutrition provisions. These include:
       Summer Food Service Program [SFSP].--Reauthorizes the 
     program through 2003 and relaxes the site limitations for 
     private nonprofit sponsors in SFSP.
       Child and Adult Care Food Program [CACFP].--Permanently 
     authorizes payments for snacks provided to children through 
     age 18 in after-school programs, and provides funds for 
     demonstration projects to expand services to homeless 
     children and family day care homes in low-income areas. On 
     July 1, 1999, the Homeless Child Nutrition Program and the 
     Homeless Summer Food Service Program was transferred into the 
     CACFP.
       National School Lunch Program [NSLP].--(1) Significantly 
     expands reimbursement for snacks for children up to age 18 in 
     after-school care programs; (2) provides for free snacks in 
     needy areas; and (3) requires participating schools to obtain 
     a food safety inspection conducted by a State or local 
     agency.
       A description of Child Nutrition Programs follows:
       1. Cash payments to States.--The programs are operated 
     under an agreement entered into by the State agencies and the 
     Department. Funds are made available under letters of credit 
     to State agencies for use in reimbursing participating 
     schools and other institutions. Sponsors apply to the State 
     agencies, and if approved, are reimbursed on a per-meal basis 
     in accordance with the terms of their agreements and rates 
     prescribed by law. The reimbursement rates are adjusted 
     annually to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for 
     food away from home.
       (a) School Lunch Program.--Assistance is provided to the 
     States for the service of lunches to all school children, 
     regardless of family income. States must match some of the 
     Federal cash grant. In fiscal year 2003, the School Lunch 
     Program will provide assistance for serving an estimated 4.8 
     billion school lunches including 2.0 billion for children 
     from upper-income families and 2.8 billion for children from 
     lower and low-income families. An estimated 28.4 million 
     children are expected to participate in the program daily 
     during the school year.
       (b) Special assistance for free and reduced-price 
     lunches.--Additional assistance is provided to the States for 
     serving lunches free or at a reduced price to needy children. 
     In fiscal year 2003, under current law, the program will 
     provide assistance for about 2.8 billion lunches, of which 
     2.4 billion will be served free of charge and 0.4 billion at 
     reduced price. About 17 million needy children will 
     participate in the program on an average schoolday during the 
     year.
       (c) School Breakfast Program.--Federal reimbursement to the 
     States is based on the number of breakfasts served free, at a 
     reduced price, or at the general rate for those served to 
     nonneedy children. Certain schools are designated in severe 
     need because, in the second preceding year, they served at 
     least 40 percent of their lunches at free or reduced prices 
     and because the regular breakfast reimbursement is 
     insufficient to cover cost. These schools receive higher 
     rates of reimbursement in both the free and reduced-price 
     categories. In fiscal year 2003, the program will serve an 
     estimated 1.4 billion breakfasts to a daily average of 8.3 
     million children.
       (d) State administrative expenses.--The funds may be used 
     for State employee salaries, benefits, support services, and 
     office equipment. Public Law 95-627 made the State 
     administrative expenses grant equal to 1.5 percent of certain 
     Federal payments in the second previous year. In fiscal year 
     2003, $133,583,000 will be allocated among the States to fund 
     ongoing State administrative expenses and to improve the 
     management of various nutrition programs.
       (e) Summer Food Service Program.--Meals served free to 
     children in low-income neighborhoods during the summer months 
     are supported on a performance basis by Federal cash 
     subsidies to State agencies. Funds are also provided for 
     related State and local administrative expenses. During the 
     summer of 2003, approximately 153.3 million meals will be 
     served.
       (f) Child and Adult Care Food Program.--Preschool children 
     receive year-round food assistance in nonprofit child care 
     centers and family and group day care homes under this 
     program. Public Law 97-35 permits profitmaking child care 
     centers receiving compensation under title XX of the Social 
     Security Act to participate in the program if 25 percent of 
     the children served are title XX participants. Certain adult 
     day care centers are also eligible for participation in this 
     program, providing subsidized meals to nonimpaired 
     individuals age 60 years or older. The Child and Adult Care 
     Food Program reimburses State agencies at varying rates for 
     breakfasts, lunches, suppers, and meal supplements and for 
     program-related State audit expenses. In fiscal year 2003, 
     approximately 1.8 billion meals will be served.
       2. Commodity procurement.--Commodities are purchased for 
     distribution to the school lunch, child care food, and summer 
     food service programs. The minimum commodity support rate for 
     all school lunch and child care center lunches and suppers 
     served is mandated by law and adjusted annually on July 1 to 
     reflect changes in the producer price index for food used in 
     schools and institutions. The commodities purchased with 
     these funds are supplemented by commodities purchased with 
     section 32 funds.
       3. Nutrition studies and education.--The National Food 
     Service Management Institute provides instruction for 
     educators and school food service personnel in nutrition and 
     food service management.
       4. Special milk.--In fiscal year 2003, approximately 116.1 
     million half-pints will be served in the Special Milk 
     Program. These include about 111.2 million half-pints served 
     to children whose family income is above 130 percent of 
     poverty. During fiscal year 2003, the average full cost 
     reimbursement for milk served to needy children is expected 
     to be 18.1 cents for each half-pint. Milk served to nonneedy 
     children is expected to be reimbursed at 14.0 cents for each 
     half-pint.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the child nutrition programs, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $5,834,506,000, plus transfers from 
     section 32 of $4,745,663,000, for a total program of 
     $10,580,169,000. This amount is $492,923,000 more than the 
     2002 level and $4,000,000 more than the budget request.
       The Committee's recommendation provides for the following 
     annual rates for the child nutrition programs.

                                          TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                 Child nutrition programs\1\                    2002 estimate     2003 budget     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
School Lunch Program.........................................        5,842,358        6,074,648        6,074,648
School Breakfast Program.....................................        1,574,654        1,660,870        1,660,870
State administrative expenses................................          126,853          133,583          133,583
Summer Food Service Program..................................          311,897          334,686          334,686
Child and Adult Care Food Program............................        1,799,735        1,904,494        1,904,494
Special Milk Program.........................................           16,891           16,449           16,449
Commodity procurement, processing, and computer support......          398,362          435,334          435,334

[[Page 611]]

 
Coordinated review system....................................            4,507            5,080            5,080
Team nutrition...............................................            9,991           10,025           10,025
Food safety education........................................            1,998            1,000            1,000
School Breakfast Grant Startup Program.......................              500  ...............            3,300
Common Roots Program.........................................  ...............  ...............              200
Child Nutrition Archive Resource Center......................  ...............  ...............              500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes studies and evaluations.

       The Committee provides $10,025,000 for TEAM nutrition. 
     Included in this amount is $4,000,000 for food service 
     training grants to States; $1,600,000 for technical 
     assistance materials; $800,000 for National Food Service 
     Management Institute cooperative agreements; $400,000 for 
     print and electronic food service resource systems; and 
     $3,225,000 for other activities.
       Of the amount provided, no more than $3,195,000 is 
     available for studies and evaluations. Of these funds, no 
     more than $500,000 may be transferred to the Economic 
     Research Service if determined by the Secretary. The 
     Committee expects to be notified each time that such a 
     transfer of funds occurs, including the amount of the 
     transfer, and a summary of the study for which the transfer 
     was deemed necessary. The Committee also requests a report 
     within 60 days of the enactment of this Act summarizing all 
     studies and evaluations planned by FNS for fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee expects FNS to utilize the National Food 
     Service Management Institute to carry out the food safety 
     education program.
       The Committee is aware of a survey taken in Wisconsin 
     studying the effects of the School Breakfast Program startup 
     grants. In schools that have received a startup grant, 
     approximately 66 percent of teachers indicated they have 
     observed positive benefits of instituting a school breakfast 
     program. Benefits included ``increased learning readiness,'' 
     ``increased socialization,'' and ``improved student 
     behavior.'' Therefore, the Committee provides $3,300,000 to 
     continue the School Breakfast Startup Grant Program in order 
     to help cover appropriate costs associated with the program 
     and to expand the availability of school breakfasts for 
     children. Of these funds, no less than $1,000,000 is to be 
     directed to the State of Wisconsin, up to $175,000 of which 
     shall be available for administrative costs related to 
     program outreach and expansion. The balance of funds is to be 
     directed to no less than five States that have had a 
     significantly lower percentage of participation in the School 
     Breakfast Program than the national average over the past 3 
     years.
       The Committee provides $200,000 to Food Works of Vermont 
     for the Common Roots program. This program integrates school 
     gardens into the curriculum in order to encourage students to 
     learn about and appreciate our agrarian and cultural 
     heritage, and to provide interesting, hands-on instruction in 
     a variety of classes including math, biology, science and 
     social studies. The program also coordinates with other 
     programs that are offered as a way to increase community 
     involvement in the free summer lunch program and integrate 
     fresh foods into the lunches served through this program.
       The Committee provides $500,000, available for 2 years, to 
     establish a Child Nutrition Archive Resource Center at the 
     National Food Service Management Institute.
       The Committee continues a general provision in the bill to 
     expand the number of low-income children in child care 
     centers that receive nutritious meals through the Child and 
     Adult Care Food Program. This language eliminates the 
     outdated requirement that eligible children receive Title 20 
     funds in order to receive the CACFP meal subsidy. This would 
     allow proprietary centers to participate in CACFP if at least 
     25 percent of the children they serve are eligible for a free 
     or reduced price meal.
       The Committee also encourages States to conduct outreach to 
     recruit new providers into the CACFP program through the 25 
     percent free or reduced price meal eligibility criteria 
     option. The Committee recognizes the value that pooling has 
     played in increasing participation in the CACFP program. 
     Under current law, which provides two options of 
     participation, States are encouraged to use this flexibility 
     to maximize participation until the 25 percent free or 
     reduced-price meal eligibility criteria is made permanent.
       The Committee believes that while there are many beneficial 
     programs to feed low-income children throughout the school 
     year, such as the National School Lunch Program and the 
     School Breakfast Program, there are significantly fewer 
     opportunities for low-income children to receive balanced 
     meals during the summer months. One such opportunity exists 
     as part of the Federal Summer Food Service Program (SFSP). 
     This program provides free, nutritious meals and snacks to 
     help children in low-income areas receive the nutrition they 
     need throughout the summer months. The benefits of SFSP are 
     multiple: not only does SFSP provide children with a healthy 
     meal, many of the approved SFSP sponsors include school 
     districts, local government agencies, or camps that provide 
     programming for recreational and educational opportunities 
     that foster learning throughout the summer months while 
     parents are working. However, SFSP is currently 
     underutilized. According to a recent report, for every 100 
     children who receive a free or reduced-price lunch during the 
     regular school year, only 21.1 children receive meals during 
     the summer.
       The Committee is aware that in 2000, a pilot program was 
     introduced that allowed 13 states to improve their use of 
     SFSP by simplifying cost accounting requirements for some 
     sponsors, reducing paperwork, and allowing for a modestly 
     higher reimbursement for meals and snacks provided under 
     SFSP. In these pilot states, SFSP participation increased by 
     8.9 percent between July 2000 and July 2001. The Committee 
     believes it would be beneficial to expand this pilot program 
     to all 50 States and recommends that this program be 
     considered during the Child Nutrition Act reauthorization in 
     2003.


special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children 
                                 [wic]

Appropriations, 2002\1\..................................$4,348,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,751,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,751,000,000

\1\Excludes $39,000,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations 
provided by Public Law 107-117.

       The special supplemental nutrition program for women, 
     infants, and children [WIC] is authorized by section 17 of 
     the Child Nutrition Act of 1966. Its purpose is to safeguard 
     the health of pregnant, breast-feeding and post partum women 
     and infants, and children up to age 5 who are at nutritional 
     risk because of inadequate nutrition and inadequate income. 
     The budget estimate assumes an average monthly participation 
     of 7.8 million participants at an average food cost of $35.86 
     per person per month in fiscal year 2003.
       The WIC program food packages are designed to provide foods 
     which studies have demonstrated are lacking in the diets of 
     the WIC program target population. The authorized 
     supplemental foods are iron-fortified breakfast cereal, fruit 
     or vegetable juice which contains vitamin C, dry beans, peas, 
     and peanut butter.
       There are three general types of delivery systems for WIC 
     foods: (1) retail purchase in which participants obtain 
     supplemental foods through retail stores; (2) home delivery 
     systems in which food is delivered to the participant's home; 
     and (3) direct distribution systems in which participants 
     pick up food from a distribution outlet. The food is free of 
     charge to all participants.
       The William F. Goodling Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act 
     of 1998, Public Law 105-336, reauthorizes the program through 
     2003 and adds several provisions to the program. For example, 
     the Act requires that an individual seeking certification or 
     recertification in the program must provide documentation of 
     family income. In addition, the Act permits State agencies to 
     award infant formula rebate contracts to the bidder offering 
     the lowest net wholesale price, unless the State agency 
     demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the 
     weighted average retail price for different brands of formula 
     in that State does not vary by more than 5 percent.
       Public Law 105-336 also includes many provisions to improve 
     retailer integrity and help to prevent fraud, waste and abuse 
     in the program.
       The WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program [FMNP] is also 
     funded from the WIC appropriation, and in fiscal year 2002 
     will receive Commodity Credit Corporation funds as authorized 
     by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. FMNP 
     is designed to accomplish two major goals: (1) to improve the 
     diets of WIC (or WIC-eligible) participants by providing them 
     with coupons to purchase fresh, nutritious, unprepared food, 
     such as fruits and vegetables, from farmers markets; and (2) 
     to increase the awareness and use of farmers' markets by low-
     income households. Although directly related to the WIC 
     Program, about one-half of the current FMNP operations are 
     administered by State departments of agriculture rather than 
     the State WIC agencies.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, 
     Infants, and Children

[[Page 612]]

     [WIC], the Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $4,751,000,000. This amount is $403,000,000 more than the 
     2002 appropriation and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee is aware that in recent years, the WIC 
     Program has increasingly been in need of supplemental 
     appropriations throughout the fiscal year due to unexpected 
     economic changes that have resulted in higher participation, 
     higher food costs, and other increased needs. The Committee 
     realizes the difficulty in providing the highest level of 
     service to WIC recipients when there is uncertainty whether 
     or not the necessary amount of funding will be available 
     throughout the entire fiscal year, and this uncertainty could 
     potentially result in low-income mothers and children being 
     turned away from this extraordinarily successful and 
     beneficial program. Therefore, the Committee provides a WIC 
     funding reserve of $125,000,000, to become available when the 
     Secretary deems necessary.
       The Committee is aware that the WIC Farmers' Market Program 
     provides fresh fruits and vegetables to low income mothers 
     and children, benefiting not only WIC participants, but local 
     farmers as well. Therefore, the Committee provides 
     $25,000,000 for the WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, 
     and directs the Secretary to obligate these funds within 45 
     days.
       The Committee also provides $14,000,000 for infrastructure 
     funding, and $2,000,000 for a study of WIC vendor practices.
       The Committee is concerned that the proposed rules to 
     revise the regulations governing the WIC food packages have 
     not yet been published. The Committee notes that the WIC food 
     package has changed little since 1974. In the past decade, 
     USDA has twice solicited comments, in 1994 and 1998, on a 
     draft policy on food substitutions to accommodate food 
     preferences and ethnic cultural eating patterns. However, the 
     Department has not moved forward with the development of a 
     WIC food package that responds to the needs of the culturally 
     sensitive populations WIC serves and with comprehensive 
     revisions in the overall food package rule to ensure 
     consistency with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and 
     USDA's Food Guide Pyramid. The Committee expects the 
     Department to immediately publish for public comment a 
     proposed food package rule responding to these needs and to 
     report quarterly to the Committee regarding the status of the 
     proposal's publication and the review of comments until a 
     final rule is published.
       The Committee notes that Federal regulations set a maximum 
     amount for infant formula to be issued to WIC participants 
     each month at a rate of 8 lbs. of powdered formula, or 403 
     fluid ounces of concentrated liquid formula. Infant formula 
     manufacturers offer powdered formula in a variety of can 
     sizes, which they change periodically. Because the maximum 
     amount can't be exceeded and because the powdered can size 
     variations rarely exactly match the authorized amount, WIC 
     clients may be provided less formula than they are authorized 
     to receive. The Committee strongly encourages the Department 
     to change WIC regulations to allow State WIC agencies to 
     round up to the next whole can size of infant formula to 
     ensure that all infants receive at least 8 lbs. or 128 ounces 
     of powdered infant formula, or 944 reconstituted fluid 
     ounces, at standard dilution, per month.
       While the Committee continues to support and encourage 
     State and local agency efforts to utilize WIC as an important 
     means of participation referral to other health care 
     services, it also continues to recognize the constraints that 
     WIC programs are experiencing as a result of expanding health 
     care priorities and continuing demand for core WIC program 
     activities. The Committee wishes to clarify that while WIC 
     plays an important role in screening and referral to other 
     health care services, it was never the Committee's intention 
     that WIC should perform aggressive screening, referral and 
     assessment functions in such a manner that supplants the 
     responsibilities of other programs, nor was it the 
     Committee's intention that WIC State and local agencies 
     should assume the burden of entering into and negotiating 
     appropriate cost sharing agreements. The Committee again 
     includes language in the bill to preserve WIC funding for WIC 
     services authorized by law to ensure that WIC funds are not 
     used to pay the expenses or to coordinate operations or 
     activities other than those allowable pursuant to section 17 
     of the Child Nutrition Act of 1996, unless fully reimbursed 
     by the appropriate Federal agency. Within the context of 
     authorized activities, the Committee notes an Executive 
     Memorandum issued by the President on December 11, 2000, on 
     the subject of improving immunization rates for children at 
     risk. The Committee supports the goal of the Executive 
     Memorandum, but remains concerned that the delivery of core 
     WIC objectives may suffer without properly shared 
     responsibilities and resources from other agencies.

                                               FOOD STAMP PROGRAM
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          TEFAP
                                             Expenses\1\    Amount in    Puerto Rico    commodity       Total
                                                             reserve                    purchases
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002......................    19,556,436     2,000,000     1,335,550       100,000  \2\22,967,98
                                                                                                               6
Budget estimate, 2003\3\..................    22,772,692     2,000,000     1,377,000       100,000    26,249,692
Committee recommendation\4\...............    22,772,692     2,000,000     1,377,000       140,000    26,289,692
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Including studies and evaluations.
\2\Includes $24,000,000 rescission pursuant to Public Law 107-206.
\3\Excludes $281,000 requested for employee pension and health benefits.
\4\Includes an additional $40,000,000 for TEFAP Commodity Purchases provided by the Farm Security and Rural
  Investment Act of 2002.

       The Food Stamp Program, authorized by the Food Stamp Act of 
     1964, attempts to alleviate hunger and malnutrition among 
     low-income persons by increasing their food purchasing power. 
     Eligible households receive food stamp benefits with which 
     they can purchase food through regular retail stores. They 
     are thus enabled to obtain a more nutritious diet than would 
     be possible without food stamp assistance. The Farm Security 
     and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public Law 107-171, enacted 
     May 13, 2002, reauthorizes the Food Stamp Program through 
     fiscal year 2007.
       The Food Stamp Program is currently in operation in all 50 
     States, the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, and 
     Guam. Participating households receive food benefits, the 
     value of which is determined by household size and income. 
     The cost of the benefits is paid by the Federal Government. 
     As required by law, the Food and Nutrition Service annually 
     revises household stamp allotments to reflect changes in the 
     cost of the thrifty food plan. The last revision was made on 
     October 1, 2001.
       At the authorized retail store, the recipient presents his/
     her card and enters a unique personal identification number 
     into a terminal that debits the household's account for the 
     amount of purchases. Federal funds are shifted from the 
     Federal Reserve to the EBT processor's financial institution 
     so that it may reimburse the grocer's account for the amount 
     of purchases. The grocer's account at a designated bank is 
     credited for the amount of purchases. The associated benefit 
     cost is accounted for in the same manner as those benefit 
     costs that result from issuance of coupons.
       As of September 30, 2001, 40 EBT projects were operating 
     Statewide in: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, 
     Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, 
     Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, 
     Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, 
     New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North 
     Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, 
     South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, 
     Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming. EBT is also 
     operating in part of California, Indiana, and Iowa. All other 
     States are in some stage of planning EBT implementation. 
     Puerto Rico has implemented an EBT system that operates 
     island-wide. Welfare reform mandates EBT for all States by 
     October 2002. Under this system, each recipient household is 
     issued a plastic benefit card with a magnetic strip or 
     computer chip to make food purchases. Neither cash nor food 
     coupons are involved.
       Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico.--The Farm Security and 
     Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public Law 107-171, authorized 
     block grants for Nutrition Assistance to Puerto Rico and 
     American Samoa which gives the Commonwealth broad flexibility 
     to establish a nutrition assistance program that is 
     specifically tailored to the needs of its low-income 
     households. However, the Commonwealth must submit its annual 
     plan of operation to the Secretary for approval. The Farm 
     Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, Public Law 107-
     171, enacted May 13, 2002, reauthorizes appropriations 
     through fiscal year 2007. In addition to the provision of 
     direct benefits to the needy, a portion of the grant may be 
     used to fund up to 50 percent of the cost of administering 
     the program. The grant may also be used to fund projects to 
     improve agriculture and food distribution in Puerto Rico.
       The program also includes the Food Distribution Program on 
     Indian Reservations which provides nutritious agricultural 
     commodities to low-income persons living on or near Indian 
     reservations who choose not to participate in the Food Stamp 
     Program.
       Effective October 1, 2001, The Farm Security and Rural 
     Investment Act of 2002, Public

[[Page 613]]

     Law, 107-171, enacted May 13, 2002, provides that 
     $140,000,000 be used to purchase commodities for the 
     Emergency Food Assistance Program.
       Administrative costs.--All direct and indirect 
     administrative costs incurred for certification of 
     households, issuance of food coupons, quality control, 
     outreach, and fair hearing efforts are shared by the Federal 
     Government and the States on a 50-50 basis. The Farm Security 
     and Rural Investment Act of 2002, (Public Law 107-171), 
     substantially revised the performance requirements for States 
     under the Quality Control (QC) System. States with poor 
     performance over 2 years will face sanctions. States that 
     demonstrate a high degree of accuracy or substantial 
     improvement in their degree of accuracy under the QC system 
     will be eligible to share in a $48,000,000 ``bonus fund'' 
     established by Congress to reward States for good 
     performance. The new system begins in fiscal year 2003 for 
     measuring performance, and in fiscal year 2004 the new 
     funding begins.
       State administration also includes State antifraud 
     activities.--Under the provisions of the Food Stamp Act of 
     1977, as amended by the Mickey Leland Childhood Hunger Relief 
     Act of 1993, States are eligible to be reimbursed for 50 
     percent of the costs of their food stamp fraud investigations 
     and prosecutions.
       States are required to implement an employment and training 
     program for the purpose of assisting members of households 
     participating in the Food Stamp Program in gaining skills, 
     training, or experience that will increase their ability to 
     obtain regular employment. In fiscal year 1987, the 
     Department of Agriculture implemented a grant program to 
     States to assist them in providing employment and training 
     services.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Food Stamp Program, the Committee recommends 
     $26,289,692,000. This is $3,321,706,000 more than the 2002 
     appropriation level and $40,000,000 more than the budget 
     request. Of the amount provided, $2,000,000,000 is made 
     available as a contingency reserve. This is the same as the 
     2002 contingency reserve level and the budget request.
       Of the amount provided, no more than $5,000,000 may be used 
     for studies and evaluations. Of these funds, no more than 
     $1,500,000 may be transferred to the Economic Research 
     Service if determined by the Secretary. The Committee expects 
     to be notified each time that such a transfer of funds 
     occurs, including the amount of the transfer, and a summary 
     of the study for which the transfer was deemed necessary. The 
     Committee also requests a report within 60 days of the 
     enactment of this Act summarizing all studies and evaluations 
     planned by FNS for fiscal year 2003.
       Included in this amount is up to $4,000,000 to purchase 
     bison for the Food Distribution Program on Indian 
     Reservations from Native American producers and Cooperative 
     Organizations without competition.
       The Committee is aware that there continues to be a 
     pressing need for infrastructure development in the Food 
     Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR). 
     Warehousing facilities on some reservations do not allow for 
     the proper and efficient storage and distribution of 
     commodities, and Indian Tribal Organization must be able to 
     replace and upgrade equipment such as tractor trailers and 
     fork lifts. Facilities have not always been able to keep pace 
     with improvements in the food package, including the addition 
     of fresh produce and more frozen foods as program options, 
     which generates the need for cooler and freezer equipment.
       Pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2028, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 
     must submit for the Secretary's approval a yearly plan that 
     contains information regarding how food and assistance 
     benefits under the Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) for 
     Puerto Rico are provided during the following fiscal year. 
     While the Committee notes the program flexibility normally 
     afforded to Puerto Rico, the Committee encourages the 
     Secretary not to approve any NAP plan that does not require 
     at least 75 percent of NAP funds to be spent on food at 
     certain stores with point-of-sales devices.
       The Committee notes the Secretary's recent waiver of 
     Section 11(e)(6)(B) of the Food Stamp Act. The Committee 
     believes it is important to study any potential risks it may 
     pose to State and Federal oversight of the Food Stamp 
     Program, as well as to families in need of food assistance. 
     The Committee directs that no additional waivers of this 
     provision be granted until a thorough and independent 
     evaluation of the current waiver is complete. This evaluation 
     should assess costs to the Federal Government; the private 
     entity's compliance with all requirements of the Food Stamp 
     Act, particularly program integrity and the Privacy Act; and 
     access to benefits as measured by food stamp participation 
     rates and service to the most disadvantaged households. The 
     evaluation should also compare the hiring and personnel 
     policies of the contractor with the merit systems standards 
     of the State, and provide an analysis of the issues 
     associated with shifting governmental responsibilities to a 
     private contractor, including potential disruption, cost, and 
     the State's capacity to reassume program administration. The 
     Committee requests a report on the evaluation findings on 
     this waiver, including the previously listed items, prior to 
     the Secretary granting any further waivers of Section 
     11(e)(6)(B) of the Food Stamp Act.
       The Committee urges the Secretary of Agriculture to work 
     with States to reduce Food Stamp error rates. The Congress 
     recently simplified the Food Stamp program and reformed the 
     quality control system, including the methodology for 
     calculating error rate penalties in recognition of the 
     difficulty in administering the Food Stamp program. The 
     Committee encourages the Department to continue to negotiate 
     with States that were sanctioned in fiscal year 2001.

                      commodity assistance program

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$152,813,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................144,991,000
Committee recommendation....................................167,000,000

\1\Does not reflect $3,300,000 rescission of available prior year 
apropriations.

       The Commodity Assistance Program includes funding for the 
     Commodity Supplemental Food Program and funding to pay 
     expenses associated with the storage and distribution of 
     commodities through The Emergency Food Assistance Program.
       The Commodity Supplemental Food Program [CSFP].--Authorized 
     by section 4(a) of the Agricultural and Consumer Protection 
     Act of 1973, as amended in 1981 by Public Law 97-98, this 
     program provides supplemental food to infants and children up 
     to age 6, and to pregnant, post partum, and breast-feeding 
     women who have low incomes, and reside in approved project 
     areas. In addition, the program operates commodity 
     distribution projects directed at low-income elderly persons 
     60 years of age or older.
       In fiscal year 2003 approximately 76,700 women, infants, 
     and young children and 369,381 elderly are authorized to 
     receive food packages each month. The foods are provided by 
     the Department of Agriculture for distribution through State 
     agencies. The authorized commodities are iron-fortified 
     infant formula, rice cereal, canned juice, evaporated milk 
     and/or nonfat dry milk, canned vegetables or fruits, canned 
     meat or poultry, egg mix, dehydrated potatoes, farina, and 
     peanut butter or dry beans. Elderly participants may receive 
     all commodities except iron-fortified infant formula and rice 
     cereal.
       The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (2002 
     Farm Bill), reauthorizes the program through fiscal year 2007 
     and establishes a specific administrative funding level for 
     each caseload slot assigned, adjusted each year for 
     inflation.
       The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).--Authorized 
     by the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983, as amended, the 
     program provides nutrition assistance to low-income people 
     through prepared meals served on site and through the 
     distribution of commodities to low-income households for home 
     consumption. The commodities are provided by USDA to State 
     agencies for distribution through State-established networks. 
     State agencies make the commodities available to local 
     organizations, such as soup kitchens, food pantries, food 
     banks, and community action agencies, for their use in 
     providing nutrition assistance to those in need.
       Funds are administered by FNS through grants to State 
     agencies which operate commodity distribution programs. 
     Allocation of the funds to States is based on a formula which 
     considers the States' unemployment rate and the number of 
     persons with income below the poverty level.
       In fiscal year 2001, $329,000,000 worth of surplus 
     commodities were distributed to assist needy individuals. 
     Donations will continue in fiscal year 2002. Precise levels 
     depend upon the availability of surplus commodities and 
     requirements regarding displacement. In fiscal year 2002, 
     $20,820,000 will be used to help State and local authorities 
     with the storage and distribution costs of providing surplus 
     commodities to needy individuals. Although the $20,820,000 
     was allocated to each State in the form of administrative 
     funds, each State is authorized to redirect funding for the 
     purchase of additional commodities.
       The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 
     reauthorizes funding to support the storage and distribution 
     of commodities through fiscal year 2007, and increases the 
     amount authorized to be appropriated from $50,000,000 to 
     $60,000,000. The law permits State and local agencies to use 
     these funds to pay costs associated with the storage and 
     distribution of USDA commodities and commodities secured from 
     other sources. At the request of the State, these funds can 
     be used by USDA to purchase additional commodities. The Farm 
     Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 also reauthorizes 
     funding for the purchase of TEFAP commodities and increases 
     the amount of funds available from $100,000,000 to 
     $140,000,000. In addition to the commodities purchased 
     specifically for TEFAP, commodities obtained under 
     agriculture support programs are donated to States for 
     distribution through TEFAP.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Commodity Assistance Program, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $167,000,000. This amount is 
     $14,187,000 more than the 2002 funding level and $22,009,000 
     more than the budget request.
       The Committee continues to encourage the Department to 
     distribute Commodity Assistance Program funds equitably among 
     the

[[Page 614]]

     States, based on an assessment of the needs and priorities of 
     each State and the State's preference to receive commodity 
     allocations through each of the programs funded under this 
     account.
       The Committee is aware that since 1997, commodities 
     provided through TEFAP have increased by approximately 400 
     percent, with most of the increase coming through surplus or 
     bonus commodities purchased by USDA. The Committee is further 
     aware that during difficult economic times, the number of 
     Americans in need of assistance through State and local food 
     banks increases. The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 
     of 2002 provides an additional $40,000,000 for TEFAP 
     commodities to be purchased with food stamp funds, even 
     further increasing the need for additional administrative 
     funding. Therefore, the Committee provides an increase of 
     $5,000,000 for TEFAP administrative funding over the fiscal 
     year 2002 level, for a total of $55,000,000. In addition, the 
     Committee provides the Secretary authority to transfer up to 
     an additional $5,000,000 from TEFAP commodities for this 
     purpose.
       The Committee is aware that a significant quantity of food 
     products are made available by hunters and other game 
     harvesting operations which are approved through USDA or 
     State inspected facilities, and present an additional source 
     of donated commodities. The Department should give 
     consideration to this opportunity as a means to supplement 
     and provide variety to food assistance programs, and allow 
     the use of TEFAP administrative funds for this purpose.
       The Committee provides $107,000,000 for the Commodity 
     Supplemental Food Program. This is an increase of $4,187,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 level, and $12,810,000 above the 
     President's request. This funding level is adequate to 
     continue funding for five States added in fiscal year 2002, 
     and will allow CSFP to expand to Alaska, Indiana, Nevada and 
     South Carolina. Of this amount, no less than $24,000,000 
     shall be available for administrative funding.
       The Committee recognizes the success of the Seniors 
     Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, which provided fresh 
     fruits and vegetables to more than 400,000 low-income senior 
     citizens and benefited more than 14,000 farmers in fiscal 
     year 2001. The Committee notes that $15,000,000 in funding 
     was provided in the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 
     2002 for this program, and provides an additional $5,000,000 
     for the Seniors Farmers' Market Nutrition Program for fiscal 
     year 2003.


                        FOOD DONATIONS PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$150,749,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\......................................1,081,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,081,000

\1\The fiscal year 2003 budget recommends moving commodity support for 
the Nutrition Service Incentive Program to the Department of Health and 
Human Services Administration on Aging.

       Nutrition Services Incentive Program.--Commodity support 
     for the Nutrition Service Incentive Program is authorized by 
     titles III and VI of the Older Americans Act of 1965. The 
     foods provided are used in preparing meals which are served 
     in senior citizen centers and similar settings or delivered 
     to the homebound elderly. These meals are the focal point of 
     the nutrition projects for the elderly which have the dual 
     objective of promoting better health and reducing the 
     isolation of old age.
       Currently, commodities or cash in lieu of commodities are 
     distributed through State agencies to the local meal sites. 
     Some States elect to take all of their subsidy in cash and 
     some States choose to receive a combination of cash and 
     commodities. The commodities made available to the Nutrition 
     Services Incentive Program are generally the same as those 
     provided to schools under the Child Nutrition Programs. In 
     previous years, the State agencies that elected to receive 
     cash in lieu of commodities were funded on a payment per meal 
     basis. The Older Americans Act of 2000, Public Law 106-501, 
     enacted November 13, 2000, revised the funding formula. The 
     Act requires that each State or grantee receive a proportion 
     of available funds equal to the proportion of meals served by 
     that State or grantee in the preceding fiscal year. The Act 
     reauthorizes the program through 2005.
       Pacific Island assistance.--This program provides funding 
     for assistance to the nuclear-affected islands in the form of 
     commodities and administrative funds. It also provides 
     funding for use in non-Presidentially declared disasters and 
     for FNS' administrative costs in connection with relief for 
     all disasters.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the food donations programs for selected groups, the 
     Committee recommends $1,081,000. This amount is $149,668,000 
     less than the 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget 
     request. The full amount recommended by the Committee is for 
     the needy family program.
       The Committee agrees with the Administration's request to 
     shift funding for the Nutrition Services Incentive Program 
     (NSIP) from the Food and Nutrition Service within USDA to the 
     Administration on Aging within the Department of Health and 
     Human Services (DHHS). It is the Committee's belief, however, 
     that it is critically important for several aspects of NSIP 
     to remain intact, as the program is shifted into DHHS. This 
     includes the allocation of NSIP funds on the basis of the 
     number of meals served in a State in the previous year, as 
     opposed to the number of seniors that reside in that State. 
     Further, NSIP funds are not currently, and should not become, 
     subject to transfer or administrative match requirements, and 
     States should continue to have the option of receiving 
     benefits in the form of cash or commodities. The Committee 
     directs the Under Secretary to work with the Assistant 
     Secretary for Aging within DHHS to ensure this transfer of 
     funding and responsibilities is carried out in a manner that 
     in no way disrupts the delivery of services provided by NSIP.

                      food program administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$127,546,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\....................................147,944,000
Committee recommendation....................................136,865,000

\1\Excludes $7,911,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Food Program Administration appropriation provides for 
     most of the Federal operating expenses of the Food and 
     Nutrition Service, which includes the Child Nutrition 
     Programs; Special Milk Program; Special Supplemental 
     Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC], 
     including the Farmers' Market Nutrition Program; Food Stamp 
     Program; Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico; the Commodity 
     Assistance Program, including the Commodity Supplemental Food 
     Program, and the Emergency Food Assistance Program; and the 
     Food Donations Programs, including Pacific Island Assistance.
       The major objective of Food Program Administration is to 
     efficiently and effectively carry out the nutrition 
     assistance programs mandated by law. This is to be 
     accomplished by the following: (1) giving clear and 
     consistent guidance and supervision to State agencies and 
     other cooperators; (2) assisting the States and other 
     cooperators by providing program, managerial, financial, and 
     other advice and expertise; (3) measuring, reviewing, and 
     analyzing the progress being made toward achieving program 
     objectives; and (4) carrying out regular staff support 
     functions.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For Food Program Administration, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $136,865,000. This amount is $9,319,000 
     more than the 2002 level and $11,079,000 less than the budget 
     request.
       Included in this amount is an increase of $4,500,000 for 
     activities to enhance program integrity in the Food Stamp and 
     Child Nutrition Programs. This amount does not include an 
     increase of $11,047,000 for rental payments to GSA or $32,000 
     for FECA administrative charges, as requested in the budget.

            TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS

                      Foreign Agricultural Service


                         salaries and expenses

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Transfers
                              Appropriations    from loan       Total
                                                accounts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002........        121,813        (4,257)     (126,070)
Budget estimate, 2003\1\....        131,668        (4,257)     (135,925)
Committee recommendation....        131,198        (4,257)     (135,445)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $3,902,000 requested for employee pension and health
  benefits.

       The Foreign Agricultural Service [FAS] was established 
     March 10, 1953, by Secretary's Memorandum No. 1320, 
     supplement 1. Public Law 83-690, approved August 28, 1954, 
     transferred the agricultural attaches from the Department of 
     State to the Foreign Agricultural Service.
       The Agency maintains a worldwide agricultural intelligence 
     and reporting service to provide U.S. farmers and traders 
     with information on world agricultural production and trade 
     that they can use to adjust to changes in world demand for 
     U.S. agricultural products. This is accomplished through a 
     continuous program of reporting by 63 posts located 
     throughout the world covering some 130 countries.
       The Foreign Agricultural Service analyzes agricultural 
     information essential to the assessment of foreign supply and 
     demand conditions in order to provide estimates of the 
     current situation and to forecast the export potential for 
     specific U.S. agricultural commodities. Published economic 
     data about commodities are combined with attache reports and 
     subjected to analysis through advanced econometric techniques 
     to generate these estimates.
       In addition, the Service is now using advanced techniques 
     for identifying, delineating, and assessing the impact of 
     events which may affect the condition and expected production 
     of foreign crops of economic importance to the United States. 
     The crop condition activity relies heavily on computer-aided 
     analysis of satellite, meteorological, agricultural, and 
     related data.
       The mission of FAS overseas is to represent U.S. 
     agricultural interests, to promote export of domestic farm 
     products, improve world trade conditions, and report on 
     agricultural production and trade in foreign countries. FAS 
     staff are stationed at 80 offices around the world where they 
     provide

[[Page 615]]

     expertise in agricultural economics and marketing, as well as 
     provide attache services.
       The Foreign Agricultural Service works in conjunction with 
     market development cooperators, trade associations, State 
     departments of agriculture and their affiliates, and U.S. 
     sales teams to develop foreign markets for U.S. farm 
     products. FAS sponsors overseas trade exhibits to promote 
     U.S. agricultural products, provides information about 
     foreign importers, and performs a wide range of market 
     development activities.
       FAS carries out several export assistance programs to 
     counter the adverse effects of unfair trade practices by 
     competitors on U.S. agricultural trade. The Export 
     Enhancement Program uses CCC-owned commodities as export 
     bonuses to provide export enhancements to U.S. producers. The 
     Market Access Program [MAP] conducts both generic and brand-
     identified promotional programs in conjunction with nonprofit 
     agricultural associations and private firms financed through 
     reimbursable CCC payments.
       These programs are supplemented by the Cooperator Program, 
     a joint FAS-nonprofit private trade and producer association 
     partnership program developing strategies for U.S. 
     agriculture export expansion. Through 2001, nonprofit private 
     trade and producer associations have generated an estimated 
     $1,391,000,000 in contributions to more than match the 
     $854,000,000 contributed by FAS to finance overseas market 
     promotion activities under the Cooperator Program. In 
     addition, GSM credit guarantee programs play an integral role 
     in the recent progress of American agriculture in the world 
     marketplace.
       The Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 includes authority to 
     establish up to 25 agricultural trade offices. Currently, 16 
     such offices are in operation at key foreign trading centers 
     to assist U.S. exporters, trade groups, and State export 
     marketing officials in trade promotion.
       The Service initiates, directs, and coordinates the 
     Department's formulation of trade policies and programs with 
     the goal of maintaining and expanding world markets for U.S. 
     agricultural products. It monitors international compliance 
     with bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. It 
     identifies restrictive tariff and trade practices which act 
     as barriers to the import of U.S. agricultural commodities, 
     then supports negotiations to remove them. It acts to counter 
     and eliminate unfair trade practices by other countries that 
     hinder U.S. agricultural exports to third markets.
       FAS also carries out the mission of the former Office of 
     International Cooperation and Development [OICD] to promote 
     U.S. agriculture and to advance the agriculture of developing 
     countries as parts of a complementary global agricultural 
     system capable of providing ample food and fiber for all 
     people. To accomplish this mission, FAS applies USDA policies 
     and U.S. agricultural perspectives in its programs of 
     international agricultural cooperation and development, and 
     in its work with foreign countries, international 
     organizations, U.S. universities and other institutions, 
     agencies of the U.S. Government, and the U.S. private sector.
       The General Sales Manager was established pursuant to 
     section 5(f) of the charter of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation and 15 U.S.C. 714-714p. The funds allocated to 
     the General Sales Manager are used for conducting the 
     following programs: (1) CCC Export Credit Guarantee Program 
     (GSM-102), including supplier credit guarantees and 
     facilities financing guarantees, (2) Intermediate Credit 
     Guarantee Program (GSM-103), (3) Public Law 480, (4) section 
     416 Overseas Donations Program, (5) Export Enhancement 
     Program, (6) Market Access Program, and (7) programs 
     authorized by the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act 
     including barter, export sales of most CCC-owned commodities, 
     export payments, and other programs as assigned to encourage 
     and enhance the export of U.S. agricultural commodities.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For the Foreign Agricultural Service, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $131,198,000. This is 
     $9,385,000 more than the 2002 appropriation and $470,000 less 
     than the budget request.
       This amount does not include an increase of $454,000 for 
     rental payments to GSA or $16,000 for FECA administrative 
     charges, as requested in the budget.
       The Committee expects the FAS to fund the Foreign Market 
     Development Cooperator Program at no less than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       The Committee provides the fiscal year 2003 budget request 
     level of $5,000,000 for the Cochran Fellowship Program. The 
     Committee encourages the Secretary to continue to provide 
     additional support for the program through the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation Emerging Markets Program.
       The Committee continues to include language in a general 
     provision in the bill, as requested in the budget, to allow 
     up to $2,000,000 of the amount appropriated to the FAS to 
     remain available until expended solely for the purpose of 
     offsetting fluctuations in international currency exchange 
     rates, subject to documentation.
       The Committee expects the Secretary to use the fully-
     authorized levels of the Dairy Export Incentive Program 
     (DEIP), consistent with GATT Uruguay commitments, in order to 
     ensure U.S. producers have fair access to foreign markets.
       The Committee is concerned that the Dairy Export Incentive 
     Program (DEIP) loses a substantial percentage of its tonnage 
     every year due to cancellation or nullification of DEIP 
     awards by foreign buyers or for other reasons beyond the 
     control of U.S. dairy producers. Because the permitted DEIP 
     tonnage is strictly limited each year under United States 
     commitments made to the World Trade Organization (WTO), it is 
     vital that this lost tonnage be reallocated during the 
     applicable export year under WTO rules so that it can be 
     used, not wasted.
       The Committee encourages the Foreign Agricultural Service 
     to assist the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute and the 
     Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation in marketing Alaska 
     salmon and other seafood to overseas markets.
       To promote the export of domestic farm products and improve 
     world agriculture trade conditions, the Foreign Agricultural 
     Service must increase its efforts to improve the 
     understanding among trading partners of the safety of 
     biotechnology and the thoroughness of the U.S. regulatory 
     oversight of biotechnology. As trading partners construct 
     regulatory systems for biotechnology and commodity trade, FAS 
     is frequently requested to provide experts for the purpose of 
     educating foreign government officials on the U.S. regulatory 
     system. If the U.S. fails to participate in such discussions, 
     those attempting to limit the access to foreign markets by 
     U.S. producers will be presented an opportunity to undermine 
     confidence in the benefits and safety of the technology while 
     reducing trade opportunities for American producers. The 
     Committee directs FAS to allocate adequate funding to meet 
     the needs of our trading partners so that officials from the 
     Department of Agriculture may, when requested, educate 
     foreign regulators on the safety of the technology and the 
     thoroughness of the U.S. regulatory process.
       In addition, the Committee continues to urge the Secretary 
     to work with representatives of the dairy industry and 
     appropriate non-governmental organizations to increase the 
     amount of fortified dry milk exported under humanitarian 
     assistance programs.
       The Committee is aware of the continuing buildup of surplus 
     non-fat dry milk acquired by the CCC through the dairy price 
     support program. The Committee is concerned with increasing 
     storage costs associated with this buildup and encourages the 
     agency to utilize all existing food donation programs to 
     reduce this growing surplus.
       The Committee encourages FAS to support the Central Asia/
     Krasnodar, Turkey and China Initiative project for the 
     development of biotechnological and conservation activities 
     and to develop services modeled on the Cooperative Extension 
     Service. The Committee also recommends FAS support for the 
     ``Good Neighbor Partnership--Azores'' initiative by the 
     Azores Collaborative Research and Education Group (ACREG).


                 public law 480 title i program account

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Credit       Loan     Administrative
                                    level       subsidy      expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002...........    (154,664)     126,409         2,005
Budget estimate, 2003..........    (131,676)      98,904         2,059
Committee recommendation.......    (154,664)     116,171         2,059
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 established the 
     program account. Appropriations to this account will be used 
     to cover the lifetime subsidy cost associated with direct 
     loans obligated in 2003 and beyond, as well as for 
     administrative expenses.
       Financing sales of agricultural commodities to developing 
     countries and private entities for dollars on credit terms, 
     or for local currencies (including for local currencies on 
     credit terms) for use under section 104; and for furnishing 
     commodities to carry out the Food for Progress Act of 1985, 
     as amended (title I).--Title I of the act authorizes 
     financing of sales to developing countries for local 
     currencies and for dollars on credit terms. Sales for dollars 
     or local currency may be made to foreign governments. The 
     legislation provides for repayment terms either in local 
     currencies or U.S. dollars on credit terms of up to 30 years, 
     with a grace period of up to 5 years.
       Local currencies under title I sales agreements may be used 
     in carrying out activities under section 104 of the 
     Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as 
     amended. Activities in the recipient country for which these 
     local currencies may be used include developing new markets 
     for U.S. agricultural commodities, paying U.S. obligations, 
     and supporting agricultural development and research.
       Title I appropriated funds may also be used under the Food 
     for Progress Act of 1985 to furnish commodities on credit 
     terms or on a grant basis to assist developing countries and 
     countries that are emerging democracies that have a 
     commitment to introduce and expand free enterprise elements 
     in their agricultural economies.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For Public Law 480, title I, the Committee recommends total 
     appropriations of $118,230,000. This amount is $10,184,000 
     less

[[Page 616]]

     than the 2002 level and $17,267,000 more than the budget 
     request. This appropriation will support a Public Law 480, 
     title I, credit level of $154,664,000 for fiscal year 2003, 
     the same as the 2002 level and $22,988,000 more than the 
     budget request. The corresponding loan levels, loan subsidy 
     amounts, and administrative expenses are reflected in the 
     table above, as compared to the fiscal year 2002 and budget 
     request levels.


        Public Law 480 Title I Ocean Freight Differential grants

Appropriations, 2002........................................$20,277,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................28,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................25,159,000

       Ocean freight differential costs in connection with 
     commodity sales financed for local currencies or U.S. dollars 
     (title I).--The Commodity Credit Corporation pays ocean 
     freight differential costs on shipments under this title. 
     These costs are the difference between foreign flag and U.S. 
     flag shipping costs.


                       committee recommendations

       For Public Law 480 ocean freight differential costs, the 
     Committee recommends $25,159,000. This is $4,882,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level and $2,841,000 less than the 
     budget request.


                     public law 480 title II grants

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$850,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,185,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,185,000,000

       The Committee recognizes the important mission of the 
     Public Law 480 Program to combat hunger and malnutrition; 
     promote broad-based equitable and sustainable development; 
     expand international trade; develop and expand export markets 
     for U.S. agricultural commodities; and to foster and 
     encourage the development of private enterprise and 
     democratic participation in developing countries. The 
     Committee strongly supports the continued efficient operation 
     of this important program.
       Commodities supplied in connection with dispositions abroad 
     (title II) (7 U.S.C. 1721-1726).--Commodities are supplied 
     without cost through foreign governments to combat 
     malnutrition and to meet famine and other emergency 
     requirements. Commodities are also supplied for 
     nonemergencies through public and private agencies, including 
     intergovernmental organizations. The Commodity Credit 
     Corporation pays ocean freight on shipments under this title, 
     and may also pay overland transportation costs to a 
     landlocked country, as well as internal distribution costs in 
     emergency situations. The funds appropriated for title II are 
     made available to private voluntary organizations and 
     cooperatives to assist these organizations in meeting 
     administrative and related costs.
       Commodities supplied in connection with dispositions abroad 
     (title III).--Commodities are supplied without cost to least 
     developed countries through foreign governments for direct 
     feeding, development of emergency food reserves, or may be 
     sold with the proceeds of such sale used by the recipient 
     country for specific economic development purposes. The 
     Commodity Credit Corporation may pay ocean freight on 
     shipments under this title, and may also pay overland 
     transportation costs to a landlocked country, as well as 
     internal distribution costs.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For Title II, the Committee recommends a program level of 
     $1,185,000,000. This is $335,000,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee strongly supports programs, including title 
     II, that provide humanitarian food assistance throughout the 
     world. Commodities and assistance provided through title II 
     are one weapon in the U.S. arsenal against world hunger, and 
     the Committee believes that a program level of $1,185,000,000 
     is a proper level of support in view of other subcommittee 
     priorities for limited direct appropriations. The Committee 
     wants to make clear that providing the President's request 
     does not overcome a strong disagreement with policies 
     suggested by this administration that certain other 
     authorities, notably section 416(b) of the Agricultural Act 
     of 1949, shall not be actively pursued toward relieving world 
     hunger, and thereby result in a net decrease in U.S. 
     contributions for world food aid. America is a land rich in 
     natural resources, the richest among nations, and one to 
     which the world's hungry look for relief from malnutrition 
     and starvation. Over the past several years, employment of 
     the section 416(b) authority has resulted in the channeling 
     of substantial surplus commodities to areas of intense need. 
     Today, the United States has on hand substantial levels of 
     surplus commodities commonly used for humanitarian food 
     assistance, and the Committee strongly urges the Department 
     to use all available authorities to apply these surpluses 
     toward levels necessary to meet targeted world needs.
       The Committee is aware that the administration has recently 
     drawn from the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust to supplement 
     food assistance needs. While use of this Trust is appropriate 
     in the event of emergency conditions for which no alternative 
     is available, it is the Committee's belief that the Trust was 
     never intended to serve as a substitute for other food 
     assistance programs, such as 416(b), and is concerned that 
     subsequent transfers of title II funds to replenish the Trust 
     will effectively further reduce food assistance resources in 
     fiscal year 2003. Accordingly, the Committee expects the 
     Secretary to utilize resources of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation to maintain the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust.
       At this point in history, the U.S.'s world leadership role 
     is more important, and under more scrutiny than ever, and the 
     Committee firmly believes that this is not the time for this 
     country to retreat from its dominant humanitarian role and 
     relating contributions toward world stabilization and peace.


                       Committee Recommendations

       The Committee expects the administration to allocate no 
     less than 1,875,000 metric tons of the commodities provided 
     under Title II to non-emergency programs. Unanticipated 
     emergency needs, such as the famine in southern Africa, 
     should be met primarily through the section 416b program, the 
     Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust, or emergency appropriations.
       The Committee directs the administration not to place 
     arbitrary limits on monetization under the Public Law 480 
     title II program. In food-deficit, import-reliant countries, 
     monetization stimulates the economy and allows needed 
     commodities to be provided in the marketplace. Food aid 
     proposals should be approved based on the merits of the 
     program plan to promote food security and improve people's 
     lives, not on the level of monetization.
       The Committee supports the use of title II funds in fiscal 
     year 2003 to continue the fiscal year 2002 level of funding 
     for the orphan feeding program in Haiti.
       The Committee notes the extraordinary effort made by the 
     people of Alaska through Rotary International, the Interfaith 
     Council, the Municipality of Anchorage, and other groups to 
     collect and distribute food and other assistance to people 
     living in the Russian Far East. The Committee urges the 
     Administration to work with these entities to take advantage 
     of their volunteer efforts in feeding people in the Russian 
     Far East, particularly abandoned children living in 
     orphanages and hospitals.
       As proposed in the budget, the Committee provides no new 
     funding for title III grants. Authority is provided by law (7 
     U.S.C. 1736f) to transfer up to 15 percent of the funds 
     available for any fiscal year for carrying out any title of 
     Public Law 480 to any other title of the program. This 
     authority may be used to transfer funds to title III should a 
     transfer be deemed appropriate.


       commodity credit corporation export loans program account

             (export credit programs, gsm-102 and gsm-103)

                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Guaranteed  Guaranteed
                                     loan        loan     Administrative
                                    levels      subsidy      expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............  \1\3,926,0  \1\265,063         4,014
                                          00
Budget estimate, 2003...........  \1\4,225,0  \1\293,927         4,058
                                          00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\No appropriation required since export credit authorizations are
  permanent authority.

       In 1980, the Commodity Credit Corporation [CCC] instituted 
     the Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102) under its 
     charter authority. With this program, CCC guarantees, for a 
     fee, payments due U.S. exporters under deferred payment sales 
     contracts (up to 36 months) for defaults due to commercial as 
     well as noncommercial risks. The risk to CCC extends from the 
     date of export to the end of the deferred payment period 
     covered in the export sales contract and covers only that 
     portion of the payments agreed to in the assurance agreement. 
     Operation of this program is based on criteria which will 
     assure that it is used only where it is determined that it 
     will develop new market opportunities and maintain and expand 
     existing world markets for U.S. agricultural commodities. The 
     program encourages U.S. financial institutions to provide 
     financing to those areas where the institutions would be 
     unwilling to provide financing in the absence of the CCC 
     guarantees. Other credit activities may also be financed 
     under the Export Credit Guarantee programs including supplier 
     credit guarantee, under which CCC guarantees payments due to 
     importers under short term financing (up to 180 days) that 
     exporters extend directly to importers for the purchase of 
     U.S. agricultural products. CCC also provides facilities 
     financing guarantees.
       In 1986, the Intermediate Export Credit Guarantee Program 
     (GSM-103) was implemented by CCC under its charter authority 
     as required by the Food Security Act of 1985. The program is 
     similar to the Export Credit Guarantee Program (GSM-102), but 
     provides for CCC guarantees to exporters for commodities sold 
     on credit terms in excess of 3 years, but not more than 10 
     years. The program also provides for adjusting the maximum 
     amount of interest which CCC guarantees to pay under the 
     payment guarantee and permits freight costs to be covered for 
     breeding animals financed under the GSM-102 and GSM-103 
     programs.
       The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 establishes the 
     program account. The subsidy costs of the CCC export 
     guarantee programs are exempt from the requirement of advance

[[Page 617]]

     appropriations of budget authority according to section 
     504(c)(2) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, Public 
     Law 101-508. Appropriations to this account will be used for 
     administrative expenses.

      TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                      Food and Drug Administration

       The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a scientific 
     regulatory agency whose mission is to promote and protect the 
     public health and safety of Americans. FDA's work is a 
     blending of science and law. The Food and Drug Administration 
     Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA) reaffirmed the 
     responsibilities of the FDA: to ensure safe and effective 
     products reach the market to a timely way, and to monitor 
     products for continued safety after they are in use. In 
     addition, FDA is entrusted with two critical functions in the 
     Nation's war on terrorism: preventing willful contamination 
     of all regulated products, including food, and improving the 
     availability of medications to prevent or treat injuries 
     caused by biological, chemical or nuclear agents.
       The FDA Foods program has the primary responsibility for 
     assuring that the food supply, quality of foods, food 
     ingredients and dietary supplements are safe, sanitary, 
     nutritious, wholesome, and honestly labeled, and that 
     cosmetic products are safe and properly labeled. The variety 
     and complexity of the food supply has grown dramatically 
     while new and more complex safety issues, such as emerging 
     microbial pathogens, natural toxins, and technological 
     innovations in production and processing, have developed. 
     This program plays a major role in keeping the United States 
     food supply among the safest in the world.
       The FDA Drugs programs are comprised of three separate 
     areas, Human Drugs, Animal Drugs and Biologics. FDA is 
     responsible for the life cycle of the product, including 
     premarket review and postmarket surveillance of human, animal 
     and biological products to ensure their safety and efficacy. 
     For Human Drugs this includes assuring that all drug products 
     used for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease 
     are safe and effective. Additional procedures include the 
     review of investigational new drug applications; evaluation 
     of market applications for new and generic drugs, labeling 
     and composition of prescription and over-the-counter drugs; 
     monitoring the quality and safety of products manufactured 
     in, or imported into, the United States; and, regulating the 
     advertising and promotion of prescription drugs. The Animal 
     Drugs and Feeds Program ensures only safe and beneficial 
     veterinary drugs, intended for the treatment and/or 
     prevention of diseases in animals and the improved production 
     of food-producing animals, are approved for marketing.
       The FDA Biologics program assures that blood and blood 
     products, blood test kits, vaccines, and therapeutics are 
     pure, potent, safe, effective, and properly labeled. The 
     program inspects blood banks and blood processors, licenses 
     and inspects firms collecting human source plasma, evaluates 
     and licenses biologics manufacturing firms and products; lot 
     releases licensed products; and monitors adverse events 
     associated with vaccine immunization.
       The FDA Devices and Radiological program ensures the safety 
     and effectiveness of medical devices and eliminates 
     unnecessary human exposure to manmade radiation from medical, 
     occupational, and consumer products. In addition, the program 
     enforces quality standards under the Mammography Quality 
     Standards Act. Medical devices include thousands of products 
     from thermometers and contact lenses to heart pacemakers, 
     hearing aids, MRIs, microwave ovens, and video display 
     terminals.
       FDA's National Center for Toxicological Research in 
     Jefferson, Arkansas, serves as a specialized resource, 
     conducting peer-review scientific research that provides the 
     basis for FDA to make sound science-based regulatory 
     decisions through its premarket review and postmarket 
     surveillance. The research is designed to define and 
     understand the biological mechanisms of action underlying the 
     toxicity of products and developing methods to improve 
     assessment of human exposure, susceptibility and risk of 
     those products regulated by FDA.

                                                                  SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                              Mammography
                                                                                    Prescription    Medical     clinics      Export and
                                                                     Appropriation    drug user     device     inspection  certification       Total
                                                                                        fees       user fees      fees          fees
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002...............................................      1,183,670      161,716   ..........       15,590         6,181        1,367,157
Budget estimate, 2003..............................................  \1\\2\1,369,3   \3\222,900   ..........       16,112         6,378   \1\\2\\3\1,614
                                                                                85                                                                  ,775
Committee recommendation...........................................      1,383,505      222,900       25,125       16,112         6,378        1,654,020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $62,569 requested for employee pension and health benefits.
\2\Includes proposed consolidation of Public Affairs and Legislation offices to HHS and other proposed management efficiencies.
\3\PDUFA total reflects reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act as part of Public Law 107-180.

                       committee recommendations

       For salaries and expenses, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $1,383,505,000. This amount is $199,835,000 
     more than the 2002 level and $14,120,000 more than the budget 
     request. The Committee also recommends $222,900,000 in 
     Prescription Drug User Fee Act user fee collections, 
     $25,125,000 in Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act 
     user fee collections, $16,112,000 in Mammography Quality 
     Standards Act fee collections, and $6,378,000 in export and 
     certification fees, as assumed in the President's budget. 
     These amounts are $61,184,000, $25,125,000, $522,000, and 
     $197,000 more than the 2002 levels, respectively. The 
     Committee includes bill language which prohibits FDA from 
     developing, establishing, or operating any program of user 
     fees authorized by 31 U.S.C. 9701.
       The following table reflects the Committee's 
     recommendations, as compared to the fiscal year 2002 and 
     budget request levels:

                               FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION SALARIES AND EXPENSES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                                                                 --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                       2002            2003       recommendation
                                                                    enacted\1\     request\2\\3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centers and related field activities:
    Foods.......................................................         309,853         412,097         412,404
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition [CFSAN]....         135,988         148,112         148,457
        Field activities........................................         173,865         263,985         263,947
                                                                 ===============================================
    Human drugs.................................................         245,270         277,317         277,628
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [CDER]..........         155,754         176,321         177,851
        Orphan product grants...................................          13,357          14,207          13,357
        Field activities........................................          76,159          86,789          86,420
                                                                 ===============================================
    Biologics...................................................         119,949         146,849         146,267
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research [CBER].....          94,000         118,414         117,958
        Field activities........................................          25,949          28,435          28,309
                                                                 ===============================================
    Animal drugs................................................          82,337          88,972          88,342
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Center for Veterinary Medicine [CVM]....................          55,541          57,875          57,375
        Field activities........................................          26,796          31,097          30,967
                                                                 ===============================================
    Medical and radiological devices............................         178,655         190,720         197,854
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Center for Devices and Radiological Health [CDRH].......         130,577         137,420         144,787

[[Page 618]]

 
        Field activities........................................          48,078          53,300          53,067
                                                                 ===============================================
    National Center for Toxicological Research [NCTR]...........          36,903          40,688          40,509
                                                                 ===============================================
Other activities................................................          82,029          77,688          85,127
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Office of the Commissioner..................................          12,900          13,466          14,387
    Office of Management and Systems............................          34,002          40,621          35,053
    Office of Senior Associate Commissioner.....................           8,088           4,040           8,254
    Office of International and Constituent Relations...........           7,207           7,410           7,410
    Office of Policy, Legislation, and Planning.................           7,906           5,659           8,097
    Central services............................................          11,926           6,492          11,926
                                                                 ===============================================
Rent and related activities.....................................          29,798          36,498          36,498
                                                                 ===============================================
Rental payments to GSA..........................................          98,876          98,876          98,876
                                                                 ===============================================
      Total, FDA salaries and expenses, new budget authority....       1,183,670       1,369,385       1,383,505
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Reflects approved reprogramming of fiscal year 2002 funds for UFMS and other management initiatives.
\2\Excludes $62,569 requested for employee pension and health benefits.
\3\Includes proposed consolidation of public affairs and legislation offices to DHHS and other proposed
  management efficiencies.

       The Committee recommends the following increases in budget 
     authority requested in the budget for FDA salaries and 
     expenses activities, as follows: $5,000,000 to enhance the 
     identification of risks associated with the use of medical 
     products and to reduce the occurrence of adverse events; 
     $4,582,000 for improvements to the generic drug review 
     program; and $152,276,000 to maintain counter terrorism 
     activities funded in the fiscal year 2002 emergency 
     supplemental appropriations bill relating to food safety, 
     safe and effective medical products, and physical security, 
     including an increase of $1,176,000, as requested in the 
     budget. The Committee also recommends a decrease in budget 
     authority requested in the budget of $2,578,000 associated 
     with efficiency improvements and consolidations of 
     administrative functions.
       The Committee does not recommend a decrease of $7,317,000 
     in budget authority to consolidate the FDA Office of Public 
     Affairs and the FDA Office of Legislation into the DHHS 
     Office of the Secretary. However, the Committee does support 
     the Secretary's efforts to streamline and coordinate the 
     activities of DHHS agencies to ensure the ability of DHHS to 
     provide clear, consistent messages to Congress and the 
     American public.
       The Committee also does not recommend an increase in budget 
     authority of $5,200,000 for the DHHS Unified Financial 
     Management System. These funds were provided through a 
     reprogramming of fiscal year 2002 funds, and are no longer 
     necessary as an increase in fiscal year 2003.
       Rent payments.--The Committee recommends $98,876,000 for 
     FDA rental payments to the General Services Administration 
     [GSA], the same as the 2002 level.
       Food safety.--An increase of approximately $19,059,000 from 
     the fiscal year 2002 level is recommended by the Committee 
     for FDA food safety activities, bringing total funding for 
     food safety to $502,263,000.
       The Committee notes that in recent years, FDA has expanded 
     the types of activities it classifies as relating to food 
     safety. Prior to fiscal year 2002, the Food Safety Initiative 
     definition was limited to activities relating to the 
     microbiological safety of foods. This definition was applied 
     from the inception of FSI through fiscal year 2001. In fiscal 
     year 2002, the definition was expanded to include chemical 
     safety of foods and pesticides, premarket review activities, 
     activities relating to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, and 
     activities related to counter-terrorism. In fiscal year 2003, 
     FDA has further expanded the definition to include activities 
     relating to the safety of dietary supplements.
       Within the total funding available, at least $2,100,000 is 
     for FDA activities in support of Codex Alimentarius.
       The Committee provides $2,000,000, an increase of $503,000 
     over the fiscal year 2002 level, for FDA to continue its 
     contract with New Mexico State University's Physical Science 
     Laboratory to operate the Agricultural Products Food Safety 
     Laboratory, and to conduct evaluation and development of 
     rapid-screening methodologies, technologies, instrumentation, 
     and data analysis for food safety and product surety to 
     facilitate FDA's regulation of food safety, bioterrorism, and 
     other initiatives.
       The Committee expects the FDA to continue its support for 
     the Waste Management Education and Research Consortium (WERC) 
     and its work in food safety technology verification and 
     education at no less than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       With the growing threat of foodborne illness to the public 
     health, the Committee believes that collaborative research in 
     food safety should continue among Government, academia, and 
     private industry. The national model for that collaboration 
     has been the National Center for Food Safety and Technology 
     (NCFST) in Summit-Argo, Illinois. The Committee expects the 
     FDA to maintain sufficient funding for the National Center to 
     continue the important work done there.
       In addition, the funding provided for food safety will 
     ensure the continuation of food contract inspections in the 
     State of Alaska. Specifically, it will allow the FDA to renew 
     its contract with the State of Alaska for inspections of food 
     and seafood processors operating in Alaska. The current 
     contract became effective on May 23, 2002. It will fund at 
     least 300 inspections, approximately 281 seafood/HACCP 
     inspections and 19 other food inspections, at a cost of 
     approximately $250,776. The establishments to be inspected 
     will be mutually agreed upon by FDA and the State of Alaska.
       Seafood Safety.--Two recent General Accounting Office (GAO) 
     reports on the safety of seafood have documented the 
     inadequacy of the FDA efforts to address foodborne hazards in 
     seafood, including shellfish. Both reports found FDA's 
     seafood inspection system provides consumers with inadequate 
     protection for seafood-related foodborne illness. The 
     Committee urges FDA to promote the development of new food 
     safety technologies such as irradiation, flash freezing, 
     high-pressure processing, or others that can cost-effectively 
     reduce the incidence of pathogens, and technologies that can 
     ensure constant safe temperatures of seafood throughout the 
     food chain.
       The Committee supports the ongoing work of the Interstate 
     Shellfish Sanitation Conference and its joint efforts with 
     the FDA and the shellfish industry to formulate shellfish 
     safety regulations through the National Shellfish Sanitation 
     Program. The Committee recommends no less than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level be directed through the Office of Seafood 
     Inspection to continue these activities, and directs that 
     $200,000 be directed to the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation 
     Conference for the Vibrio Vulnificus Education Program.
       The Committee is concerned that FDA has not taken effective 
     action to address foodborne illness risks from the 
     consumption of raw shellfish. In particular, the Committee is 
     concerned that Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Commission's 
     (ISSC) proposed steps to reduce the rates of death and 
     illness due to consumption of Vibrio vulnificus-contaminated 
     raw shellfish may not effectively address public health 
     concerns.
       The Committee also continues its concern with the agency's 
     failure to bring FDA-regulated seafood into compliance with 
     HACCP. However, the Committee is aware that special or unique 
     circumstances may exist for particular seafood processors. 
     While ultimate HAACP compliance is not in question, the 
     Committee is aware of Hawaii's lengthy and culturally 
     important history of hook-and-line fisheries, auction 
     markets, and the high consumption of raw tuna and other 
     pelagic fish in Hawaii, and believes the agency should take 
     into account both the history and the industry's practical 
     experience in approving a plan that is consistent with 
     healthy seafood products and national standards for seafood 
     safety.
       Omega 3.--The Committee has become aware of new and 
     continued research in Circulation (April 9, 2002), the 
     Journal of the American Medical Association (April 10, 2002) 
     and the New England Journal of Medicine (April 11, 2002) that 
     indicates potential positive health benefits of Omega 3 fatty 
     acids in the diet. In a previous report to the Committee, the 
     FDA concluded that there was no evidence of the value of 
     salmon, which is a source of Omega 3 fatty acids, in the 
     diet. Taking current research into consideration, the 
     Committee believes the FDA

[[Page 619]]

     should reconsider the health claim that ``Consumption of 
     Omega 3 fatty acids in salmon can prevent and reverse heart 
     disease'' and report back to the Committee by April 15, 2003.
       Latex Allergies.--The Committee remains concerned about the 
     increasing prevalence of latex allergies, which can, in some 
     instances, be deadly. The Committee understands that FDA is 
     currently studying the incidence of latex allergies related 
     to food handling, and will report back to the Committee in 
     August on the agency's plan to eliminate exposure to latex 
     from food handling, if data currently being reviewed warrants 
     such a decision. The Committee looks forward to receiving 
     this report, and encourages FDA to take all necessary steps 
     to eliminate unnecessary exposure to natural rubber latex.
       The Committee is also aware that DHHS is currently working 
     to ensure that health care providers and first responders are 
     vaccinated in the event of a public health emergency. The 
     Committee applauds this effort. Taking into consideration the 
     NIOSH Alert in DHHS Publication No. 97-135, ``Preventing 
     Allergic Reactions to Natural Rubber Latex in the 
     Workplace,'' which indicates that between 8 percent and 12 
     percent of the exposed health care workforce is allergic to 
     natural rubber latex, the Committee encourages the Secretary 
     to ensure that all products utilized in these efforts are 
     latex free.
       The Committee is aware that FDA proposed regulations in 
     1999 to reclassify all surgeon's and patient examination 
     gloves as Class II medical devices. The Committee is further 
     aware that the use of some surgeon's and patient examination 
     gloves has been associated with a number of adverse health 
     effects, including allergic reactions, in patients and users. 
     Therefore, the Committee encourages FDA to finalize these 
     proposed regulations.
       National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring Service.--The 
     Committee supports the work of the National Antimicrobial 
     Resistance Monitoring Service (NARMS) and its collaborative 
     relationship between FDA, the Department of Agriculture, and 
     the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Committee 
     expects the coordination of activities among these three 
     areas of Government to result in the most unbiased 
     presentation of timely, accurate data in the best interest of 
     public health.
       Orphan Products Grants.--Included in the Center for Drug 
     Evaluation and Research is $13,357,000 for the Orphan 
     Products Grants Program. This is the same as the fiscal year 
     2002 level.
       Dietary Supplements.--The Committee believes that the 
     potential for dietary supplements to have positive health 
     benefits has been realized in many cases. However, it is 
     essential that FDA continue its efforts to ensure their 
     safety, and to fully enforce the prohibition of false, 
     misleading or unsubstantiated claims regarding dietary 
     supplements implemented in the Dietary Supplement and Health 
     Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994. The budget request includes 
     total funding of $5,600,000 for the CFSAN Adverse Events 
     Reporting System (CAERS), of which approximately $1,500,000 
     is for dietary supplements. The Committee provides an 
     increase of $2,000,000 for CAERS, bringing total funding to 
     $7,600,000. These funds are to be used to ensure prompt 
     identification of and response to adverse health events 
     related to foods, including dietary supplements.
       FDA has indicated that the ability to identify and analyze 
     specific components in ingredients, including botanical 
     ingredients, is an essential component of research and 
     regulatory programs directed at ensuring the safety and 
     effectiveness of dietary supplements. The Committee provides 
     $2,000,000 in new budget authority for fiscal year 2003 to 
     continue the review of botanicals in dietary supplements. 
     This work is being carried out by FDA in collaboration with 
     the National Center for Natural Products Research, Oxford, 
     MS.
       Biotechnology.--The Committee understands that the FDA 
     frequently receives requests from foreign governments for FDA 
     regulators to visit foreign countries to educate regulators 
     on the evaluation of the safety of biotechnology. Providing 
     information on the soundness of the U.S. regulatory process 
     will promote the understanding of the benefits of 
     biotechnology to human health and the environment and improve 
     the climate for acceptance of U.S. agricultural products 
     abroad. The Committee directs the FDA to allocate adequate 
     funding so that agency representatives may perform this 
     service.
       Blood product safety.--The Committee remains concerned FDA 
     has not moved forward in finalizing its proposed rule to 
     require manufacturer tracking of blood-derived products and 
     prompt patient notification of adverse events. The Committee 
     urges FDA to complete implementation of this important blood 
     product safety mechanism and requests quarterly reports on 
     its progress.
       Blood Safety and Adequacy.--The Committee is aware of 
     several factors that have affected that Nation's blood 
     supply, including a recently implemented FDA deferral policy 
     which restricts eligibility of blood donors who have traveled 
     or lived in Europe or the United Kingdom because of the 
     theoretical risk of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease. The 
     Committee is concerned about existing blood shortages, and 
     the possibility of increasingly severe shortages in the 
     future because of the elimination of blood donors, confusion 
     about donor criteria, and the potential loss of up to 25 
     percent of the U.S. military donor base. The Committee 
     understands that additional FDA donor restrictions will 
     become effective October 31, 2002.
       The Committee believes that maintaining an adequate blood 
     supply is critical for the Nation's public health and is 
     essential for national preparedness in the event of public 
     health emergencies. The Committee urges that FDA and the 
     Department of Health and Human Services to address this issue 
     and consider the potential need for modification of donor 
     deferral criteria or other measures if serious blood 
     shortages continue.
       Generic Drugs.--The Committee is deeply concerned about the 
     high cost of prescription drugs, and believes that generic 
     drugs play an important role in the reduction of these costs. 
     Prompt approval of generic drug applications is imperative to 
     making generic drugs available at the earliest possible date 
     to American consumers. Latest statistics, however, indicate 
     that it currently takes 18.4 months, on average, for a 
     generic drug application to be reviewed by FDA. Therefore, 
     the Committee is providing $45,282,000 for the generic drugs 
     program, an increase of $6,082,000 over the fiscal year 2002 
     level, and $1,500,000 more than the budget request. The 
     Committee expects that this increase will result in more than 
     75 percent of generic drug applications being reviewed within 
     6 months of submission.
       Standards of Identity.--The Committee is aware of the 
     ongoing debate surrounding increased importation and use of 
     milk protein concentrate. A recent General Accounting Office 
     investigation highlighted a dramatic increase in milk protein 
     concentrate imports. The Committee is concerned with FDA's 
     current lack of enforcement of standards of identity as it 
     relates to the potential illegal use of milk protein 
     concentrate in standardized cheese.
       Office of Women's Health.--The Committee believes that it 
     is imperative for FDA to pay sufficient attention to gender-
     based research, ensuring that products approved by the FDA 
     are safe and effective for women as well as men. The 
     Committee notes that in the budget request, the Office of 
     Women's Health at FDA is funded at approximately $3,000,000 
     for program operation and oversight. The Committee encourages 
     FDA to ensure that the Office of Women's Health is 
     sufficiently funded to carry out its activities, and to 
     enhance its funding if necessary.
       Orange Book.--The Committee is aware of the contributions 
     of pharmaceutical products to public health and the high cost 
     of product development, but is extremely concerned about the 
     high cost of prescription drugs to American consumers, and is 
     aware that generic drugs, once they reach the marketplace, 
     are available to consumers at a significantly lower cost than 
     the original drug. The FDA maintains a listing of ``Approved 
     Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,'' 
     also known as the ``Orange Book.'' Patent information for 
     approved drugs submitted to the FDA are listed and published 
     in this book. FDA has indicated to the Committee that FDA 
     intends to commence a process of providing guidance in the 
     near future on patents which it believes should and should 
     not be listed in the Orange Book. The Committee is 
     supportive, and encourages the Secretary to work with the 
     pharmaceutical and generic industries in this effort. The 
     Committee requests a report on these activities by January 
     15, 2003.
       Medical Device Application Review.--The Committee is aware 
     that for the last several years, premarket approval 
     applications for breakthrough medical technologies have taken 
     more than a year, despite the 180-day statutory maximum for 
     approval or denial of such applications. Specifically, it is 
     the Committee's understanding that the average length of time 
     for medical device premarket reviews is currently over 400 
     days. Moreover, the medical technology industry has doubled 
     the investment in research and development in the last 
     decade, and FDA has stated that device technology advances 
     and global impact will continue to affect review performance. 
     In addition, FDA has stated that submissions are becoming 
     increasingly more complex, also contributing to review 
     performance. Therefore, the Committee provides an increase of 
     $8,000,000 from the fiscal year 2002 level for activities 
     relating to premarket reviews of medical devices. These funds 
     are to be used solely for premarket review activities, with 
     the intention of decreasing review times. The Committee 
     directs the FDA to provide a report within 90 days of the 
     enactment of this Act on how these funds will be obligated, 
     including the number of employees that will be hired, a 
     description of their duties, and the effect these funds will 
     have on premarket review times for medical devices.
       Reused Medical Devices.--The Committee recognizes the 
     important role that FDA plays in ensuring that every medical 
     device used on a patient in the United States is both safe 
     and effective for its intended use. Adhering to this 
     principle, the FDA has issued new guidance for the 
     reprocessing of single-use medical devices. The Committee is

[[Page 620]]

     concerned that the FDA may consider allowing a single 
     premarket submission for reprocessing of multiple models of a 
     certain medical devices. FDA's own research indicates that 
     minor modifications to a device can substantially alter the 
     device's properties with regard to sterilization and 
     reprocessing. This was stated by FDA's own scientists at the 
     1999 AAMI/FDA Conference entitled ``The reuse of single-use 
     devices.'' Therefore, the Committee urges the FDA to require 
     a premarket submission for every model that is to be 
     reprocessed, if an application was required for the original 
     manufactured device.
       Implanted Medical Devices.--The Committee acknowledges the 
     FDA's final rule to improve post-market surveillance for 
     medical devices, and strongly encourages FDA to devote the 
     necessary resources to require registries and monitor well-
     designed long-term safety studies for implanted devices, 
     including but not limited to jaw implants. As the aging U.S. 
     population becomes more dependent on implanted devices, the 
     Committee believes it is essential that the FDA allocate 
     adequate resources to patient safety activities related to 
     these devices, such as registries, post-market surveillance, 
     and long-term phase IV trials.
       Adverse Events Reporting System.--The Committee is 
     concerned about the lack of oversight over reprocessed 
     medical devices when they fail. The General Accounting Office 
     reported that the incidence of failure was unknown. This may 
     be in part due to the fact that FDA's adverse reporting 
     system used by health professionals does not capture data on 
     whether a defective device has been reprocessed. The MEDWATCH 
     system includes on its mandatory reporting form a box for the 
     identification of whether a defective device was or was not 
     reprocessed. The voluntary reporting form, however, does not 
     allow for such reporting. The Committee strongly encourages 
     the agency to update the voluntary reporting form to allow 
     for the identification of whether a defective device has been 
     reprocessed, and if it has been reprocessed, information on 
     how many times the device has been reused.
       Tissue Safety.--The Committee remains concerned about the 
     safety of tissue processing. FDA first initiated oversight of 
     tissue by regulation in 1993. Since then, additional safety 
     concerns have led FDA to publish the ``Proposed Approach to 
     the Regulation of Cellular and Tissue-Based Products'' on 
     February 28, 1997. Since 1997, FDA has proposed three new 
     regulations to deal with registration of tissue processors 
     and the listing of their products, donor suitability and good 
     manufacturing practice. Only one of these three proposed 
     rules, relating to registration and listing, has been 
     finalized. The Committee is concerned that FDA still has not 
     finalized the donor suitability and good manufacturing 
     practices rules. The urgency of establishing new safety rules 
     has been highlighted by the unfortunate death of one young 
     person due to contaminated tissue. Therefore, the Committee 
     directs the agency to finalize the tissue safety rules within 
     9 months of the enactment of this Act.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 2002........................................$34,281,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................8,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................11,000,000

       In addition to Washington, DC, area laboratories which are 
     in six separate locations, FDA has 16 laboratories at other 
     locations around the country, including regular field 
     laboratories and specialized facilities, as well as the 
     National Center for Toxicological Research complex. Repairs, 
     modifications, improvements and construction to FDA 
     headquarters and field facilities must be made to preserve 
     the properties, ensure employee safety, meet changing program 
     requirements, and permit the agency to keep its laboratory 
     methods up to date.

                       committee recommendations

       For continued repairs and improvements of FDA buildings and 
     facilities, the Committee recommends $11,000,000. This amount 
     is $23,281,000 less than the 2002 appropriation and 
     $3,000,000 more than the budget request.
       Included in the amount provided is $8,000,000 for repair 
     and improvement projects, and $3,000,000 to complete 
     renovation of the National Center for Toxicology Research.

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Appropriations, 2002........................................$70,700,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................79,884,000
Committee recommendation.....................................93,985,000

\1\Excludes $2,916,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] was 
     established as an independent agency by the Commodity Futures 
     Trading Commission Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1389; 7 U.S.C. 4a).
       The Commission administers the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 
     U.S.C. section 1, et seq. The 1974 Act brought under Federal 
     regulation futures trading in all goods, articles, services, 
     rights, and interests; commodity options trading; and 
     leverage trading in gold and silver bullion and coins; and 
     otherwise strengthened the regulation of the commodity 
     futures trading industry. It established a comprehensive 
     regulatory structure to oversee the volatile futures trading 
     complex.
       The purpose of the Commission is to protect and further the 
     economic utility of futures and commodity options markets by 
     encouraging their efficiency, assuring their integrity, and 
     protecting participants against manipulation, abusive trade 
     practices, fraud, and deceit. The objective is to enable the 
     markets to better serve their designated functions of 
     providing a price discovery mechanism and providing price 
     risk insurance. In properly serving these functions, the 
     futures and commodity options markets contribute toward 
     better production and financial planning, more efficient 
     distribution and consumption, and more economical marketing.
       Programs in support of the overall mission include market 
     surveillance analysis and research; registration, audits, and 
     contract markets; enforcement; reparations; proceedings; 
     legal counsel; agency direction; and administrative support 
     services. CFTC activities are carried out in Washington, DC; 
     two regional offices located in Chicago and New York; and 
     smaller offices in Kansas City, Los Angeles, and Minneapolis.

                       committee recommendations

       For the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Committee 
     recommends $93,985,000. The amount provided is $23,285,000 
     more than the 2002 appropriation and $14,101,000 more than 
     the budget request.
       The Committee is aware that the Farm Security and Rural 
     Investment Act of 2002 exempted CFTC from the salary 
     restrictions imposed by Title V of the United States Code. 
     The Committee is also aware that Title V pay restrictions 
     have historically been a significant factor in CFTC's high 
     turnover rate, nearly triple the government average, among 
     attorneys and economists, which are the Commission's two 
     largest occupational series. The Committee has been informed 
     that this high attrition rate impedes the Commission's 
     ability to develop and sustain a cadre of legal and financial 
     professionals necessary to detect, prosecute, and deter fraud 
     in the expanding and complex financial markets. Therefore, 
     the Committee is providing $15,915,000 for CFTC to provide 
     compensation and benefits comparable to other Federal 
     financial regulators, or other program costs, if necessary. 
     It is the Committee's understanding that CFTC is currently 
     developing a plan to implement pay comparability with other 
     Federal financial regulators, and the Committee requests a 
     full report on these activities, including their effect on 
     the CFTC attrition rate, quarterly.

                       Farm Credit Administration

                 limitation on administrative expenses

Limitation, 2002..........................................($36,700,000)
Budget estimate, 2003\1\...................................(36,700,000)
Committee recommendation...................................(38,404,000)

\1\Excludes $1,796,000 requested for employee pension and health 
benefits.

       The Farm Credit Administration [FCA] is the independent 
     agency in the executive branch of the Government responsible 
     for the examination and regulation of the banks, 
     associations, and other institutions of the Farm Credit 
     System.
       Activities of the Farm Credit Administration include the 
     planning and execution of examinations of Farm Credit System 
     institutions and the preparation of examination reports. FCA 
     also establishes standards, enforces rules and regulations, 
     and approves certain actions of the institutions.
       The administration and the institutions under its 
     jurisdiction now operate under authorities contained in the 
     Farm Credit Act of 1971, Public Law 92-181, effective 
     December 10, 1971. Public Law 99-205, effective December 23, 
     1985, restructured FCA and gave the agency regulatory 
     authorities and enforcement powers.
       The act provides for the farmer-owned cooperative system to 
     make sound, adequate, and constructive credit available to 
     farmers and ranchers and their cooperatives, rural 
     residences, and associations and other entities upon which 
     farming operations are dependent, and to modernize existing 
     farm credit law to meet current and future rural credit 
     needs.
       The Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 authorized the 
     formation of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation 
     [FAMC] to operate a secondary market for agricultural and 
     rural housing mortgages. The Farm Credit Administration, 
     under section 8.11 of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as 
     amended, is assigned the responsibility of regulating this 
     entity and assuring its safe and sound operation.
       Expenses of the Farm Credit Administration are paid by 
     assessments collected from the Farm Credit System 
     institutions and by assessments to the Federal Agricultural 
     Mortgage Corporation.

                       committee recommendations

       The Committee recommends a limitation of $38,404,000 on 
     administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration 
     [FCA]. This is $1,704,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     level and the budget request.

[[Page 621]]

       The Committee recommends an increase in the limitation of 
     FCA's administrative expenses for two reasons. First, it is 
     the Committee's understanding that pending a study scheduled 
     to be completed this summer, the FCA may be unable to comply 
     with a statute requiring it to provide employees with 
     comparable compensation to other Federal financial regulatory 
     agencies. Second, the FCA is facing the potential loss of 
     many seasoned examiners and other employees through 
     retirement. There is a need to hire up to an additional 13 
     examiners to prevent a loss that could significantly strain 
     FCA's ability to effectively carry out its financial safety 
     and soundness examination and enforcement functions. It is 
     the Committee's understanding that this increase in FCA's 
     limitation on administrative expenses will not result in an 
     increase in the amount of the assessments on system 
     institutions. The Committee requests a report on the outcome 
     of studies currently underway related to this increase, 
     including the actual limitation amount necessary, the amount 
     of carryover funds in FCA's reserve, and the change, if any, 
     in the amount of the assessments on system institutions.

                     TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sections 701-731 of the general provisions are essentially 
     the same as those included in the fiscal year 2002 and 
     previous years' appropriations acts.

       In addition, the Committee recommends the following 
     provisions:

       Section 732 to provide eligibility for rural development 
     programs to the city of Dunkirk, NY.

       Section 733 to provide assistance through the Rural Housing 
     Assistance Grants program for agriculture processing workers 
     in the State of Wisconsin.

       Section 734 to provide eligibility for conservation 
     projects in the State of Illinois.

       Section 735 to allow up to 20 percent of competitive 
     research funds to be used to carry out awards under the same 
     terms and conditions as those pursuant to section 401 of the 
     Agriculture Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
     1998 (7 U.S.C. 7621).

       Section 736 to provide eligibility for a conservation 
     program in the State of West Virginia.

       Section 737 to allow a reimbursement to the USDA Office of 
     General Counsel from salaries and expenses accounts of 
     agencies for which the General Counsel will provide certain 
     services, subject to prior approval of the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House and the Senate.

       Section 738 to prohibit funds from being used to carry out 
     section 14(h)(i) of the Watershed Protection and Flood 
     Prevention Act.

       Section 739 to prohibit funds from being used to carry out 
     section Subtitle I of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act.

       Section 740 to prohibit funds from being used to carry out 
     section 6405 of Public Law 107-171.

       Section 741 to limit funds available to carry out section 
     9010 of Public Law 107-171.

       Section 742 to provide eligibility for a conservation 
     program in the State of Arkansas.

       Section 743 to provide eligibility for a conservation 
     program in the State of Alaska.

       Section 744 to provide direction in the implementation of 
     the Food for Progress program.

       Section 745 to rescind unobligated balances of funds 
     appropriated to the Cooperative State Research, Education, 
     and Extension Service by Public Law 104-180.

       Section 746 to limit the use of funds for programs under 7 
     U.S.C. 1736f-1.

       Section 747 to provide eligibility for conservation 
     programs in the States of Utah and Nebraska.

       Section 748 to establish certain authorities regarding the 
     Denali Commission.

       Section 749 to rescind funds to carry out the Rural Clean 
     Water program.

       Section 750 to establish a program for loans and grants 
     related to the dairy industry in the State of Alaska.

       Section 751 to allow the Secretary to transfer up to 
     $2,000,000 from the Food and Nutrition Service to the 
     Economic Research Service for studies and evaluations on 
     behalf of the Food and Nutrition Service.

       Section 752 to complete the project regarding the John 
     Ogonowski farm in a manner consistent with the rules and 
     regulations of the Farmland Protection Program. Because of 
     the strong national demand for Farmland Protection Program 
     funds and the need to provide full access to Program funds 
     nationally, the Committee directs the Secretary to carry out 
     the project without providing additional funding under the 
     Program for projects in the State of Massachusetts.

       Section 753 to authorize Department of Agriculture 
     employees to carry firearms for personal protection in remote 
     locations that may be populated by bears and other dangerous 
     wildlife.

       Section 754 to limit funds available for the Export 
     Enhancement Program.

       Section 755 to structure the schedule of payments for the 
     rural development guaranteed underwriting loan program.

                     Program, Project, and Activity

       During fiscal year 2003, for purposes of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
     99-177) or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
     Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-119), the following 
     information provides the definition of the term ``program, 
     project, and activity'' for departments and agencies under 
     the jurisdiction of the Agriculture, Rural Development, and 
     Related Agencies Subcommittee. The term ``program, project, 
     and activity'' shall include the most specific level of 
     budget items identified in the Agriculture, Rural 
     Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003, the House and Senate 
     Committee reports, and the conference report and accompanying 
     joint explanatory statement of the managers of the committee 
     of conference.

       If a sequestration order is necessary, in implementing the 
     Presidential order, departments and agencies shall apply any 
     percentage reduction required for fiscal year 2003 pursuant 
     to the provisions of Public Law 99-177 or Public Law 100-119 
     to all items specified in the explanatory notes submitted to 
     the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in 
     support of the fiscal year 2003 budget estimates, as amended, 
     for such departments and agencies, as modified by 
     congressional action, and in addition:

       For the Agricultural Research Service the definition shall 
     include specific research locations as identified in the 
     explanatory notes and lines of research specifically 
     identified in the reports of the House and Senate 
     Appropriations Committees.

       For the Natural Resources Conservation Service the 
     definition shall include individual flood prevention projects 
     as identified in the explanatory notes and individual 
     operational watershed projects as summarized in the notes.

       For the Farm Service Agency the definition shall include 
     individual, regional, State, district, and county offices.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports 
     accompanying general appropriations bills identify each 
     recommended amendment which proposes an item of appropriation 
     which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
     law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
     passed by the Senate during that session.

       The Committee recommends funding for the following program 
     which currently lacks authorization for fiscal year 2003:

       Compact of Free Association Act of 1985.

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''

       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets; new matter is printed in italics; and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

[[Page 622]]



  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or -)
              Item                      2002             Budget        House allowance      Committee    ----------------------------------------------------
                                    appropriation   estimate        deg.         recommendation         2002             Budget            House
                                                                                                            appropriation   estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
 TITLE I--AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
 
   Production, Processing, and
            Marketing
 
Office of the Secretary.........            2,992            36,667             3,412              +420           -33,255
    Emergency appropriations               80,919   ................  ................          -80,919   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of the                 83,911            36,667             3,412           -80,499           -33,255
       Secretary................
 
Executive Operations:
    Chief Economist.............            7,704            12,117            12,016            +4,312              -101
    National Appeals Division...           12,869            14,334            13,759              +890              -575
    Office of Budget and Program            7,041             7,358             7,358              +317   ................
     Analysis...................
    Office of the Chief                    10,029            31,277            31,275           +21,246                -2
     Information Officer........
        Common computing                   59,369           133,155           133,155           +73,786   ................
         environment............
    Office of the Chief                     5,384             7,918             7,877            +2,493               -41
     Financial Officer..........
    Working capital fund........  ................           21,000   ................  ................          -21,000
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Executive                    102,396           227,159           205,440          +103,044           -21,719
       Operations...............
 
Office of the Assistant           ................  ................              400              +400              +400
 Secretary for Civil Rights.....
Office of the Assistant                       647               780               780              +133   ................
 Secretary for Administration...
Agriculture buildings and                (187,647)          (70,499)         (197,662)         (+10,015)        (+127,163)
 facilities and rental payments.
    Payments to GSA.............          130,266   ................          130,266   ................         +130,266
    Building operations and                31,438            36,522            33,419            +1,981            -3,103
     maintenance................
    Repairs, renovations, and              25,943            33,977            33,977            +8,034   ................
     construction...............
Hazardous materials management..           15,665            15,685            15,685               +20   ................
Departmental administration.....           37,079            46,398            42,479            +5,400            -3,919
Office of the Assistant                     3,718             4,157             4,157              +439   ................
 Secretary for Congressional
 Relations......................
Office of Communications........            8,894             9,637             9,637              +743   ................
Office of the Inspector General.           70,839            82,231            78,127            +7,288            -4,104
Office of the General Counsel...           32,627            37,287            35,588            +2,961            -1,699
Office of the Under Secretary                 573               780               780              +207   ................
 for Research, Education and
 Economics......................
Economic Research Service.......           67,200            79,243            65,123            -2,077           -14,120
 
National Agricultural Statistics          113,786           143,659           140,854           +27,068            -2,805
 Service........................
    Census of Agriculture.......          (25,350)          (41,274)          (41,274)         (+15,924)  ................
 
Agricultural Research Service:..
    Salaries and expenses.......          979,464           971,445         1,053,597           +74,133           +82,152
        Emergency appropriations           40,000   ................  ................          -40,000   ................
         (Public Law 107-117)...
    Buildings and facilities....          118,987            16,580           100,955           -18,032           +84,375
        Emergency appropriations           73,000   ................  ................          -73,000   ................
         (Public Law 107-117)...
        Regular appropriations             25,000   ................  ................          -25,000   ................
         (Public Law 107-206)...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Agricultural           1,236,451           988,025         1,154,552           -81,899          +166,527
           Research Service.....
 
Cooperative State Research,
 Education, and Extension
 Service:.......................
    Research and education                542,062           552,549           651,411          +109,349           +98,862
     activities.................
    Native American Institutions           (7,100)           (7,100)           (7,100)  ................  ................
     Endowment Fund.............
    Extension activities........          439,473           419,989           452,767           +13,294           +32,778
    Integrated activities.......           42,853            44,865            48,218            +5,365            +3,353
    Outreach for socially                   3,243             3,243             3,493              +250              +250
     disadvantaged farmers......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Cooperative State          1,027,631         1,020,646         1,155,889          +128,258          +135,243
       Research, Education, and
       Extension Service........
 
Office of the Under Secretary                 654               780               780              +126   ................
 for Marketing and Regulatory
 Programs.......................
 
Animal and Plant Health
 Inspection Service:............
    Salaries and expenses.......          620,490           767,119           735,673          +115,183           -31,446
        Emergency appropriations          105,000   ................  ................         -105,000   ................
         (Public Law 107-117)...
    AQI user fees...............          (84,813)         (275,000)  ................         (-84,813)        (-275,000)
    Animal welfare user fees      ................           -5,000   ................  ................           +5,000
     (proposed).................
    Buildings and facilities....            7,189            13,189            13,189            +6,000   ................
        Emergency appropriations           14,081   ................  ................          -14,081   ................
         (Public Law 107-117)...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Animal and               746,760           775,308           748,862            +2,102           -26,446
           Plant Health
           Inspection Service...
 
Agricultural Marketing Service:
    Marketing Services..........           71,430            75,411            75,411            +3,981   ................
        Standardization user               (5,000)           (5,000)           (5,000)  ................  ................
         fees...................
    (Limitation on                        (60,596)          (61,619)          (61,619)          (+1,023)  ................
     administrative expenses,
     from fees collected).......
    Funds for strengthening                13,995            14,910            14,910              +915   ................
     markets, income, and supply
     (transfer from section 32).
    Payments to states and                  1,347             1,347             1,347   ................  ................
     possessions................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Agricultural                  86,772            91,668            91,668            +4,896   ................
       Marketing Service........
 
Grain Inspection, Packers and
 Stockyards Administration:
    Salaries and expenses.......           33,117            41,164            44,475           +11,358            +3,311
    Limitation on inspection and          (42,463)          (42,463)          (42,463)  ................  ................
     weighing services..........
    Inspection and licensing      ................          -29,000   ................  ................          +29,000
     user fees (proposed).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Grain Inspection,             33,117            12,164            44,475           +11,358           +32,311
       Packers and Stockyards...
 
Office of the Under Secretary                 476               780               780              +304   ................
 for Food Safety................
Food Safety and Inspection                715,642           763,049           759,759           +44,117            -3,290
 Service........................
    Emergency appropriations               15,000   ................  ................          -15,000
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    Lab accreditation fees\1\...           (1,000)           (1,000)           (1,000)  ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Production,                4,587,485         4,406,602         4,756,889          +169,404          +350,287
       Processing, and Marketing
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
    Farm Assistance Programs
 
Office of the Under Secretary                 606               899               899              +293   ................
 for Farm and Foreign
 Agricultural Services..........
 
Farm Service Agency:
    Salaries and expenses.......          939,030           993,620           986,913           +47,883            -6,707
 
    (Transfer from export loans)             (790)             (834)             (834)             (+44)  ................
    (Transfer from Public Law                (972)           (1,026)           (1,026)             (+54)  ................
     480).......................
    (Transfer from ACIF)........         (272,595)         (279,176)         (279,176)          (+6,581)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, transfers from           (274,357)         (281,036)         (281,036)          (+6,679)  ................
       program accounts.........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 623]]

 
      Total, Salaries and              (1,213,387)       (1,274,656)       (1,267,949)         (+54,562)          (-6,707)
       expenses.................
    Emergency conservation        ................           48,700   ................  ................          -48,700
     program....................
    State mediation grants......            3,493             4,000             4,000              +507   ................
    Dairy indemnity program.....              100               100               100   ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Farm Service              942,623         1,046,420           991,013           +48,390           -55,407
       Agency...................
 
    Agricultural Credit
     Insurance Fund Program
     Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Farm ownership
             loans:
                Direct..........         (146,996)         (100,000)         (146,996)  ................         (+46,996)
                Guaranteed......       (1,000,000)       (1,000,000)       (1,000,000)  ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal......       (1,146,996)       (1,100,000)       (1,146,996)  ................         (+46,996)
            Farm operating
             loans:
                Direct..........         (611,198)         (600,000)         (611,198)  ................         (+11,198)
                Unsubsidized           (1,500,000)       (1,700,000)       (1,700,000)        (+200,000)  ................
                 guaranteed.....
                Subsidized               (505,531)         (300,000)         (505,531)  ................        (+205,531)
                 guaranteed.....
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal......       (2,616,729)       (2,600,000)       (2,816,729)        (+200,000)        (+216,729)
                Indian tribe               (2,000)           (2,000)           (2,000)  ................  ................
                 land
                 acquisition
                 loans..........
                Emergency                 (25,000)  ................  ................         (-25,000)  ................
                 disaster loans.
                Boll weevil              (100,000)         (100,000)         (100,000)  ................  ................
                 eradication
                 loans..........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan          (3,890,725)       (3,802,000)       (4,065,725)        (+175,000)        (+263,725)
                   authorization
                   s............
        Loan subsidies:
            Farm ownership
             loans:
                Direct..........            3,866            11,610            17,066           +13,200            +5,456
                Guaranteed......            4,500             7,500             7,500            +3,000   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal......            8,366            19,110            24,566           +16,200            +5,456
 
            Farm operating
             loans:
                Direct..........           54,580           103,560           105,493           +50,913            +1,933
                Unsubsidized               52,650            53,890            53,890            +1,240   ................
                 guaranteed.....
                Subsidized                 68,550            35,400            59,653            -8,897           +24,253
                 guaranteed.....
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal......          175,780           192,850           219,036           +43,256           +26,186
 
                Indian tribe                  118               179               179               +61   ................
                 land
                 acquisition....
                Emergency                   3,363   ................  ................           -3,363   ................
                 disaster loans.
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan             187,627           212,139           243,781           +56,154           +31,642
                   subsidies....
 
        ACIF expenses:
            Salaries and expense          272,595           279,176           279,176            +6,581   ................
             (transfer to FSA)..
            Administrative                  8,000             8,000             8,000   ................  ................
             expenses...........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, ACIF                 280,595           287,176           287,176            +6,581   ................
               expenses.........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total,                      468,222           499,315           530,957           +62,735           +31,642
               Agricultural
               Credit Insurance
               Fund.............
                  (Loan                (3,890,725)       (3,802,000)       (4,065,725)        (+175,000)        (+263,725)
                   authorization
                   )............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
              Total, Farm               1,410,845         1,545,735         1,521,970          +111,125           -23,765
               Service Agency...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
Risk Management Agency..........           74,752            72,771            70,708            -4,044            -2,063
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Farm Assistance            1,486,203         1,619,405         1,593,577          +107,374           -25,828
       Programs.................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
          Corporations
 
Federal Crop Insurance
 Corporation:
    Federal crop insurance              2,900,000         2,886,000         2,886,000           -14,000   ................
     corporation fund...........
Commodity Credit Corporation
 Fund:
    Reimbursement for net              20,279,000        16,285,000        16,285,000        -3,994,000   ................
     realized losses............
    Hazardous waste management             (5,000)           (5,000)           (5,000)  ................  ................
     (limitation on
     administrative expenses)...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Corporations.......       23,179,000        19,171,000        19,171,000        -4,008,000   ................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, title I,                  29,252,688        25,197,007        25,521,466        -3,731,222          +324,459
       Agricultural Programs....
          (By transfer).........         (274,357)         (281,036)         (281,036)          (+6,679)  ................
          (Loan authorization)..       (3,890,725)       (3,802,000)       (4,065,725)        (+175,000)        (+263,725)
          (Limitation on                 (108,059)         (109,082)         (109,082)          (+1,023)  ................
           administrative
           expenses)............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
 TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
 
Office of the Under Secretary                 730               902               902              +172   ................
 for Natural Resources and
 Environment....................
 
Natural Resources Conservation
 Service:
    Conservation operations.....          779,000           840,963           840,002           +61,002              -961
    Watershed surveys and                  10,960   ................           10,960   ................          +10,960
     planning...................
    Watershed and flood                   106,590   ................          105,000            -1,590          +105,000
     prevention operations......
        Regular appropriations             94,000   ................  ................          -94,000   ................
         (Public Law 107-206)...
    Emergency watershed           ................          110,000   ................  ................         -110,000
     protection.................
    Watershed rehabilitation               10,000   ................           30,000           +20,000           +30,000
     program....................
    Resource conservation and              48,048            49,079            50,000            +1,952              +921
     development................
    Forestry incentives program.            6,811   ................  ................           -6,811   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Natural Resources          1,055,409         1,000,042         1,035,962           -19,447           +35,920
       Conservation Service.....
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, title II,                  1,056,139         1,000,944         1,036,864           -19,275           +35,920
       Conservation Programs....
                                 =======================================================================================================================
  TITLE III--RURAL DEVELOPMENT
            PROGRAMS
 
Office of the Under Secretary                 623               898               898              +275   ................
 for Rural Development..........
 
Rural Development:
    Rural community advancement           806,557           791,499           867,176           +60,619           +75,677
     program....................
    (Transfer out)..............         (-24,000)  ................         (-30,000)          (-6,000)         (-30,000)
    RD expenses:
        Salaries and expenses...          133,722           145,736           127,502            -6,220           -18,234
 

[[Page 624]]

 
        (Transfer from RHIF)....         (422,241)         (455,630)         (455,630)         (+33,389)  ................
        (Transfer from RDLFP)...           (3,733)           (4,290)           (4,290)            (+557)  ................
        (Transfer from RETLP)...          (36,000)          (38,035)          (38,035)          (+2,035)  ................
        (Transfer from RTB).....           (3,082)           (3,082)           (3,082)  ................  ................
        (Transfer from TLP).....           (2,000)  ................  ................          (-2,000)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Transfers            (467,056)         (501,037)         (501,037)         (+33,981)  ................
           from program accounts
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, RD expenses....         (600,778)         (646,773)         (628,539)         (+27,761)         (-18,234)
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                    940,279           937,235           994,678           +54,399           +57,443
           Development..........
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
Rural Housing Service:
    Rural Housing Insurance Fund
     Program Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Single family (sec.        (1,079,848)         (957,300)       (1,005,162)         (-74,686)         (+47,862)
             502)...............
                Unsubsidized           (3,137,968)       (2,750,000)       (2,750,000)        (-387,968)  ................
                 guaranteed.....
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,            (4,217,816)       (3,707,300)       (3,755,162)        (-462,654)         (+47,862)
                   Single family
            Housing repair (sec.          (32,324)          (35,000)          (35,000)          (+2,676)  ................
             504)...............
            Rental housing (sec.         (114,068)          (60,000)         (120,000)          (+5,932)         (+60,000)
             515)...............
            Site loans (sec.               (5,090)           (5,000)           (5,000)             (-90)  ................
             524)...............
            Multi-family housing          (99,770)         (100,000)  ................         (-99,770)        (-100,000)
             guarantees (sec.
             538)...............
            Multi-family housing           (1,778)           (2,000)           (2,000)            (+222)  ................
             credit sales.......
            Single family                 (10,000)          (10,000)          (10,000)  ................  ................
             housing credit
             sales..............
            Self-help housing              (5,000)           (5,011)           (5,011)             (+11)  ................
             land development
             fund...............
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan              (4,485,846)       (3,924,311)       (3,932,173)        (-553,673)          (+7,862)
               authorizations...
                                                                                                          Loan subsidies:
            Single family (sec.           142,108           185,429           194,700           +52,592            +9,271
             502)...............
                Unsubsidized               40,166            19,800            19,800           -20,366   ................
                 guaranteed.....
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,               182,274           205,229           214,500           +32,226            +9,271
                   Single family
 
            Housing repair (sec.           10,386            10,857            10,857              +471   ................
             504)...............
            Rental housing (sec.           48,274            27,978            55,956            +7,682           +27,978
             515)...............
            Site loans (sec.                   28                55                55               +27   ................
             524)...............
            Multi-family housing            3,921             4,500   ................           -3,921            -4,500
             guarantees (sec.
             538)...............
            Multi-family housing              750               934               934              +184   ................
             credit sales.......
            Single family         ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
             housing credit
             sales..............
            Self-help housing                 254               221               221               -33   ................
             land development
             fund...............
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Loan                 245,887           249,774           282,523           +36,636           +32,749
               subsidies........
 
        RHIF administrative               422,241           455,630           455,630           +33,389   ................
         expenses (transfer to
         RD)....................
 
        Rental assistance
         program:
            (Sec. 521)..........          695,104           706,100           724,100           +28,996           +18,000
            (Sec. 502(c)(5)(D)).            5,900             5,900             5,900   ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Rental               701,004           712,000           730,000           +28,996           +18,000
               assistance
               program..........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Total, Rural              1,369,132         1,417,404         1,468,153           +99,021           +50,749
               Housing Insurance
               Fund.............
                  (Loan                (4,485,846)       (3,924,311)       (3,932,173)        (-553,673)          (+7,862)
                   authorization
                   )............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
    Mutual and self-help housing           35,000            34,000            35,000   ................           +1,000
     grants.....................
    Rural housing assistance               38,914            42,498            47,498            +8,584            +5,000
     grants.....................
    Farm labor program account..           31,431            34,615            34,615            +3,184   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, grants and                105,345           111,113           117,113           +11,768            +6,000
       payments.................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Rural Housing              1,474,477         1,528,517         1,585,266          +110,789           +56,749
       Service..................
          (Loan authorization)..       (4,485,846)       (3,924,311)       (3,932,173)        (-553,673)          (+7,862)
                                 =======================================================================================================================
Rural Business-Cooperative
 Service:
    Rural Development Loan Fund
     Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)....          (38,171)          (40,000)          (40,000)          (+1,829)  ................
        Loan subsidy............           16,494            19,304            19,304            +2,810   ................
        Administrative expenses             3,733             4,290             4,290              +557   ................
         (transfer to RD).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                     20,227            23,594            23,594            +3,367   ................
           Development Loan Fund
 
    Rural Economic Development
     Loans Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)....          (14,966)          (14,967)          (14,967)              (+1)  ................
        Direct subsidy..........            3,616             3,197             3,197              -419   ................
    Rural cooperative                       7,750             9,000             9,000            +1,250   ................
     development grants.........
    Rural empowerment zones and            14,967   ................           14,967   ................          +14,967
     enterprise communities
     grants.....................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Rural Business-               46,560            35,791            50,758            +4,198           +14,967
       Cooperative Service......
          (Loan authorization)..          (53,137)          (54,967)          (54,967)          (+1,830)  ................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
Rural Utilities Service:
    Rural Electrification and
     Telecommunications Loans
     Program Account:
        Loan authorizations:
            Electric:
                Direct, 5                (121,107)         (121,103)         (121,103)              (-4)  ................
                 percent........
                Direct,                  (500,000)         (100,000)         (100,000)        (-400,000)  ................
                 Municipal rate.
                Direct, FFB.....       (2,600,000)       (1,600,000)       (2,600,000)  ................      (+1,000,000)
                Direct, Treasury         (750,000)         (700,000)       (1,150,000)        (+400,000)        (+450,000)
                 rate...........
                Guaranteed               (100,000)         (100,000)         (100,000)  ................  ................
                 electric.......
                Guaranteed        ................  ................       (1,000,000)      (+1,000,000)      (+1,000,000)
                 underwriting...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,            (4,071,107)       (2,621,103)       (5,071,103)        (+999,996)      (+2,450,000)
                   Electric.....
            Telecommunications:
                Direct, 5                 (74,827)          (75,029)          (75,029)            (+202)  ................
                 percent........
                Direct, Treasury         (300,000)         (300,000)         (300,000)  ................  ................
                 rate...........
                Direct, FFB.....         (120,000)         (120,000)         (120,000)  ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,              (494,827)         (495,029)         (495,029)            (+202)  ................
                   Telecommunica
                   tions........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 625]]

 
                  Total, Loan          (4,565,934)       (3,116,132)       (5,566,132)      (+1,000,198)      (+2,450,000)
                   authorization
                   s............
        Loan subsidies:
            Electric:
                Direct, 5                   3,609             6,915             6,915            +3,306   ................
                 percent........
                Direct,           ................            4,030             4,030            +4,030   ................
                 Municipal rate.
                Guaranteed                     80                80                80   ................  ................
                 electric.......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,                 3,689            11,025            11,025            +7,336   ................
                   Electric.....
 
            Telecommunications:
                Direct, 5                   1,736             1,283             1,283              -453   ................
                 percent........
                Direct, Treasury              300               150               150              -150   ................
                 rate...........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Subtotal,                 2,036             1,433             1,433              -603   ................
                   Telecommunica
                   tions........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Total, Loan               5,725            12,458            12,458            +6,733   ................
                   subsidies....
 
        RETLP administrative               36,000            38,035            38,035            +2,035   ................
         expenses (transfer to
         RD)....................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural                     41,725            50,493            50,493            +8,768   ................
           Electrification and
           Telecommunications
           Loans Program Account
              (Loan                    (4,565,934)       (3,116,132)       (5,566,132)      (+1,000,198)      (+2,450,000)
               authorization)...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
    Rural Telephone Bank Program
     Account:
        (Loan authorization)....         (174,615)  ................         (174,615)  ................        (+174,615)
        Direct loan subsidy.....            3,737   ................            2,410            -1,327            +2,410
        RTB administrative                  3,082             3,082             3,082   ................  ................
         expenses (transfer to
         RD)....................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Rural Telephone            6,819             3,082             5,492            -1,327            +2,410
           Bank Program Account.
 
    High energy costs grants (by          (24,000)  ................          (30,000)          (+6,000)         (+30,000)
     transfer)..................
    Distance learning and
     telemedicine program:
        (Loan authorization)....         (380,000)         (156,480)         (129,535)        (-250,465)         (-26,945)
        Grants/loans subsidy               49,441            31,049            51,941            +2,500           +20,892
         costs..................
 
    Local Television Loan
     Guarantee Program Account:
        (Loan authorization)....         (258,065)  ................  ................        (-258,065)  ................
        Direct loan subsidy.....           20,000   ................  ................          -20,000   ................
            Regular                         8,000   ................  ................           -8,000   ................
             appropriations
             (Public Law 107-
             206)...............
            Rescission (Public            -20,000   ................  ................          +20,000   ................
             Law 107-206).......
        LTLP administration                 2,000   ................  ................           -2,000   ................
         expenses (transfer to
         RD)....................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Local                     10,000   ................  ................          -10,000   ................
           Television Loan
           Program Account......
                                 =======================================================================================================================
          Total, Rural Utilities          107,985            84,624           107,926               -59           +23,302
           Service..............
              (Loan                    (5,378,614)       (3,272,612)       (5,870,282)        (+491,668)      (+2,597,670)
               authorization)...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
          Total, title III,             2,569,924         2,587,065         2,739,526          +169,602          +152,461
           Rural Economic and
           Community Development
           Programs.............
              (By transfer).....         (491,056)         (501,037)         (531,037)         (+39,981)         (+30,000)
              (Loan                    (9,917,597)       (7,251,890)       (9,857,422)         (-60,175)      (+2,605,532)
               authorization)...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
TITLE IV--DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
 
Office of the Under Secretary                 587               774               774              +187   ................
 for Food, Nutrition and
 Consumer Services..............
 
Food and Nutrition Service:
    Child nutrition programs....        4,914,288         5,382,179         5,830,506          +916,218          +448,327
        Transfer from section 32        5,172,458         5,193,990         4,745,663          -426,795          -448,327
        Discretionary spending..              500   ................            4,000            +3,500            +4,000
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Child nutrition       10,087,246        10,576,169        10,580,169          +492,923            +4,000
           programs.............
 
    Special supplemental                4,348,000         4,751,000         4,751,000          +403,000   ................
     nutrition program for
     women, infants, and
     children (WIC).............
        Emergency appropriations           39,000   ................  ................          -39,000   ................
         (Public Law 107-117)...
        Regular appropriations             75,000   ................  ................          -75,000   ................
         (Public Law 107-206)...
 
    Food stamp program:
        Expenses................       19,556,436        22,772,692        22,772,692        +3,216,256   ................
        Reserve.................        2,000,000         2,000,000         2,000,000   ................  ................
        Nutrition assistance for        1,335,550         1,377,000         1,377,000           +41,450   ................
         Puerto Rico and Samoa..
        The emergency food                100,000           100,000           140,000           +40,000           +40,000
         assistance program.....
        Rescission (Public Law            -24,000   ................  ................          +24,000   ................
         107-206)...............
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Food stamp            22,967,986        26,249,692        26,289,692        +3,321,706           +40,000
           program..............
 
    Commodity assistance program          152,813           144,991           167,000           +14,187           +22,009
        Rescission..............           -3,300   ................  ................           +3,300   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Commodity                149,513           144,991           167,000           +17,487           +22,009
           assistance program...
 
    Food donations programs:
        Needy family program....            1,081             1,081             1,081   ................  ................
        Elderly feeding program.          149,668   ................  ................         -149,668   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Food donations           150,749             1,081             1,081          -149,668   ................
           programs.............
 
    Food program administration.          127,546           147,944           136,865            +9,319           -11,079
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Food and Nutrition        37,945,040        41,870,877        41,925,807        +3,980,767           +54,930
       Service..................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, title IV, Domestic        37,945,627        41,871,651        41,926,581        +3,980,954           +54,930
       Food Programs............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
 TITLE V--FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND
        RELATED PROGRAMS
 
Foreign Agricultural Service:
    Salaries and expenses,                121,813           131,668           131,198            +9,385              -470
     direct appropriation.......
    (Transfer from export loans)           (3,224)           (3,224)           (3,224)  ................  ................
    (Transfer from Public Law              (1,033)           (1,033)           (1,033)  ................  ................
     480).......................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Program level......         (126,070)         (135,925)         (135,455)          (+9,385)            (-470)
                                 =======================================================================================================================
Public Law 480 Program and Grant
 Accounts:
    Program account:
        Loan authorization,              (154,664)         (131,676)         (154,664)  ................         (+22,988)
         direct.................

[[Page 626]]

 
        Loan subsidies..........          126,409            98,904           116,171           -10,238           +17,267
        Ocean freight                      20,277            28,000            25,159            +4,882            -2,841
         differential grants....
 
    Title II--Commodities for
     disposition abroad:
        Program level...........         (850,000)       (1,185,000)       (1,185,000)        (+335,000)  ................
        Appropriation...........          850,000         1,185,000         1,185,000          +335,000   ................
 
    Salaries and expenses:
        Foreign Agricultural                1,033             1,033             1,033   ................  ................
         Service (transfer to
         FAS)...................
        Farm Service Agency                   972             1,026             1,026               +54   ................
         (transfer to FSA)......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal..............            2,005             2,059             2,059               +54   ................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Public Law 480:
          Program level.........         (850,000)       (1,185,000)       (1,185,000)        (+335,000)  ................
          Appropriation.........          998,691         1,313,963         1,328,389          +329,698           +14,426
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
CCC Export Loans Program Account
 (administrative expenses):
    Salaries and expenses
     (Export Loans):
        General Sales Manager               3,224             3,224             3,224   ................  ................
         (transfer to FAS)......
        Farm Service Agency                   790               834               834               +44   ................
         (transfer to FSA)......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, CCC Export                 4,014             4,058             4,058               +44   ................
           Loans Program Account
                                 =======================================================================================================================
          Total, title V,               1,124,518         1,449,689         1,463,645          +339,127           +13,956
           Foreign Assistance
           and Related Programs.
              (By transfer).....           (4,257)           (4,257)           (4,257)  ................  ................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 TITLE VI--RELATED AGENCIES AND
  FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
 
 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
            SERVICES
 
  Food and Drug Administration
 
Salaries and expenses, direct           1,183,670         1,369,385         1,383,505          +199,835           +14,120
 appropriation..................
    Emergency appropriations              151,100   ................  ................         -151,100   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    Prescription drug user fee           (161,716)         (264,220)         (222,900)         (+61,184)         (-41,320)
     act........................
    Medical device user fee act.  ................  ................          (25,125)         (+25,125)         (+25,125)
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..................       (1,496,486)       (1,633,605)       (1,631,530)        (+135,044)          (-2,075)
    Mammography clinics user fee          (15,590)          (16,612)          (16,112)            (+522)            (-500)
     (outlay savings)...........
    Export certification........           (6,181)           (6,378)           (6,378)            (+197)  ................
    Payments to GSA.............         (105,116)          (98,556)          (98,556)          (-6,560)  ................
 
Buildings and facilities........           34,281             8,000            11,000           -23,281            +3,000
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Direct                     1,369,051         1,377,385         1,394,505           +25,454           +17,120
       appropriations FDA.......
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
      INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
 
Commodity Futures Trading                  70,700            79,884            93,985           +23,285           +14,101
 Commission.....................
    Emergency appropriations               16,900   ................  ................          -16,900   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    Transaction fee (proposed)..  ................          -33,000   ................  ................          +33,000
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Commodity Futures             87,600            46,884            93,985            +6,385           +47,101
       Trading Commission.......
 
Farm Credit Administration                (36,700)          (36,700)          (38,404)          (+1,704)          (+1,704)
 (limitation on administrative
 expenses)......................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, title VI, Related          1,456,651         1,424,269         1,488,490           +31,839           +64,221
       Agencies and Food and
       Drug Administration......
                                 =======================================================================================================================
  TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
 
Hunger fellowships..............            2,496   ................            2,496   ................           +2,496
National Sheep Industry                     1,000   ................  ................           -1,000   ................
 Improvement Center revolving
 fund...........................
Limit crop insurance education..           -6,000   ................  ................           +6,000   ................
Mallard Pointe conservation.....              150   ................  ................             -150   ................
Jamestown conservation..........              250   ................  ................             -250   ................
Child and adult care feeding               10,000   ................           22,000           +12,000           +22,000
 program........................
CCC Apple market loss...........           75,000   ................  ................          -75,000   ................
Dairy price support extension...           15,000   ................  ................          -15,000   ................
Sugar beets.....................            5,000   ................  ................           -5,000   ................
Tobacco.........................            5,000   ................  ................           -5,000   ................
Summer Food Service program.....  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Youth organizations.............  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Telework........................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Rural clean water program         ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 (rescission)...................
Export enhancement program (sec.         -445,000   ................  ................         +445,000   ................
 101) (Public Law 107-206)......
Agriculture assistance (Public             10,000   ................  ................          -10,000   ................
 Law 107-206)...................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, title VII, General          -327,104   ................           24,496          +351,600           +24,496
       provisions...............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Grand total:
          New budget                   73,078,443        73,530,625        74,201,068        +1,122,625          +670,443
           (obligational)
           authority............
              Appropriations....      (72,590,743)      (73,530,625)      (74,201,068)      (+1,610,325)        (+670,443)
              Rescission........         (-47,300)  ................  ................         (+47,300)  ................
              Emergency                   535,000   ................  ................         -535,000   ................
               appropriations...
          (By transfer).........         (769,670)         (786,330)         (816,330)         (+46,660)         (+30,000)
          (Loan authorization)..      (13,962,986)      (11,185,566)      (14,077,811)        (+114,825)      (+2,892,245)
          (Limitation on                 (144,759)         (145,782)         (147,486)          (+2,727)          (+1,704)
           administrative
           expenses)............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
         RECAPITULATION
 
Title I--Agricultural programs..       29,252,688        25,197,007        25,521,466        -3,731,222          +324,459
    Mandatory...................      (23,193,095)      (19,186,010)      (19,186,010)      (-4,007,085)  ................
    Discretionary...............       (6,059,593)       (6,010,997)       (6,335,456)        (+275,863)        (+324,459)
Title II--Conservation programs         1,056,139         1,000,944         1,036,864           -19,275           +35,920
 (discretionary)................
 
Title III--Rural economic and           2,569,924         2,587,065         2,739,526          +169,602          +152,461
 community development programs
 (discretionary)................
 
Title IV--Domestic food programs       37,945,627        41,871,651        41,926,581        +3,980,954           +54,930
 (discretionary)................
    Mandatory...................      (33,078,732)      (36,825,861)      (36,865,861)      (+3,787,129)         (+40,000)

[[Page 627]]

 
    Discretionary...............       (4,866,895)       (5,045,790)       (5,060,720)        (+193,825)         (+14,930)
Title V--Foreign assistance and         1,124,518         1,449,689         1,463,645          +339,127           +13,956
 related programs
 (discretionary)................
 
Title VI--Related agencies and          1,456,651         1,424,269         1,488,490           +31,839           +64,221
 Food and Drug Administration
 (discretionary)................
 
Title VII--General provisions            -327,104   ................           24,496          +351,600           +24,496
 (discretionary)................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, new budget                73,078,443        73,530,625        74,201,068        +1,122,625          +670,443
       (obligational) authority.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\In addition to appropriation.

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED 
                   AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

    Mr. Gregg, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, 
     Justice, and State, the judiciary, and related agencies for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other 
     purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the 
     bill do pass.


             Amount in new budget (obligational) authority

Total bill as reported to Senate........................$47,067,043,000
Amount of appropriations, 2002...........................44,601,829,000
Amount of budget estimates, 2003, as amended.............44,007,407,000
The bill as reported to the Senate:
  Above the appropriations for 2002........................+330,214,000
  Above the estimates for 2003.............................+924,636,000

                               BACKGROUND

                          Purpose of the Bill

       This bill makes appropriations for the functions of the 
     Departments of Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary and 
     Related Agencies for the period October 1, 2002, through 
     September 30, 2003. Functional areas include the pay, 
     allowances, and support of personnel, operation and 
     maintenance, procurement of equipment and systems, and 
     research.
       The bill provides funds for responding to the threat of 
     terrorism, fighting crime, enhancing drug enforcement, 
     addressing the shortcomings of the immigration process, 
     continuing the judicial process, conducting commerce within 
     the United States, improving State Department operations, and 
     fullfilling the needs of various independent agencies.

                                Hearings

       The Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations began hearings on the 
     fiscal year 2003 budget request on February 26, 2002, and 
     concluded them on March 21, 2002, after holding 7 separate 
     sessions. The subcommittee heard testimony from 
     representatives of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, 
     State, the Judiciary, and various commissions.

                          Summary of the Bill

       The budget estimates for the departments and agencies 
     included in the accompanying bill are contained in the budget 
     of the United States for fiscal year 2003 submitted on 
     January 30, 2002.
       The total amount of new budget authority recommended by the 
     Committee for fiscal year 2003 is $44,932,043,000. This 
     amount is an increase of $330,214,000 above appropriations 
     enacted for fiscal year 2002 for these departments and 
     agencies. The Committee recommendation is $924,636,000 above 
     the budget estimates. The following paragraphs highlight 
     major themes contained in this bill:


             FIGHTING TERROR AT ITS ROOTS THROUGH DEMOCRACY

       The Committee has responded to the threat of terrorism by 
     reinforcing the Nation's preparedness and response 
     capabilities. However, this threat also requires a long term 
     response that addresses the root causes of terrorism. The 
     United States can begin to do this by supporting 
     organizations that work to bring democracy to countries that 
     suffer under authoritarian regimes. Together with our allies, 
     we must work to ensure peaceful and stable political and 
     economic transitions in the troubled areas of the Middle 
     East, Africa, South and Central Asia, and other regions where 
     terrorism has flourished over the last decade. Our ultimate 
     goal must be greater than mere regime-change. It must be for 
     democratic principles to win the hearts and minds of all 
     those who have never experienced democracy. We cannot do this 
     unless we are willing to commit resources to fostering more 
     open political systems, more transparent and effective 
     governments and legal systems, more engaged and responsible 
     civil societies, and open markets. The recommendation 
     therefore includes initial funding to establish a center in 
     Turkey, the mission of which will be to promote mutual 
     understanding between the Muslim nations of the world and the 
     West. The recommendation also includes substantial increases 
     for certain U.S.-based non-profit organizations to augment 
     their work in critical parts of the world, particularly the 
     Middle East. In addition to the pioneering work of such 
     independent organizations, the Department of State has a role 
     to play in altering inaccurate perceptions of the United 
     States. From direct U.S. assistance, which does not fall 
     under this Committee's jurisdiction, to public diplomacy, 
     which does, the Committee understands that the Department is 
     developing a strategy to address the root causes of 
     terrorism. The Committee looks forward to working with the 
     State Department to engineer and execute this strategy.


                     PROTECTING AMERICA'S CHILDREN

       The Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary 
     appropriations bill is the natural home of programs that keep 
     our children safe. Programs such as the Safe Schools 
     Initiative and Cops In Schools have for years enhanced the 
     physical security of schools while creating a rapport between 
     law enforcement officials and youths. Coupled with anti-drug, 
     youth violence, and after-school programs, these initiatives 
     have improved the condition of America's at-risk youth. This 
     year, the Committee expanded the concept of protecting our 
     children to include training School Resource Officers to 
     prevent and deter acts of terrorism. September 11 
     demonstrated that terrorists are in constant search of new 
     ways to harm the United States. We cannot ignore the 
     disturbing reality that our schools could be targeted. The 
     bill therefore includes a $10,000,000 ``down payment'' for 
     schools to begin taking steps to prepare for this 
     contingency. The threat to American children does not end at 
     U.S. borders, however, and the Committee has begun an 
     initiative under the State Department to enhance the security 
     of schools attended by American children overseas.


                       REFORMING THE INS AND FBI

       Perhaps no agencies face greater challenges in the wake of 
     September 11 than the Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI] 
     and the Immigration and Naturalization Service [INS]. Both 
     agencies awoke that dreadful day in the midst of the greatest 
     internal crises in their respective histories. Years of 
     mismanagement, neglect, and confusion left otherwise 
     dedicated professionals ill-equipped and ill-prepared for the 
     daily challenges of enforcing the Nation's criminal and 
     immigration laws, much less deal with a security catastrophe 
     that many liken to the attack on Pearl Harbor. ``What is to 
     be done?'' is the question on everyone's lips and there are 
     as many answers as there are observers. After appropriating 
     more than $1,200,000,000 in emergency spending to the FBI and 
     INS, it is unclear what improvements, if any, have been 
     achieved in their domestic security posture. The Committee 
     recommendation for the FBI and the INS provides an 
     opportunity for both agencies to reflect, regroup, and 
     refocus in anticipation of the fiscal year 2004 budget 
     request.


                    CONTINUED UNITED NATIONS REFORM

       At the insistence of the United States, the United Nations 
     [U.N.] has undertaken significant management and budgetary 
     reforms. But the fulfillment of Helms-Biden does not mean the 
     United Nations can revert to its old ways. The U.N. now faces 
     an even greater challenge: to sustain and build upon the 
     positive reforms that have occurred over the last few years. 
     Only by moving forward with an aggressive reform agenda--
     continually

[[Page 628]]

     updating the organization's budget practices, improving 
     internal oversight, and containing unnecessary growth in the 
     U.N. bureaucracy--will the U.N. be able to meet the demands 
     of a rapidly-changing global security environment. The 
     Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary appropriations 
     bill provides an opportunity for the American people, who pay 
     one-quarter of the U.N.'s annual operating costs, to demand 
     the continued improvement and reform of U.N. operations. The 
     Committee acknowledges the importance of this task, and looks 
     forward to working with the U.N. towards our common goals.


                       Protecting small investors

       From the events of September 11, 2001 to the recent major 
     accounting scandals and subsequent demise of multiple 
     nationally recognized corporations, the confidence of U.S. 
     small investors in the integrity and fairness of our Nation's 
     securities industry and markets has been shaken severely. 
     Small investors have lost billions of dollars in their 
     retirement accounts, college funds, and portfolios. At the 
     same time, they have had to endure the spectacle of those 
     corporate executives with whom they entrusted their life 
     savings skirt their corporate responsibilities and enrich 
     themselves at the expense of shareholders. In addition, small 
     investors have begun to learn more about the mixed and often 
     conflicting incentives analysts face when making stock 
     recommendations.
       In response to these challenges and the need to revive the 
     faith of small investors, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $656,700,000 for the U.S. Securities and 
     Exchange Commission [SEC] for fiscal year 2003. This amount 
     will allow the SEC to hire at least 700 new staff to assist 
     in pursuing corporate malfeasance and financial fraud, 
     require enhanced public disclosure by corporations and stock 
     analysts, expand its examination and inspection program, and 
     continue working on market structure issues. This amount will 
     also allow the SEC to develop a robust electronic document 
     management system that will increase staff productivity while 
     decreasing the SEC's reliance on paper documents. In 
     addition, at this funding level the Committee expects that 
     the SEC will begin addressing its backlog of information 
     technology needs so that staff can begin performing more in-
     depth analytical reviews. The Committee believes that by 
     providing the SEC with this funding increase, the SEC will be 
     able to begin reinforcing and strengthening the foundation 
     upon which the confidence of America's small investors and 
     the entire investing public is built.


            REPROGRAMMINGS, REORGANIZATIONS, AND RELOCATIONS

       As in previous years, the Committee is inserting section 
     605 under title VI of the general provisions of the bill.
       The Committee directs that both the House and Senate 
     chairmen of the Subcommittees on the Departments of Commerce, 
     Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies will 
     be notified by letter at least 15 days prior to:
       --Reprogramming of funds, whether permanent or temporary, 
         in excess of $500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, 
         between programs or activities. In addition, the 
         Committee desires to be notified of reprogramming actions 
         which are less than these amounts if such actions would 
         have the effect of committing the agency to significant 
         funding requirements in future years;
       --Increasing funds or personnel by any means for any 
         project or activity for which funds have been denied or 
         restricted;
       --Creating new programs, offices, agencies, or commissions, 
         or substantially augmenting existing programs, offices, 
         agencies, or commissions;
       --Relocating offices or employees;
       --Reorganizing offices, programs, or activities, including 
         consolidations, expansions, and changes in names or 
         designations;
       --Contracting out or privatizing any functions or 
         activities presently performed by Federal employees 
         funded by this subcommittee;
       --Initiating construction projects in excess of $500,000 
         not specifically approved by the Committee; and
       --Adding, expanding, converting, or altering of space in 
         any newly constructed facility for a period of one year 
         after contract close-out of the new facility.
       For the purpose of this section, a construction project 
     includes all cost activities necessary to produce a complete 
     and usable facility. Projects include construction, addition, 
     expansion, conversion, or acquisition of an existing 
     building, land, or structure. This limitation applies to the 
     total cost of the project without regard for the fiscal year 
     that funds designated, or used, for the project were 
     appropriated. This includes renovation projects which 
     substantially expand or result in a change in the type of 
     space or facility (garage to office, storage to garage, 
     storage to office, etc.). This includes construction 
     involving more than one building or structure or utility 
     system or site improvements at a location which support the 
     provision of a complete and usable facility.
       The Committee directs each department, commission, or 
     agency to provide their current number of political 
     appointees and the number as of January 30, 2003. These 
     amounts should be broken out by pay level. This report should 
     be provided to the Committees on Appropriations no later than 
     April 10, 2003. Also the Committee shall be notified, when 
     the number of political appointees rises above 10 percent 
     from either of the previous 2 years or when five or more 
     political appointees are added in a given year. The Committee 
     should be notified 30 days before either of these situations 
     occurs. Similar notification should be provided when the same 
     number of personnel positions is converted from political 
     appointments to civil service positions.
       In addition, the Committee directs departments or agencies 
     funded in the accompanying bill that are planning to conduct 
     a reduction in force to notify the Committees by letter 30 
     days in advance of the date of the proposed personnel action. 
     Also, the Committee directs that any items which are subject 
     to interpretation will be reported.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal to 
     charge to individual agencies, starting in fiscal year 2003, 
     the fully accrued costs related to retirement benefits of 
     Civil Service Retirement System employees and retiree health 
     benefits for all civilian employees. The Budget also 
     requested an additional dollar amount in each affected 
     discretionary account to cover these accrued costs.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee has reduced the dollar 
     amounts of the President's request shown in the ``Comparative 
     Statement of New Budget Authority Request and Amounts 
     Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in other tables in this 
     report, to exclude the accrual funding proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget [OMB] decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. In the future, long-established 
     procedures, with respect to discretionary spending proposals 
     that require legislative action, should be followed.
       Proper budgeting.--The Committee is aware that it is 
     routine practice at the Office of Management & Budget [OMB] 
     to non-recur capital investments and to force agencies to 
     seek operations and maintenance, repair, and modernization 
     funds as program increases rather than adjustments to base. 
     The result, seen again and again by the Committee, is that 
     new investments quickly degrade, leading to a costly and 
     inefficient ``collapse-crisis-rebuild'' cycle for computer 
     and communications networks, specialized equipment, vehicles, 
     and facilities. The Committee, as the agent for the taxpayer, 
     has made substantial capital investments in the Departments 
     of Justice, Commerce, and State in the last 6 years. The 
     Committee intends to protect that investment and expects the 
     agencies to do the same. Therefore, the Committee urges OMB 
     to properly recur capital investments in the fiscal year 2004 
     budget request and thereafter.
       Liaison.--The Committee shares the desire of the House to 
     channel most of its inquiries and requests for information 
     and assistance through the budget offices or comptroller 
     organizations, but reserves the right to call upon all 
     organizations throughout the agencies. The Committee 
     continues to stress the natural affinity between these 
     offices and the Appropriations Committee, which makes such a 
     relationship imperative.

                     TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

       The Committee has made funding for combating terrorism and 
     law enforcement the centerpiece of the fiscal year 2003 
     appropriations bill. The Committee recommends $24,059,727,000 
     in new budget (obligational) authority in the accompanying 
     bill for the Department of Justice with a strong emphasis on 
     combating terrorism and law enforcement activities for fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Modular cost budgeting and chronic shortfalls.--Built into 
     the cost of every new Justice Department employee are funds 
     to partially cover so-called ``modular costs'', the costs of 
     equipment, vehicles, facilities, and training integral to an 
     employee's ability to perform his or her duty. Yet components 
     are, almost without exception, desperately short of 
     equipment, vehicles, facilities, and training. The reasons 
     for this are unclear. However, it seems apparent that the 
     modular

[[Page 629]]

     cost approach has lulled components into ignoring necessary 
     capital investments. It has also grossly inflated the cost of 
     new employees without commensurate benefit. Built-in capital 
     investment funds are siphoned off for purposes unknown while 
     the Committee finds itself responsible for pulling together 
     funds to address significant shortfalls in everything from 
     computers to fingerprint powder. The Committee believes that 
     the long-term health of the Department requires a new 
     approach to budgeting. Therefore, the Justice Department is 
     directed to drop modular cost budgeting beginning with the 
     fiscal year 2004 request. The costing of new employees shall 
     only include personnel salaries and benefits. Costs 
     associated with new hires characterized broadly as 
     ``Contractual Services and Supplies'', ``Acquisition of 
     Assets'', and ``Items with Multiple Object Classes'' shall be 
     budgeted directly in separate and identifiable capital 
     investment lines in the request of each component. Justice 
     Management Division is directed to submit a report on how 
     this was achieved not later than February 5, 2003. The 
     Committee recognizes that this report is required shortly 
     before the fiscal year 2004 President's budget request is 
     submitted to Congress. However, the intent of the Committee 
     was made known to the Department in July of 2002.
       Morale.--The Committee is aware that the Justice Department 
     intends to cap the reimbursement per employee for 
     professional liability insurance [PLI] at $50, a cut of up to 
     $65, due to ``budget shortfalls''. The Committee is unaware 
     of any shortfalls. PLI is all that may stand between a law 
     enforcement officer and his or her family and impoverishment 
     should the proper performance of his or her duties result in 
     a liability claim. The Committee can think of few things more 
     apt to demoralize line officers who confront split second 
     decisions every day. Regardless of other considerations, the 
     Justice Department is directed to reimburse employees for the 
     full amount policy allows for PLI. The Assistant Attorney 
     General for Administration is directed to issue a circular to 
     components to that effect and to confirm by letter, with 
     circular attached, to the Committees on Appropriations that 
     this directive has been implemented.
       Budget restructuring.--The Committee is perplexed by the 
     administration's pursuit of budget restructuring. Justice 
     Department components have shown such contempt for the 
     reprogramming process that reducing the number of decision 
     units per component to allow greater ``flexibility'' seems 
     entirely unnecessary. There have been so many violations of 
     section 605 of the fiscal year 2002 Commerce, Justice, State 
     Appropriations Act that there is not room enough to enumerate 
     them all. While the Attorney General's [AG's] December 9, 
     2002 memo and the Deputy Attorney General's December 10, 2002 
     memo regarding the reprogramming process are commendable, a 
     means of compelling agencies to follow established procedures 
     remains elusive. In the hopes of enforcing the AG's will, the 
     recommendation includes a variety of mechanisms that should 
     help promote the reprogramming process.

                         General Administration


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$91,668,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................114,579,000
Committee recommendation.....................................99,696,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $99,696,000. 
     The recommendation is $14,883,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay raise 
     for Federal employees.
       This account funds the development of policy objectives and 
     the overall management of the Department of Justice.
       Deputy Attorney General.--The Committee has concentrated 
     terrorism resources in the hands of the Attorney General with 
     some trepidation, knowing that day to day oversight of 
     terrorism operations will be left to the Office of the Deputy 
     Attorney General [ODAG]. Nine months ago, the Committee asked 
     the ODAG for a list of its responsibilities. That list was 
     provided just days before this report went to print. The 
     Committee remains concerned that the expansion of the ODAG's 
     ``chop authority'' will create a serious bottleneck at the 
     Justice Department. If the simplest administrative tasks take 
     the ODAG almost a year to address, the delays that will 
     result from the ODAG's assumption of control of terrorism 
     task forces will be significant. No more than $4,663,000 of 
     the amount provided under this heading may be made available 
     to the ODAG until that office demonstrates to the Committee's 
     satisfaction that it has organized itself to properly lead 
     the war on terrorism. Should such leadership be demonstrated, 
     the Committee will consider a reprogramming to further 
     bolster the ODAG's capabilities.
       Office of Intelligence Policy and Review.--The 
     unprecedented public dispute between the Foreign Intelligence 
     Surveillance Court and the Justice Department emphasizes the 
     need for the most robust oversight of the Foreign 
     Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA] warrant process. The 
     Committee expects the Office of Intelligence Policy and 
     Review [OIPR] to continue balancing Constitutional 
     protections against investigative imperatives. In that 
     capacity, the Committee expects OIPR to be directly involved 
     at every stage of every wiretap case. The Committee 
     recommendation provides an increase of $2,234,000 over fiscal 
     2002 to enhance OIPR oversight capabilities. OIPR is directed 
     to provide quarterly briefings to the Committees on 
     Appropriations beginning April 1, 2003 on FISA-related 
     activities, issues, compliance with Congressional directives, 
     perceived abuses, and needed statutory corrections.
       International Law Enforcement Training Academy/Mexico.--
     Language regarding the establishment of an International Law 
     Enforcement Training Academy [ILEA] in Mexico was included in 
     Public Law 107-77. Public Law 107-77 required the Attorney 
     General to submit a report on the feasibility of establishing 
     an ILEA--Mexico, including a timeline, cost analysis, and 
     implementation plan no later than May 12, 2002. While the 
     report, submitted on September 11, 2002, included 
     comprehensive sections on the background, objectives, program 
     strategy, and organization and administration of ILEAs, it 
     swiftly dismissed ILEA-Mexico as a possibility. The Committee 
     disagrees with the Attorney General's assessment that a 
     resort location would be better suited to host the ILEA and 
     directs the Department to submit a report to the Committees 
     on Appropriations no later than June 4, 2003, that includes a 
     cost estimate and timeline, for constructing ILEA--Mexico in 
     one of the following States: Chiapas, Durango, Oaxaca, or 
     Yucatan.
       Security Locks Initiative.--It is imperative for the 
     Justice Department to store classified materials securely and 
     in compliance with Federal security standard FF-L-2740A. The 
     recommendation includes $2,000,000 to upgrade security locks 
     to ensure the safety of such critical information.
       Continuity of Operations.--The collapse of local 
     communications networks in New York in the immediate wake of 
     the destruction of the World Trade Center highlighted the 
     value of a mobile situation room for maintaining continuity 
     of operations during a crisis. Though various components have 
     fixed situation rooms, palletized versions of deployable 
     command posts, or both, none have vehicle-based mobile 
     situation rooms that are both instantly deployable and remain 
     on-line, capable of command and control, from the moment of 
     departure to arrival and thereafter. Many crises will require 
     that the Attorney General or other high-level Justice 
     Department officials be on-site for the duration. A self-
     contained, self-sufficient, mobile command post offers 
     significant advantages over distant or ad hoc situation 
     rooms. The Committee is aware that the Department of Justice 
     has completed concept definition for such a vehicle. The 
     Committee endorses the concept, as currently defined, and 
     recommends $4,000,000 for design, development, and 
     procurement of a mobile situation room. The Committee expects 
     the vehicle to be universally available to the Department of 
     Justice component heads as needed. Crew positions should be 
     permanently filled by specialists from the various components 
     and ``gold'' and ``blue'' crews should train and deploy as a 
     team. The Committee also recommends that day to day care of 
     the vehicle when not deployed be left to the United States 
     Marshals Service.


                       Anti-Terrorism Task Forces

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation....................................$63,700,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $63,700,000.
       This new account funds Anti-Terrorism Task Forces [ATTFs].
       Previously, funding for ATTFs was provided under the 
     heading ``Salaries and Expenses, United States Attorneys''. 
     ATTFs are charged with facilitating information sharing 
     between Federal, State, and local authorities and 
     coordinating anti-terrorism activities within each judicial 
     district. The Committee believes that centralizing task force 
     funding under the Attorney General [AG] will ensure proper 
     operational control of ATTFs. The Committee expects to 
     receive regular updates from the AG on the activities of the 
     ATTFs.


                      Joint Terrorism Task Forces

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...................................$158,547,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $158,547,000.
       This new account funds Joint Terrorism Task Forces [JTTFs].
       Previously, funding for JTTFs was provided under the 
     headings ``Salaries and Expenses, United States Marshals 
     Service'', ``Federal Bureau of Investigation, Salaries and 
     Expenses'', and ``Immigration and Naturalization Service, 
     Salaries and Expenses, Enforcement and Border Affairs''. 
     JTTFs are charged with facilitating information sharing 
     between Federal, State, and local authorities and 
     coordinating terrorism investigations in more than 50 cities. 
     The Committee believes that centralizing task force funding 
     under the Attorney General [AG] will ensure proper 
     operational control of JTTFs. The Committee expects to 
     receive regular updates from the AG on the activities of the 
     JTTFs.

[[Page 630]]




                 Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$49,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................62,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $62,000,000.
       This new account funds the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task 
     Force [FTTTF]. The recommendation is $13,000,000 above the 
     amount requested in a budget amendment received November 14, 
     2002.
       Previously, funding for the FTTTF was provided under the 
     heading ``Immigration and Naturalization Service, Salaries 
     and Expenses, Enforcement and Border Affairs''. The FTTTF is 
     an inter-agency data fusion operation stood up on an ad hoc 
     basis last year. The FTTTF's advanced information technology 
     capabilities are intended to compensate for profound 
     shortcomings in Justice Department, particularly FBI and INS, 
     data warehousing, mining, and analysis capabilities. These 
     advanced networking capabilities are also intended to 
     eliminate the barriers that had led to past communications 
     and information sharing failures. Besides heavy Justice 
     Department participation, Treasury, State, DOD, CIA, NSA, 
     HHS, SSA, and OPM all have staff onboard. The FTTTF is 
     charged with denying terrorists entry into the United States 
     and locating, detaining, prosecuting, and deporting 
     terrorists that have already entered the country.
       Although described as a stop gap measure, it has become 
     clear that the FTTTF is at least a semi-permanent activity. 
     Its ultimate permanence will depend upon the degree that the 
     FTTTF is or is not duplicating existing or planned Justice 
     Department and Homeland Security operations, a persistent and 
     troubling concern that has yet to be resolved.
       The Committee believes that centralizing task force funding 
     under the Attorney General [AG] will ensure proper 
     operational control of the FTTTF. The Committee expects to 
     receive regular updates from the AG on the activities of 
     FTTTF.


                   Identification Systems Integration

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$24,478,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for this 
     new account. Instead, funding is provided in separate 
     accounts within this title.
       There are no advantages in merging funding for the Joint 
     Automated Booking System and Automated Biometric 
     Identification System/Integrated Automated Fingerprint 
     Identification System integration into a single account. 
     Historically, such mergers have hindered program progress and 
     complicated program oversight.


                     joint automated booking system

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................15,973,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,973,000.
       This account centrally funds development, acquisition, and 
     deployment of the Joint Automated Booking System [JABS].
       The Committee has not adopted an Administration proposal to 
     merge funding for JABS and Automated Biometric Identification 
     System/Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System 
     integration into a single new account.
       JABS incentive funds are to be distributed to the component 
     or components making the best progress in installing and 
     operating the system.


    Automated Biometric Identification System/Integrated Automated 
             Fingerprint Identification System Integration

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................$9,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,000,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request and to 
     last year's funding level, which included funding from 
     available resources within the Department.
       This new account funds integration of the Automated 
     Biometric Identification System and the Integrated Automated 
     Fingerprint Identification System [IDENT/IAFIS].
       Previously, funding for IDENT/IAFIS integration was 
     provided under the heading ``General Administration, Salaries 
     and Expenses''. The Committee has not adopted an 
     Administration proposal to merge funding for IDENT/IAFIS 
     integration and the Joint Automated Booking System into a 
     single account.
       There are considerable cost implications with this effort. 
     As the Inspector General noted in a December 2001 report, and 
     the Justice Department confirmed in March 2002 briefings, 
     procurement, and particularly operational, costs to the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service [INS] of an integrated 
     IDENT/IAFIS system could approach $1,900,000,000. This does 
     not include additional significant costs that indirectly 
     would be incurred by the Marshals Service, U.S. Attorneys, 
     Executive Office of Immigration Review, and Bureau of 
     Prisons. The Committee will have difficulty meeting these 
     cost requirements in the foreseeable future. Rather than 
     focusing on the relatively simple matter of integrating the 
     two systems, Justice must craft an affordable, comprehensive 
     plan that addresses border security throughout the 
     Department. Therefore, 25 percent of $8,000,000 provided 
     under this heading shall be available for obligation and 
     expenditure only after the Justice Management Division 
     delivers to the Committees on Appropriations a cost and 
     operational effectiveness analysis [COEA] for IDENT/IAFIS. 
     The COEA should cover all Justice Department costs, not just 
     those of the Border Patrol or the INS. The remaining 
     $1,000,000 shall be for a pilot program for software for 
     IAFIS that is capable of expedited background checks and that 
     is capable of 10-fingerprint to 2-fingerprint comparisons.


                                Chimera

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation....................................$83,400,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $83,400,000. 
     The recommendation is $83,400,000 above the budget request. 
     This request is identical to a requested Homeland Security 
     program increase under INS.
       This new account funds the design, development, testing, 
     and deployment of an interoperable computer network, 
     ``Chimera'', for the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
       INS suffers to an extreme from information technology [IT] 
     ``stovepiping''. Over the years, INS has developed a myriad 
     of independent systems to address specific needs or missions. 
     These systems tend not to replace, but serve as an adjunct 
     to, paper-driven processes. The systems have limited 
     capability and are rarely compatible either internally or 
     with other agencies. The significant amount of funds invested 
     in these systems have yielded little results.
       Chimera will be a common hardware/software backbone 
     deployed INS-wide. It will serve as the searchable, shareable 
     repository of data bases migrated from existing (``legacy'') 
     INS systems that are incompatible with one another and with 
     other law enforcement, State Department, and intelligence 
     community systems. It also will serve as the foundation for 
     student tracking and entry/exit applications.
       To start, JMD shall undertake a comprehensive survey of 
     existing INS IT systems to build a definitive baseline of 
     current capabilities and deficiencies. The design of 
     Chimera's architecture should build directly upon this 
     foundation.
       Prior to the release for obligation and expenditure of the 
     funds provided under this heading or ``Atlas'' funding 
     provided under the heading ``Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service, Salaries and Expenses'', JMD shall brief the 
     Committees on Appropriations on: (1) current INS IT systems 
     capabilities and shortcomings, (2) opportunities to leverage 
     technical solutions developed, or lessons learned, by other 
     Federal agencies and private industry, (3) program priorities 
     designed to maximize INS performance as quickly as possible, 
     and (4) projected schedule, with modular and measurable 
     milestones, and costs, by fiscal year. JMD shall also assess 
     the value of developing and testing a prototype integrated 
     database.


                   legal activities office automation

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,765,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................15,942,000
Committee recommendation.....................................77,127,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $77,127,000. 
     The recommendation is $61,185,000 above the budget request 
     and $42,527,000 more than the total amoumt provided last 
     year. The Committee has not adopted a recommendation to use 
     prior year funds and has instead appropriated the entire 
     amount sought for LAOA.
       This account centrally funds acquisition, deployment, and 
     maintenance of Legal Activities Office Automation [LAOA] 
     systems, the largest components of which are the Justice 
     Consolidated Network [JCN] and the Justice Consolidated 
     Office Network [JCON].
       LAOA is the computer modernization program for the legal 
     divisions, including the Antitrust Division, the U.S. 
     Attorneys, the U.S. Marshals Service, the U.S. Trustees, the 
     Executive Office for Immigration Review, the Community 
     Relations Service, and the offices funded through the 
     ``General Administration'' and ``General Legal Activities'' 
     accounts. The Committee has pushed hard in previous years to 
     increase the funds for, and widen the scope of, JCN and JCON 
     to maximize the benefits of a common computer system across 
     components. This year, the Committee recommendation 
     incorporates the Bureau of Prisons and Office of Justice 
     Programs into the network.


                       Narrowband Communications

Appropriations, 2002........................................$94,615,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................149,254,000
Committee recommendation....................................149,254,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $149,254,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request. The 
     recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for 
     Federal employees.

[[Page 631]]

       This account centrally funds development, acquisition, 
     deployment, and operation and maintenance of the Justice 
     Department's narrowband wireless communications network. By 
     law, all Justice components operating Land Mobile Radio 
     systems in the VHF band must convert by January 1, 2005.
       A number of critical development milestones should be 
     reached by March 2003, and the Committee expects the Wireless 
     Management Office to keep it fully apprised of program 
     progress.


                         Counterterrorism Fund

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,989,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the 
     ``Counterterrorism fund'' account. The recommendation is 
     identical to the request and $4,989,000 below the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation. The Committee is aware that there will be 
     carryover balances available in fiscal year 2003 in excess of 
     $43,000,000.
       The purpose of the fund is to cover the costs incurred in 
     reestablishing the operational capability of an office or 
     facility which has been damaged or destroyed as a result of 
     any domestic or international terrorist incident. It may also 
     be used to cover the costs of providing support to counter, 
     investigate, or prosecute domestic or international 
     terrorism.


                   Administrative Review and Appeals

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$177,147,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................193,535,000
Committee recommendation....................................180,466,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $180,466,000. 
     The recommendation is $13,069,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Executive Office for Immigration Review [EOIR] includes 
     the Board of Immigration Appeals, immigration judges, and 
     administrative law judges who decide through administrative 
     hearings whether to admit or exclude aliens seeking to enter 
     the country, and whether to deport or adjust the status of 
     aliens whose status has been challenged. This account also 
     funds the Office of the Pardon Attorney which receives, 
     investigates, and considers petitions for all forms of 
     executive clemency.


                           Detention Trustee

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,388,566,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,385,966,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,385,966,000. The recommendation is $2,600,000 below the 
     budget request.
       The Detention Trustee oversees Federal detainees.
       Last year, the Committee's recommendation for the Detention 
     Trustee included funding for the Justice Prisoner and Alien 
     Transportation System [JPATS] and requested that the Justice 
     Department include in its fiscal year 2003 budget request a 
     proposal to centralize all detention funding under the 
     Trustee. The Committee recommendation included that direction 
     because only with control of funding can the Detention 
     Trustee effectively oversee and manage detention. The 
     Committee is pleased that the budget request met the 
     Committee's recommendation last year to the extent that it 
     centralizes funding for the Federal Prisoner Detention 
     Program and the Immigration and Naturalization Service's 
     [INS] Service Processing Centers within the Department of 
     Justice Detention Trustee.
       However, while the Trustee has management responsibility 
     for detention, and finally has been given control of funding 
     for bed space, detention personnel still remain under the 
     control of the various components. Without control of 
     personnel, the Trustee will be forced to regularly contend 
     with Presidentially-appointed officials in the Marshals 
     Service [USMS], the INS, and the Bureau of Prisons [BoP] of 
     this or any future Administration who may disagree with his 
     ``guidance''. If the Trustee is to effectively manage bed 
     space, he must control the experts that negotiate inter-
     governmental agreements. Therefore, not later than 45 days 
     after enactment of this Act, the Justice Department is 
     directed to transfer such personnel from the USMS, INS, and 
     BoP to the Detention Trustee as may be necessary to give the 
     Trustee full operational control of bed space management. To 
     the degree possible, such transfers should be voluntary and 
     involve a minimum of disruption. Should said transfers not 
     occur by this date, the $1,870,000 provided under this 
     heading for additional management personnel shall immediately 
     be transferred to the Working Capital Fund.
       National clearinghouse for detention space.--The Committee 
     fully supports the notion of a one-stop shop for detention 
     space. Such a clearinghouse may be the only way to break the 
     current ``seller's market'' that has allowed local bed space 
     providers to charge excessive daily rates. The Committee 
     believes that existing Justice networks, such as Law 
     Enforcement Online, may serve as a vehicle for the 
     clearinghouse or that lessons learned in the FBI's Internet 
     cafe program may speed development of the clearinghouse. In 
     cooperation with the Justice Department's Chief Information 
     Officer, the Trustee is directed to pursue any and all cost-
     effective means of establishing the clearinghouse as rapidly 
     as possible. The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 
     for this effort. The Committee expects to be regularly 
     briefed on the Trustee's progress in making the clearinghouse 
     a reality.
       Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System.--The 
     Committee is disappointed by the Justice Department's failure 
     to make the Trustee the head of the JPATS. As the Committee 
     noted last year, endless disputes between JPATS ``customers'' 
     are distracting managers from the complex task of operating 
     an airline in a high security environment. As importantly, 
     the lack of a sufficiently powerful manager leaves the 
     program without an advocate in all-important budget debates. 
     The result is a wide-body fleet in such a ruinous condition 
     that only the dedication of the maintenance personnel and 
     pilots keep these aircraft in the air. These problems leave 
     managers little time to explore possible efficiencies in 
     routing, scheduling, or other operational areas. The 
     Department's proposed solution, out-sourcing, fails to 
     address the real issues affecting JPATS and is unacceptable 
     except on a carefully limited, piecemeal basis. There should 
     be no confusion that ultimate responsibility for the safe and 
     secure transportation of prisoners rests solely with the 
     Justice Department. That being so, the Trustee is directed to 
     assume control of JPATS operations not later than May 1, 
     2003. The Committee will consider a reprogramming request to 
     fund a business process re-engineering study after the 
     Trustee has taken over JPATS and after the immediate need to 
     replace aging wide-body aircraft has been fully addressed.


                      Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$50,735,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................63,937,000
Committee recommendation.....................................54,825,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,825,000. 
     The recommendation is $9,112,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
     $3,000,000 for 3 attorneys, 10 agents, and 12 auditors or 
     program analysts to provide effective oversight of the 
     Department's counterterrorism program. As the Inspector 
     General [IG] noted in his budget justification, the 
     Department's Strategic Plan for 2001-2006 ``notes the 
     significant management challenge facing the Department as it 
     seeks to effectively manage its counterterrorism program and 
     avoid potential gaps in coverage or duplicate services 
     provided by state and local governments. In addition, the 
     infusion of billions of dollars into the Department's efforts 
     to combat terrorism presents its own set of challenges.'' The 
     Committee concurs with the judgment of the IG and looks 
     forward to regular progress reports.

                         U.S. Parole Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$9,876,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,862,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,114,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,114,000. 
     The recommendation is $748,000 below the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Commission is an independent body within the Department 
     of Justice which makes decisions regarding requests for 
     parole and supervision of Federal prisoners.

                            Legal Activities


                        general legal activities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$561,676,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................645,299,000
Committee recommendation....................................537,502,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $537,502,000. 
     The recommendation is $107,797,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes, within available 
     resources, a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for Federal 
     employees.
       This appropriation funds the establishment of litigation 
     policy, conduct of litigation, and various other legal 
     responsibilities, through the Office of the Solicitor 
     General, the Tax Division, the Criminal Division, the Civil 
     Division, the Environmental and Natural Resources Division, 
     the Civil Rights Division, the Office of Legal Counsel, and 
     Interpol.
       The Committee recommendations, by division, are displayed 
     in the following table:


                            Legal Divisions

Office of the Solicitor General..............................$7,130,000
Tax Division.................................................72,142,000
Criminal Division...........................................116,895,000
Civil Division..............................................156,797,000
Environment & Natural Resources Division.....................70,303,000
Office of Legal Counsel.......................................4,928,000

[[Page 632]]

Civil Rights Division........................................91,963,000
Interpol USNCB................................................7,679,000
Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Administration............1,996,000
Courtroom Technology..........................................5,200,000
Office of Dispute Resolution....................................319,000
Automated Litigation Support..................................2,150,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total...................................................537,502,000

       Professional standards.--The more than 10,000 Justice 
     Department attorneys making up the class suing the Justice 
     Department for nearly $500,000,000 in unpaid overtime 
     recently prevailed in their suit. Thus, some of the highest 
     paid employees in the Federal service, with an average salary 
     of more than $104,000, will now receive benefits heretofore 
     limited to hourly wage employees. The Committee 
     recommendation includes provisions designed to address 
     attorney working conditions and the manner in which the 
     expected judgment will be paid.
       Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Administrative 
     Expenses.--The recommendation includes $1,996,000 for the 
     administrative expenses associated with the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Act [RECA], previously funded under a 
     separate account. The Committee expects that additional 
     resources required to process RECA will be absorbed from 
     within other resources available to the Civil Division. This 
     program was established to permit the payment of claims to 
     individuals exposed to radiation as a result of atmospheric 
     nuclear tests and uranium mining in accordance with the 
     Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990.
       Courtroom technology.--To further enhance the presentation 
     of evidence, as well as rapidly accelerate the pace of 
     trials, the Committee recommendation provides $5,200,000 for 
     courtroom technology to be distributed among the divisions on 
     the basis of need.


               the national childhood vaccine injury act

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,028,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,028,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,028,000

       The Committee recommends a reimbursement of $4,028,000 for 
     legal costs. The recommendation is identical to the fiscal 
     year 2002 funding level and the budget request.
       This account covers Justice Department expenses associated 
     with litigating cases under the National Childhood Vaccine 
     Injury Act of 1986.

                           Antitrust Division


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$130,791,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................137,799,000
Committee recommendation....................................133,133,000

       The Committee recommendation assumes a total of 
     $133,133,000 in budget (obligational) authority. The 
     recommendation is $4,666,000 below the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Antitrust Division investigates potential violations of 
     Federal antitrust laws, represents the interests of the 
     United States in cases brought under these laws, acts on 
     antitrust cases before the Supreme Court, and reviews 
     decisions of regulatory commissions relating to antitrust 
     law.

                             U.S. Attorneys

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,403,338,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,506,373,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,320,160,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,320,160,000. The recommendation is $186,213,000 below the 
     budget request. The Committee recommendation includes, within 
     available resources, a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for Federal 
     employees. Some of the reduction from the request is 
     attributable to the transfer of Anti-Terrorism Task Forces 
     from the U.S. Attorneys to the Attorney General. The 
     Committee is aware that the U.S. Attorneys will receive 
     $91,993,000 in reimbursements in fiscal year 2003.
       This account supports the Executive Office for U.S. 
     Attorneys [EOUSA] and the 94 U.S. attorneys offices 
     throughout the United States and its territories. The U.S. 
     attorneys serve as the principal litigators for the U.S. 
     Government for criminal and civil matters. As in the past, 
     Committee recommendations focus the efforts of the U.S. 
     Attorneys on those crimes where the unique resources, 
     expertise, or jurisdiction of the Federal Government can, or 
     must, be most effective.
       Professional standards.--The more than 10,000 Justice 
     Department attorneys making up the class that sued the 
     Justice Department for nearly $500,000,000 in unpaid overtime 
     recently prevailed in their case. Thus, some of the highest 
     paid employees in the Federal service, with an average salary 
     of more than $104,000, will now receive benefits heretofore 
     limited to hourly wage employees. The Committee 
     recommendation includes provisions designed to address 
     attorney working conditions and the manner in which the 
     expected judgment will be paid.
       IT Infrastructure.--The Committee recommends a total of 
     $8,000,000 for the third and final phase of the overall 
     telecommunications convergence initiative to implement 
     Internet Protocol [IP] Technology. These funds will allow the 
     U.S. Attorneys to improve performance, reliability, capacity, 
     efficiency and security of the U.S. Attorneys' infrastructure 
     by securely converging data, video, and voice transport over 
     a single IP network.
       Fundamental Reform.--Last year, in an attempt to fix the 
     U.S. Attorneys' resource allocation process, the Committee 
     waived all previous congressional guidance to the U.S. 
     Attorneys regarding initiatives and the designation of funds. 
     In addition, the Committee requested that the EOUSA submit a 
     report to the Committees on Appropriations on these proposed 
     reforms no later than March 17, 2002. While the submitted 
     report included a number of activities currently underway by 
     EOUSA to determine whether the resource allocation process 
     places attorneys where the workload demand dictates and where 
     productive use of the resources is assured, the report 
     provided no specific information about the implementation of 
     actual reform. The Committee therefore requests the EOUSA to 
     submit an updated status report on actions planned or taken 
     for actual reform to the Committees on Appropriations not 
     later than May 15, 2003.
       Anti-Terrorism Task Forces.--Though the Committee remains 
     somewhat perplexed by the establishment of Anti-Terrorism and 
     Joint Terrorism Task Forces [ATTFs/JTTFs] in the same 
     judicial districts, the Committee is willing to give the 
     administration the benefit of the doubt for now. However, the 
     Committee believes that only the Attorney General [AG] can 
     properly coordinate the activities of ATTFs and JTTFs. 
     Therefore, funding for ATTFs has been transferred from this 
     account to a new separate account under the direct control of 
     the AG. The AG is directed to submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations a master plan outlining the planned activities 
     of ATTFs, JTTFs, and the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task 
     Force for fiscal year 2003 not later than March 1, 2003.
       Civil Defensive Litigation.--In light of the recent waiver 
     of congressional designations of caseloads, the Committee 
     does not recommend including additional resources 
     specifically for civil defensive litigation. Rather, the 
     Committee recommends an increase in the number of authorized 
     positions and full-time equivalent workyears for the U.S. 
     Attorneys. With this increase, the U.S. Attorneys may 
     allocate resources as needed to better address the 
     significant increase and complexity of cases in civil 
     defensive litigation over the last several years.
       Courtroom technology.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides $5,000,000 for additional personnel, equipment, and 
     training to support courtroom technology activities.
       Cyber Crime and Intellectual Property Enforcement.--The 
     U.S. Attorneys, in cooperation with the U.S. Customs Service, 
     shall report to the Committee not later than April 30, 2003 
     on the number of copyright law investigations and 
     prosecutions undertaken in the preceding year, including 
     those under Public Law 105-147, by type and location.
       Port Security Pilot Project.--The Committee remains 
     concerned about security at U.S. seaports. The potential for 
     crew members, passengers, and dangerous cargo to illegally 
     enter the country and pose a threat to the country's security 
     remains a harsh reality. The recommendation therefore 
     includes $20,000,000 for four pilot projects to enhance 
     security at our Nation's ports. Each of the pilot projects 
     shall be coordinated under an ATTF and shall include Federal, 
     State, and local law enforcement.
       Legal education.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $18,842,000 for legal education and distance learning at the 
     National Advocacy Center [NAC] as requested by the 
     Administration. If merited, the NAC may expand or include 
     antiterrorism and cybercrime classes. Also, the Committee 
     includes an additional $6,000,000 to acquire, upgrade, and 
     equip space from the University of South Carolina to expand, 
     among other things, distance learning capabilities at the 
     NAC. NAC State and local training funds are provided under 
     the Office of Justice Programs.
       Violent crime task forces.--The Committee recommends an 
     additional $1,000,000 within available resources to continue 
     and expand task force activities associated with Operation 
     Streetsweeper.


                        U.S. trustee system fund

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$147,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................167,510,000
Committee recommendation....................................150,381,000

       The Committee recommends a total of $150,381,000 in budget 
     authority. The recommendation is $17,129,000 below the budget 
     request. The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent 
     pay adjustment for Federal employees.
       The U.S. trustee system provides administrative support to 
     expeditiously move bankruptcy cases through the bankruptcy 
     process and ensures accountability of private trustees 
     appointed to administer bankruptcy estates.
       The Committee recommendation includes not less than 
     $750,000 for the Bankruptcy Training Center at the National 
     Advocacy Center, in support of the Trustees' continuing 
     education program.

[[Page 633]]




                  foreign claims settlement commission

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,136,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,136,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,136,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,136,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level and the budget request and fully provides for 
     the adjudication of claims against: Germany relating to World 
     War II; Cuba relating to the Castro regime; and Iraq relating 
     to the U.S.S. Stark incident and Desert Shield/Storm.
       The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission settles claims of 
     American citizens arising from nationalization, 
     expropriation, or other takings of their properties and 
     interests by foreign governments.

                         U.S. Marshals Service

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$643,896,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................700,343,000
Committee recommendation....................................673,146,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $673,146,000. 
     The recommendation is $27,197,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The U.S. Marshals Service [USMS] is responsible for the 
     apprehension of fugitives, protection of the Federal 
     judiciary, protection of witnesses, execution of warrants and 
     court orders, and the custody and transportation of accused 
     and unsentenced prisoners.
       The Committee recommendations are displayed in the 
     following table:


                     United States Marshals Service

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Prisoner moves..................................................30,754 
  JPATS.........................................................26,954 
  All other......................................................3,800 
Special assignments.............................................10,015 
  Judicial security..............................................4,800 
    High threat trials...........................................3,400 
    Judicial conferences...........................................400 
    All Other Judicial Protection................................1,000 
  Investigative services.........................................3,715 
    15 Most Wanted.................................................100 
    Major case fugitives...........................................300 
    International offices........................................1,415 
    Task forces....................................................400 
    Extraditions...................................................900 
    Witness security...............................................600 
  All other......................................................1,500 
    Demonstrations...............................................1,000 
    Unforeseeable requirements.....................................500 
District operating expenses.....................................29,507 
  Operations....................................................23,407 
    Perimeter security (NY)......................................3,900 
    Protection details (NY)......................................2,000 
    Deputy Attorney General detail.................................500 
    Travel.......................................................2,200 
    Supplies.....................................................5,700 
    Equipment rentals..............................................600 
    Equipment (fuel, ammunition, safety & technical).............2,207 
    Awards/overtime..............................................1,600 
    Communications...............................................2,400 
    Services.....................................................2,300 
  Guards & temporary personnel...................................6,100 
Agency-wide support.............................................46,798 
  Telecommunication & IT........................................20,064 
    Telephones...................................................9,500 
    Information technology......................................10,564 
  Equipment, maintenance & miscellany............................7,922 
    Rentals of copiers/fax.......................................1,100 
    Meter mail, publishing/distribution, warehouse services......2,100 
    Building maintenance (moves, locks)............................500 
    Field support:
      Safes/gun lockers............................................500 
      Hand/leg cuffs...............................................722 
    Financial systems--contract support............................500 
    Financial systems support costs..............................1,400 
    Transit subsidy................................................300 
    Medical exams/operational personnel............................100 
    Background investigations......................................700 
  Vehicles......................................................10,424 
  Permanent change of station....................................3,338 
  Training academy & training....................................5,050 
Headquarters operating expenses.................................22,904 
  Consumables....................................................7,806 
    Travel.......................................................1,368 
    Office supplies/uniforms.....................................1,089 
    Equipment/equip. rentals.......................................991 
    Fuel............................................................50 
    Ammunition......................................................20 
    Safety/technical equipment.....................................160 
    Technical/investigatory equipment..............................120 
    Overtime.......................................................571 
    Awards.........................................................792 
    Communications.................................................274 
    Contract.....................................................2,371 
  Special Operations Group.......................................1,578 
  Electronic Surveillance Unit...................................7,700 
  Fugitive Task Forces...........................................2,735 
  WIN/Commercial/Other Databases.................................2,766 
  DoD schools reimbursement........................................319 
Rent...........................................................121,360 
Headquarters security............................................1,600 
Salaries and benefits..........................................397,397 
  Protection of Judicial Process...............................217,121 
  Prisoner Transportation.......................................10,039 
  Fugitive Apprehension.........................................96,927 
    Electronic Surveillance Unit................................[5,461]
    Fugitive Task Forces........................................[5,524]
    Special Operations Group....................................[1,289]
  Seized Asset Management........................................3,559 
  D.C. Superior Court...........................................21,616 
  Service of Process............................................11,122 
  Training Academy...............................................2,313 
  ADP/Telecommunications.........................................8,364 
  Management & Administration...................................26,336 
Adjustments for prior year activity................................750 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, United States Marshals Service......................661,085 

       The Committee expects to be consulted prior to any 
     deviation from the above plan for fiscal year 2003. The 
     Committee recommendations are discussed in more detail in the 
     following paragraphs.
       The Committee recommendation includes $2,766,000 (excluding 
     a $500,000 transfer from the Justice Detainee Information 
     System) to improve and maintain the Warrant Information 
     Network and to continue subscriptions to various government 
     and private networks and on-line services and $3,300,000 for 
     Electronic Surveillance Unit recurring costs.
       Special assignments.--Special assignment funding is 
     intended for contingencies such as the Vieques and World Bank 
     protests. Unfortunately, the Marshals persist in using this 
     account to pay for long established missions or capital 
     investments. The Committee has transferred what is truly base 
     funding, including perimeter security and longstanding 
     protective details, from this subaccount to the ``District 
     Expenses'' subaccount. Other lines have been stripped of 
     padding. If the Committee finds that routine items creep back 
     into ``Special Assignments'', it is prepared to eliminate the 
     subaccount and let the Marshals handle contingency funding 
     the way all other law enforcement agencies do, through the 
     reprogramming process.
       Courthouse Security Personnel.--The Committee is aware that 
     the Marshals are manipulating vacancies to recover funds to 
     cover shortfalls in other areas. Until the Marshals hire up 
     to authorized levels, the Committee sees little reason to 
     fund additional personnel. The Committee directs the Marshals 
     to provide a report to the Committees on Appropriations 
     describing the nature and extent of chronic shortfalls in 
     their base budget. The report should be delivered not later 
     than February 15, 2003.
       Reimbursable positions.--The Committee believes that the 
     Marshals made a mistake by allowing themselves to be 
     distracted by the pursuit of reimbursable positions that do 
     nothing to improve the ability of the agency to execute its 
     core missions. Senior criminal investigators lost to 
     collateral duties actually weaken performance. Therefore, the 
     106 reimbursable Deputy U.S. Marshals [DUSMs] designated as 
     security managers for the courts have been transferred back 
     to the control of, and hereafter shall be funded by, the 
     Marshals. These DUSMs should be utilized as follows: (1) not 
     less than two and not more than five roving security teams, 
     including physical security specialists, shall regularly 
     survey courthouses and make recommendations regarding 
     security, (2) such number of DUSMs as are necessary shall be 
     distributed to the Southwest border to address the acute 
     manpower shortage being experienced by those courts, and (3) 
     remaining DUSMs will be distributed on a priority basis to 
     the most undermanned courthouses. Finally, the Administrative 
     Office of the U.S. Courts, USMS, and Federal Protective 
     Service [FPS] shall report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations on the strengths and weaknesses of the 
     proposal to place FPS officers under the operational control 
     of Marshals under certain circumstances. The report shall be 
     delivered not later than March 1, 2003.
       As part of the fiscal year 2004 budget process, the 
     Marshals should be prepared to justify both the relationship 
     forged with the Centers for Disease Control and retention of 
     the seized asset mission as opposed to transfer of that 
     mission to Justice Management Division.
       Courthouse security equipment.--This account funds security 
     equipment, furnishings, relocations, and telephone systems 
     and cabling. The Committee recommendation provides 
     $12,061,000 for courthouse security equipment. This equipment 
     will outfit courthouses in the following locations:


                   USMS Courthouse Security Equipment

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

Detainee Facilities:
  Decatur, AL....................................................... 45
  Florence, AL...................................................... 30
  Gadsen, AL........................................................ 40
  Tuscaloosa, AL.................................................... 45
  Hot Springs, AR...................................................805
  Little Rock, AR................................................... 65
  Fort Myers, FL....................................................150
  Key West, FL......................................................683
  Miami, FL.........................................................110
  Rome, GA..........................................................110
  Hammond, IN....................................................... 70

[[Page 634]]

  Terre Haute, IN...................................................438
  Carbondale, IL....................................................150
  Rock Island, IL...................................................390
  Springfield, MA...................................................150
  Bangor, ME........................................................ 75
  Flint, MI.........................................................120
  Marquette, MI.....................................................150
  Natchez, MS.......................................................545
  Billings, MT......................................................240
  Great Falls, MT................................................... 20
  Helena, MT........................................................ 24
  Greensboro, NC....................................................930
  Roswell, NM....................................................... 50
  Santa Fe, NM......................................................120
  Buffalo, NY.......................................................110
  Columbus, OH......................................................180
  Dayton, OH........................................................150
  Toledo, OH........................................................225
  Lawton, OK........................................................272
  Erie, PA..........................................................500
  Pittsburgh, PA....................................................600
  Anderson, SC...................................................... 65
  Sioux Falls, SD...................................................385
  Laredo, TX........................................................ 40
  Danville, VA...................................................... 75
  Newport News, VA..................................................390
  Seattle, WA.......................................................265
  Green Bay, WI.....................................................180
  Cheyenne, WY......................................................144
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, detainee facilities.................................9,136
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

ADT Security Equipment Maintenance................................1,400
Security Engineering Services.......................................673
Safety Program......................................................852
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, USMS Security Equipment...............................12,061

       The Committee expects to be consulted prior to any 
     deviation from the above plan for fiscal year 2003.
       The recommendation transfers funding for the Marshal's 
     safety and health program from the ``Salaries and Expenses'' 
     account to this subaccount.
       Fugitive apprehensions.--Last year, the Committee directed 
     the Marshals to establish task forces in New York City and 
     Los Angeles dedicated full-time to the pursuit of the most 
     dangerous fugitives on the eastern and western seaboard. The 
     Committee notes with concern that the annualization of costs 
     for the two task forces appears inadequate. In addition, the 
     Committee believes that the establishment of two additional 
     centrally-managed fugitive task forces in the heartland is 
     essential to properly cover fugitive caseload. Therefore, the 
     Committee recommendation includes an additional $2,268,000 to 
     fully annualize the two existing task forces, and $5,832,000 
     for two new task forces, of which $3,856,000 is for the full 
     year costs of 1811s and support staff on the task forces, 
     $485,000 is for equipment and expenses, $335,000 is for State 
     and local overtime and informant payments, and $1,155,000 is 
     for permanent change of station moves. In addition, the 
     Committee recommendation provides an increase of $5,500,000 
     over the fiscal year 2003 request for electronic surveillance 
     unit [ESU] personnel, training, and equipment, including 
     funding for surveillance vans and light aircraft, bucket 
     trucks, a central signal collection system, secure 
     communications equipment, various tracking systems, and night 
     vision equipment.
       International fugitives.--The Committee is aware that the 
     Marshals Service was forced to close temporary offices in 
     Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, and Mexico due to budget 
     irregularities. Afterwards, the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation legal attache offices in, or responsible for, 
     those countries proved unable or unwilling to pick up the 
     fugitive apprehension mission. To avoid creating a safe haven 
     for felons in the Caribbean, the Committee has provided 
     $3,850,000 to establish a permanent Marshals Service presence 
     in Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, and Mexico. The Committee 
     expects these offices to report annually on their fugitive 
     apprehension efforts. The Committee also directs the Marshals 
     to report to the Committees on Appropriations on the global 
     requirements for fugitive apprehension for the next 5 years.
       Vehicles.--The Marshals Service's approach to fleet 
     management is ``run to failure''. Though Federal guidelines 
     call for replacing sedans after 3 years or 60,000 miles and 
     SUVs after 4 years or 40,000 miles to avoid chronic problems 
     with availability and excessive operations and maintenance 
     costs, the Marshals have no fleet replacement cycle. As a 
     result, deputies are chasing fugitives or transporting 
     prisoners in vehicles whose unreliability pose an unnecessary 
     risk. The Committee has scrutinized the Marshals' budget 
     looking for low priority items that could be reduced or 
     eliminated to free up resources for vehicle purchases. The 
     Committee recommendation provides $10,424,000 for vehicle 
     purchases. This shall be treated as a permanent increase to 
     the base. None of these vehicles are to be assigned to 
     headquarters.
       Information Technology.--The Justice Department's Inspector 
     General [IG] just released an audit report (03-03) concerning 
     the Marshal Network [MNET] and Warrant Information Network 
     [WIN]. The Committee expects the Marshals, overseen by the 
     Justice Department's Chief Information Officer [CIO], to 
     immediately implement the recommendations listed on pages 
     iii-vi of the IG's report. The Committee expects to be 
     briefed quarterly on progress by the CIO until all of the 
     recommendations have been implemented. The Committee 
     recommendation provides an increase of $10,564,000 to 
     implement the IG's recommendations, including the hiring of 
     additional computer personnel, for circuit costs, courthouse 
     moves, licenses, help desk and other operations and 
     maintenance costs, and for technology refreshment. The 
     Committee expects information technology costs to be properly 
     recurred in the fiscal year 2004 request as an adjustment to 
     base.


                              Construction

Appropriations, 2002........................................$24,125,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................15,126,000
Committee recommendation.....................................17,378,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,378,000. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       This account funds construction, security, and furniture at 
     existing courthouses.
       The Committee is aware that a recently-conducted national 
     survey of Federal courthouses revealed that 95 percent of 
     prisoner holding and transit facilities have serious security 
     deficiencies. Of 392 courthouses surveyed: 84 percent lack 
     enough courtroom holding cells; 78 percent do not have secure 
     prison elevators; 74 percent do not have enclosed sallyports; 
     72 percent lack enough interview rooms; 57 percent do not 
     have adequate cellblock space; and 38 percent lack cameras, 
     monitors, and alarms.
       Years of neglect have created this deplorable situation, 
     posing risks to the judicial family, the public, and the 
     Marshals themselves. The Committee is intent on remedying 
     courthouse deficiencies before a tragedy occurs. The 
     Committee recommendations, by project, are displayed in the 
     following table:


                           USMS Construction

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Construction:
  Florence, AL.....................................................980 
  El Dorado, AR....................................................807 
  Fayetteville, AR.................................................800 
  El Centro, CA....................................................600 
  Key West, FL.....................................................916 
  Ocala, FL........................................................984 
  Athens, GA.......................................................750 
  Sioux City, IA...................................................810 
  Boise, ID.........................................................50 
  East St. Louis, IL...............................................175 
  Rock Island, IL..................................................300 
  Port Huron, MI...................................................850 
  Fergus Falls, MN.................................................100 
  Billings, MT.....................................................920 
  Great Falls, MT..................................................400 
  Wilmington, NC...................................................750 
  Anderson, SC.....................................................823 
  Charlottesville, VA..............................................750 
  Newport News, VA.................................................250 
  Green Bay, WI....................................................300 
  Beckley, WV.......................................................50 
  Bluefield, WV....................................................300 
  Charleston, WV...................................................125 
  Cheyenne, WY.....................................................410 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, construction......................................13,200 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Planning, Design, & Relocation:
  Rome, GA.........................................................110 
  Carbondale, IL...................................................350 
  Hammond, IN.......................................................50 
  Bangor, ME.......................................................100 
  Gulfport, MS......................................................30 
  Natchez, MS.......................................................30 
  Durham, NC.......................................................475 
  Roswell, NM......................................................250 
  Santa Fe, NM.....................................................500 
  Buffalo, NY......................................................110 
  Toledo, OH.......................................................100 
  Lawton, OK.......................................................475 
  Erie, PA.........................................................320 
  Fort Worth, TX...................................................135 
  Laredo, TX........................................................20 
  Marshal, TX......................................................110 
  Texarkana, TX....................................................110 
  Danville, VA......................................................75 
  Lynchburg, VA.....................................................30 
  Seattle, WA.......................................................50 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, planning, design, and relocation...................3,430 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Schedules & slippages.............................................(908)
Minor repairs......................................................375 
ADT security equipment maintenance.................................531 
Security specialist consultants/construction engineers.............750 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, USMS Construction....................................17,378 

       The Committee considers this an important step in reducing 
     the backlog of critical security-related projects. As with 
     courthouse security equipment, the Committee expects to be 
     consulted prior to any deviation from the above plan for 
     fiscal year 2003.
       Construction engineering consultants.--The Committee is 
     aware that the Marshals have been using funds allocated by 
     Congress for consulting services on construction projects to 
     pay the Federal salaries of 9 permanent employees hired in 
     fiscal year 2000. Apparently, this diversion of funds was 
     prompted

[[Page 635]]

     by confusion over terms and dollar amounts used by the 
     Marshals and Congress. The Committee expects the salaries of 
     permanent employees to be paid out of the ``Salaries and 
     Expenses'' account and the salaries for construction 
     consultants to be paid out of this account. The Marshals are 
     directed to report on the proper execution of the 
     construction engineering funds not later than 30 days after 
     enactment of this Act.
       Billings, MT.--The funds provided for construction for 
     Billings shall only be available to renovate the Marshals 
     Service space, including designated prisoner movement and 
     holding areas, in the existing Federal courthouse, space 
     previously occupied by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. No other 
     proposals are to be considered.


            Justice prisoner and alien transportation system

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation....................................$77,694,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $77,694,000. 
     The recommendation is $77,694,000 above the budget request.
       This account funds prisoner air transportation operations 
     and maintenance, aircraft procurement, and facilities.
       The Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System's 
     [JPATS'] per passenger pricing structure makes no provision 
     for the capitalization of assets. The result is that large 
     body aircraft responsible for prisoner movements will be 
     flown until grounded for structural failure or other safety 
     reasons. No replacements are planned. Therefore, unless 
     Congress intervenes, the JPATS fleet will be allowed to 
     diminish until no aircraft remain. Justice has no plan for 
     dealing with the resulting crisis. The Committee 
     recommendation has provided the funds necessary to avert 
     disaster before it occurs. The funds provided will allow the 
     Marshals to procure four modern, fuel efficient, wide body 
     aircraft and spares to replace four first generation 
     airliners that have reached the end of their useful service 
     lives. The Marshals shall report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations on its procurement strategy not later than 
     February 28, 2003.


                       Federal prisoner detention

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$706,182,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...............................................

       No funds are requested or recommended under the Federal 
     Prisoner Detention Program. The budget request met the 
     Committee's recommendation last year by centralizing funding 
     for detention activities within the Federal Prisoner 
     Detention Program and the Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service under the Department of Justice Detention Trustee. 
     This recommendation is identical to the budget request.


                     fees and expenses of witnesses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$156,145,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................156,145,000
Committee recommendation....................................156,145,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $156,145,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level and the budget request.
       This account provides for fees and expenses of witnesses 
     who appear on behalf of the Government in cases in which the 
     United States is a party, including fact and expert 
     witnesses. These funds are also used for mental competency 
     examinations as well as witness and informant protection.


                      community relations service

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$9,269,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,364,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,474,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,474,000, 
     which is $110,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
     recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for 
     Federal employees.
       The Community Relations Service [CRS] provides assistance 
     to communities and persons in the prevention and resolution 
     of disagreements relating to perceived discriminatory 
     practices.


                         assets forfeiture fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$22,949,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................22,949,000
Committee recommendation.....................................22,949,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,949,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level and the budget request. This account provides 
     funds to supplement existing resources to cover additional 
     investigative expenses of the FBI, DEA, INS, and U.S. 
     Marshals, such as awards for information, purchase of 
     evidence, equipping of conveyances, and investigative 
     expenses leading to seizure. Funds for these activities are 
     provided from receipts deposited in the assets forfeiture 
     fund resulting from the forfeiture of assets. Expenses 
     related to the management and disposal of assets are also 
     provided from the assets forfeiture fund by a permanent 
     indefinite appropriation.

                    Radiation Exposure Compensation

                        administrative expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,996,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,996,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       No funds are recommended under this account. Rather, full 
     funding for the administrative expenses of the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Fund is provided under the Civil 
     Division of General Legal Activities.

                      Interagency Law Enforcement


                 Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$338,577,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................362,131,000
Committee recommendation....................................400,102,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $400,102,000. 
     The recommendation is $37,971,000 above the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees. The increase is 
     attributable to a transfer of DEA resources to this account. 
     This additional $53,000,000 shall only be available to 
     reimburse the DEA for participation in task force operations.
       The Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement Program, through 
     its 9 regional task forces, utilizes the combined resources 
     and expertise of its 11 member Federal agencies, in 
     cooperation with State and local investigators and 
     prosecutors, to target and disband major narcotics 
     trafficking and money laundering organizations.
       State and Local Overtime.--Overtime for State and local law 
     enforcement officers who support OCDETF investigations has 
     traditionally been funded by the Department of Justice Assets 
     Forfeiture Fund [AFF]. This year, OCDETF has included 
     $8,000,000 in its request for State and local overtime out of 
     concern that declining AFF receipts will be insufficient to 
     cover these costs. The Committee supports the role of State 
     and local law enforcement with OCDETF, but believes the AFF 
     remains the proper source of funding for overtime. Should 
     funds not be available for this purpose within AFF, the 
     Committee will entertain a reprogramming request from an 
     alternative source of funding.
       To ensure that the Immigration and Naturalization Service 
     [INS] only seeks reimbursable funds if INS agents are 
     actually performing task force work, the INS is directed to 
     match at least 25 percent of each reimbursable dollar from 
     their direct appropriation on Organized Crime and Drug 
     Enforcement Task Force cases before they can be reimbursed 
     from this account.

                    Federal Bureau of Investigation


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$4,236,073,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,202,587,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,927,587,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $3,927,587,000. The recommendation is $275,000,000 below the 
     budget request. The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 
     percent pay adjustment. The reduction is mostly attributable 
     to the full use of large carryover balances and the transfer 
     of joint terrorism task force resources to the Attorney 
     General. The Committee is aware that up to $103,300,000 in 
     uncommitted carryover will be available to apply to this 
     account and expects that new found efficiencies (Chiaradio's 
     ``elimination of sixth men'') will free up additional 
     resources.
       The Committee recommendation highlights the following 
     initiatives:
       Reorganization.--The Committee commends Director Mueller 
     for focusing the FBI on its core missions: counterterrorism, 
     counterintelligence, and cybercrime. Not in memory has a 
     Justice Department agency identified its priorities and then 
     moved base resources to address those priorities. The 
     Committee was impressed by the Director's initiative and 
     urges other agencies to follow suit.
       Still, the establishment of clear goals and the shifting of 
     personnel in response are only the first tentative steps in 
     what must be an almost total recreation of the FBI. When 
     intent replaces action and possibilities replace certainties 
     in the pursuit of crime the Bureau faces a revolution without 
     precedent.
       FBI spending jumped $1,017,591,000 (32 percent) between 
     fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2002, and would hold steady 
     from last year to this if the President's request were 
     adopted. What we got for these increases is debatable, but 
     what is not debatable is that this level of investment cannot 
     be sustained. We must make far better use of the assets 
     already in hand.
       The FBI must re-validate every expense in its base. How, 
     for example, does the Hostage Rescue Team contribute to 
     counterterrorism, counterintelligence, or cybercrime? What 
     about Safe Street Task Forces? Or the Federal Convicted 
     Offender Program? In time of war, the FBI must weigh programs 
     against priorities. Those that don't measure up must be 
     transferred to sister law enforcement agencies, reduced, or 
     terminated. Only then will resources meet needs.
       Finally, it remains a question whether a command structure 
     totally dominated by agents can accomplish this. Are the 
     greatest efficiency experts in America really FBI agents? The 
     Committee believes that outside

[[Page 636]]

     talent may have more to offer when streamlining the 
     bureaucracy is the goal.
       Trilogy.--The Committee was informed last month that 
     Trilogy is experiencing a cost overrun of $137,900,000, a 30 
     percent increase, which, when combined with an earlier 
     overrun, translates into a more than 50 percent increase in 
     one year in the projected total cost of the program. This is 
     not a surprise. The attempt to make up for 20 years of 
     neglect in 2 years of frenzied spending was destined to fail. 
     The Committee, foreseeing this, provided a cushion of 
     $100,000,000 in no-year funds in the counterterrorism 
     supplemental as a ``rainy day'' fund for Trilogy. 
     Unfortunately, over the objections of the Committee, the FBI 
     chose to squander this reserve. Now, when the funds are 
     needed, none are available. Nevertheless, Trilogy remains the 
     Committee's top FBI priority. The FBI is directed to put 
     together a reprogramming package to cover the overrun. That 
     package should be submitted to the Committees on 
     Appropriations not later than February 15, 2003.
       Intelligence Production.--The recommendation includes an 
     additional $7,731,000 to enhance headquarters and field 
     office analytical capabilities to support the FBI's 
     counterterrorism program, including 20 headquarters 
     Intelligence Research Specialists [IRSs] and 90 field IRS 
     positions. IRSs provide time-sensitive analyses in support of 
     investigations, operations, and programmatic issues and 
     strategic analyses aimed at identifying investigative 
     priorities. Expertise in understanding current and projected 
     terrorist threats shall be a prerequisite for these 
     positions.
       Hazardous Materials Response Capabilities.--Now more than 
     ever, law enforcement personnel must be properly trained and 
     equipped to encounter crime scenes where hazardous materials 
     may be present. The Committee therefore includes an 
     additional $9,333,000 for the FBI's Hazardous Materials 
     Response Unit [HMRU] and an additional $3,272,000 for the 
     Hazardous Devices School [HDS].
       The HMRU provides an integrated approach to ensuring the 
     safe and effective response to criminal acts and incidents 
     involving hazardous materials, including specialized response 
     teams, a national training program, interagency liaison, 
     technical assistance to FBI field and Headquarters divisions, 
     and the development of field response programs. The Unit 
     trains, equips, and certifies FBI field office personnel for 
     hazardous materials operations.
       The HDS prepares public safety bomb technicians [BTs] to 
     locate, identify, render safe, and dispose of improvised 
     hazardous devices, including those containing explosives, 
     incendiary materials, and materials classified as weapons of 
     mass destruction. The program also includes training in the 
     use of specialized equipment and protective clothing needed 
     for the safe disposal of explosive materials. These funds 
     will provide additional courses for BTs and provide necessary 
     operations and maintenance funding associated with practical 
     training villages.
       Evidence Response Team Program.--The Evidence Response Team 
     Program provides management and training for field personnel 
     who are responsible for providing forensic and crime scene 
     services. These personnel must respond to case investigations 
     with the most current techniques, procedures, and equipment 
     to ensure that critical evidence is identified and gathered 
     for forensic analysis. The recommendation includes an 
     additional $5,722,000 for personnel, training, field office 
     supplies, equipment, surveying stations, underwater equipment 
     and contractor support, physicals, canine evidence recovery, 
     and technology assisted search team operational travel and 
     equipment.
       Intellectual Property Enforcement.--Twenty-five percent of 
     the software produced in the United States has been copied 
     illegally in violation of U.S. copyright laws. Other 
     industries have similarly suffered from high rates of 
     counterfeiting, including pharmaceuticals, automobile 
     manufacturing, videos and music. The estimate of lost revenue 
     to such industries exceeds $300,000,000,000 annually. The 
     Committee provides $9,674,000 within available white collar 
     crime resources for the vigorous pursuit of Federal copyright 
     law violations.
       Federal Convicted Offender Program.--The recommendation 
     includes an additional $867,000 for the Federal Convicted 
     Offender [FCO] Program. Last year, the FCO Program's 
     authority to collect DNA samples was expanded to include 
     additional crimes of violence and terrorism-related offenses. 
     This funding will support 5 positions to manage and type 
     Federal convicted offender samples, purchase equipment, and 
     fund additional expenses related to this effort.
       Polygraph Program.--In the past, the FBI only conducted 
     polygraphs on new employees and individuals with access to 
     certain sensitive programs or cases. The recommendation 
     includes an additional $6,804,000 to expand the FBI's 
     polygraph program to include periodic polygraph examinations 
     for individuals who have broad access to the FBI's most 
     sensitive information and for employees leaving for and 
     returning from permanent foreign assignments.
       Forensic research.--The FBI Laboratory's forensic research 
     spending plan for fiscal year 2002 was very impressive. The 
     Committee is aware that the FBI Laboratory still has a long 
     list of unfunded research projects. The Committee 
     recommendation includes an increase of $8,056,000 over last 
     year's level to fund the highest priority forensic research 
     proposals submitted to the Committee as part of the fiscal 
     year 2002 spend plan. The FBI shall report back to the 
     Committees on Appropriations on the disposition of these 
     resources not later than April 5, 2003.
       Investigative data warehousing.--Investigative data 
     warehousing is phase II of Trilogy, the FBI's computer 
     modernization initiative. Phase I of Trilogy will fuse into 
     an enterprise database, the so-called Virtual Case File 
     [VCF], a handful of key legacy databases, currently 
     stovepiped, that are central to the day-to-day investigatory 
     and intelligence gathering activities of the Bureau. 
     Investigative data warehousing will migrate an additional 34 
     priority, highly specialized legacy databases, also currently 
     stovepiped, into the VCF. This program is essential for the 
     FBI to fully access its collected data. Unfortunately, 
     progress on data warehousing is threatened by Trilogy's cost 
     overruns and schedule delays. Should Trilogy's problems be 
     overcome, the FBI may spend up to $50,300,000 in available 
     prior year funds on investigative data warehousing. Knowing 
     the magnitude of this project, the Committee looks forward to 
     regular updates on its progress. The first briefing shall 
     occur within 30 days of the enactment of this Act and shall 
     address in detail the execution plan for fiscal year 2003.
       Information assurance.--The Committee has been very 
     impressed by the comprehensive approach to, and rapid 
     development of, information assurance capabilities at the 
     Bureau. A series of wide ranging and very comprehensible 
     briefings provided excellent insight into the program's 
     scope, capabilities, and goals. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $18,435,000 to continue information assurance 
     initiatives undertaken last year. The Committee expects that 
     the ``one stop shopping'' information desk for security 
     customers will be fully operational by the end of the fiscal 
     year. The Committee recommendation also includes $29,738,000 
     for the Enterprise Security Operations Center [ESOC]. With 
     the lack of information included in the FBI's budget request 
     about the ESOC, funding was provided only as a result of a 
     candid and thorough briefing at the unclassified level. The 
     Committee notes the necessity of total disclosure to ensure 
     funding for initiatives.
       Collaborative capabilities.--Collaborative capabilities are 
     phase III of Trilogy. Collaborative capabilities will open 
     the FBI's heretofore closed, classified computer network to 
     other Federal, State, and local law enforcement and 
     intelligence agencies. There is concern with this effort. An 
     open network is inherently vulnerable to attack. Fortunately, 
     Internet cafe, a stand-alone system for web access, should 
     provide the Bureau with time to perfect a secure, shared 
     network. The Committee believes that extensive lab testing 
     followed by thorough piloting is essential to the success of 
     this initiative. The Committee looks forward to observing lab 
     and field demonstrations at every critical milestone in the 
     development of collaborative capabilities. Additionally, 
     progress on collaborative capabilities is threatened by 
     Trilogy's cost overruns and schedule delays. Should Trilogy's 
     problems be overcome, the FBI may spend up to $11,000,000 in 
     available prior year funds on collaborative capabilities.
       Analytical tools for data mining and visualization.--The 
     Committee is familiar with the demonstrated value of these 
     software tools and has provided money in the past for the 
     acquisition of earlier versions. The Committee recommendation 
     provides $5,000,000 for analytical tools from the $30,000,000 
     in National Infrastructure Protection Center funds on hold. 
     The Committee directs the Bureau to provide the Committees on 
     Appropriations with a detailed spend plan that shall not 
     require Congressional approval after it is submitted.
       Internet cafe.--The FBI is wrestling with the risks of 
     opening its previously closed computer network to the Web. 
     The Committee is fully aware that no security system can 
     fully protect its host from threats on the Internet. Still, 
     an enormous amount of freely- or commercially-available 
     information can be found on the Web that could prove very 
     useful in pursuing criminal or national security 
     investigations. As an interim measure, the Bureau has 
     requested funds to establish stand alone access to the Web, 
     referred to as Internet cafes. The Committee considers this a 
     prudent step. The recommendation includes an additional 
     $3,620,000 for Internet cafes from the $30,000,000 in 
     National Infrastructure Protection Center funds on hold. The 
     Bureau shall provide a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations on the distribution and use of Internet cafes 
     not later than May 1, 2003.
       Physical Surveillance Program.--As the FBI expands its 
     efforts to collect intelligence about potential domestic and 
     international terrorists groups and respond to threats 
     against the United States and other extraordinary incidents, 
     the need for surveillance technology and equipment grows. The 
     recommendation includes an additional

[[Page 637]]

     $5,137,000 for development, deployment, and support of core 
     technologies associated with tracking and locating fugitives, 
     mobile surveillance, and design and fabrication capabilities 
     from the $30,000,000 in National Infrastructure Protection 
     Center funds on hold.
       Tactical Operations.--Court ordered tactical operations 
     only serve as an effective investigative tool if the FBI has 
     the resources to address emerging technologies, such as 
     advanced digital communications, command and control and 
     computers, radio frequency communications and data links, and 
     sophisticated encryption. The Committee therefore includes in 
     its recommendation an additional $12,612,000 for research and 
     development and for engineering to support ongoing and new 
     strategic initiatives directed against new technologies posed 
     by the high-technology industries.
       Re-enginering the workforce.--The FBI request for 
     additional analysts and technological enhancements highlights 
     the Bureau's shift from a manpower-intensive approach to an 
     information-intensive approach to intelligence gathering and 
     crime fighting. However, this shift has come, thus far, 
     without a comprehensive approach to human capital investment. 
     The Director's stated priorities: counterterrorism [CT], 
     counterintelligence [CI], and cybercrime [``cyber''], will 
     require marked shifts in the skills of the Bureau workforce. 
     A far more diversified workforce of scientists, engineers, 
     technicians, analysts, support, and other staff, as well as 
     agents, will be required. To maintain and enhance the 
     proficiency of this new workforce during the current 
     information and technology revolution, employees will need 
     constant field exposure and continual in-service training and 
     education to keep skills finely honed. For that reason, the 
     Bureau must develop and maintain a manpower master plan that, 
     at a minimum, includes an analysis of, and justification for: 
     (1) the proper mix of agent, specialist, and support 
     personnel in foreign and domestic field offices and 
     headquarters at the squad, unit, section, and division 
     levels, (2) mandatory, substantive in-service training 
     programs of at least 40 hours per year for all personnel that 
     include both in-house, other Federal, and private sector 
     training and development opportunities, (3) career paths for 
     personnel in specialized areas, especially CT, CI, cyber, and 
     security, with an emphasis on lifetime commitment to 
     specialization, (4) the proper balance of personnel versus 
     capital investments to ensure that Bureau employees are 
     properly equipped with the essential tools of their 
     particular trade, and (5) a deployment strategy that 
     maximizes the benefits of mentor-protege relationships and 
     cross-pollination between highly specialized personnel. The 
     report shall be completed not later than December 31, 2003. 
     The Bureau shall provide a progress report to the Committees 
     on Appropriations by July 1, 2003 and shall provide the 
     Committees with a final copy of the plan upon completion.
       Aviation.--The FBI is directed to submit a 5-year aviation 
     master plan that includes: (1) current fleet assets by type, 
     (2) logged flight hours by mission by aircraft/helicopter, 
     (3) projected useful service life remaining (under what 
     assumptions) by aircraft/helicopter, (4) utilization of 
     current fleet assets, by mission type, for the last 5 years 
     by year, and (5) basing, by aircraft/helicopter locations. 
     The plan should also discuss the costs and benefits of 
     maintaining versus replacing current fleet assets through 
     2008, maldeployments or other causes of underutilization of 
     current fleet assets, if applicable, and capabilities of 
     current fleet assets versus current and projected mission 
     requirements. The report shall be delivered not later than 
     March 3, 2003.
       Rapid Deployment Logistics Unit.--The Rapid Deployment 
     Logistics Unit [RDLU] was created unbeknownst to the 
     Committee through an internal reallocation of resources. The 
     number and composition of Rapid Deployment Teams [RDTs] were 
     settled by the Bureau without the Committee's approval. To 
     date, the Committee has never received a briefing on the RDLU 
     or RDTs. That being so, the Committee expects the FBI to 
     submit a comprehensive report on the purpose of the RDLU, the 
     justification for the number and configuration of RDTs, the 
     capabilities of the RDLU and RDTs, and the personnel and 
     equipment requirements of both for the next 5 years, by year.
       Joint Terrorism Task Force.--The Bureau is seeking to 
     quadruple the amount of funding available for Joint Terrorism 
     Task Forces [JTTFs]. The increased funding would be used for 
     space to house JTTFs and backfill the FBI slots transferred 
     to JTTFs. The FBI's goal is to establish a JTTF in every 
     field office by the end of fiscal year 2003. The value of 
     JTTFs, both in general and relative to their cost, remains 
     open to debate as does the value of having JTTFs in more than 
     56 locations. Since JTTFs are now competing with Regional 
     Terrorism Task Forces, Anti-Terrorism Task Forces and the 
     Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force, not to mention the 
     Counterterrorism Division, for resources to meet the same 
     mission, a thorough review of the program is in order. The 
     Bureau is directed to submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations that, at a minimum, includes a thorough 
     discussion of JTTF caseload over the last 5 years by type 
     (domestic/foreign), offense(s), and disposition (referred for 
     prosecution, prosecuted, convicted, etc.) on a task force by 
     task force basis. The report should also include an explicit 
     discussion of threats in existing or proposed JTTF locations. 
     The report shall be delivered not later than April 30, 2003. 
     In the meantime, the Committee has transferred JTTF funding 
     from this account to a new separate account under the direct 
     control of the Attorney General to ensure proper coordination 
     of the various terrorism task forces.
       National Infrastructure Protection Center [NIPC].--A March 
     2001 report on computer intrusion squad training, promotion, 
     and retention has yet to be delivered to the Committee on 
     Appropriations. As a result, almost $30,000,000 in NIPC 
     funding remains unavailable for obligation or expenditure. In 
     July, the Committee directed that a reasonable plan regarding 
     these funds to be submitted to, and approved by, the 
     Committees on Appropriations by September 30, 2002. To date, 
     no such plan has been delivered. Therefore, the Committee 
     directs that $17,221,000 of the $30,000,000 in NIPC funds on 
     hold be provided to the Special Technologies and Applications 
     Unit [STAU] to fund phase II of a three phase research and 
     development initiative being run by the STAU. The Committee 
     fully expects the STAU to have occupied the 4,000 square feet 
     of space on the 4th floor of its new location in Virginia not 
     later than March 31, 2003.
       Emergency communications.--The FBI has established a 
     requirement for the Critical Response Unit [CRU] to respond 
     to five crisis sites simultaneously with state-of-the-art 
     secure communications equipment and personnel. How this 
     requirement was arrived at is unknown. It is also unclear how 
     the CRU's communications suite integrates with that of the 
     Foreign and Domestic Emergency Support Teams, the Hostage 
     Rescue Team, the Critical Incident Response Group, the 
     Strategic Information & Operations Center, Special Weapons & 
     Tactics Teams, and a host of other specialized units, all of 
     which have communications suites of their own. The Committee 
     presumes that communications gear deployed by the CRU is 
     fully interoperable with that of all other emergency response 
     units it is charged with supporting and that duplication of 
     gear between units has been eliminated, but expects the FBI 
     to formally confirm both presumptions. Also, the Bureau is 
     directed to submit a CRU communications master plan to the 
     Committees on Appropriations not later than March 15, 2003 
     that: (1) outlines in detail the criteria that must be met 
     for the CRU to deploy, (2) justifies in detail the five 
     simultaneous crisis sites requirement, and (3) outlines in 
     detail the personnel and non-personnel needs of the CRU for 
     the next 5 years by year.
       Technically Trained Agents.--The Committee has been 
     supportive of Technically Trained Agents [TTAs], though the 
     Committee has differed with the Bureau on priorities. The 
     Committee continues to believe that properly equipping and 
     training TTAs is a higher priority than simply adding more 
     bodies. As justification material accompanying the request 
     for 50 new positions notes, one-third of TTAs are 
     probationary. Clearly, TTAs need more seasoning. The Bureau 
     is directed to report on its strategy for using intense 
     supervision and continuing in-service training and education 
     to compensate for the distinct lack of experience in its TTA 
     force. The report shall be delivered not later than April 25, 
     2003.
       Legal attaches.--The Committee notes that the legal attache 
     [Legat] offices in, or responsible for, Jamaica, the 
     Dominican Republic, and Mexico were unable or unwilling to 
     develop plans for picking up the fugitive apprehension 
     mission when the Marshals Service was forced to shut down 
     operations in those countries. The Committee also notes that 
     the apparent measure of effectiveness for Legats is the 
     number of ``leads'' pursued, the equivalent of measuring 
     congressional effectiveness by the number of phone calls 
     answered. The Committee directs that the FBI provide a report 
     detailing the stated national security or law enforcement 
     goals underpinning the establishment of each Legat office and 
     the specific steps being taken to reach those goals. The 
     report shall be delivered to the Committees on Appropriations 
     not later than June 1, 2003. No more than 75 percent of the 
     funds provided for Legats in fiscal year 2003 shall be made 
     available for expenditure until the aforementioned report is 
     delivered.
       Budget restructuring.--As part of the fiscal year 2004 
     budget request, the Committee expects the FBI to adopt a new 
     budget structure premised on eight decision units: (1) 
     Counterterrorism, (2) National Security, (3) Cyber-
     investigations, (4) Criminal Enterprises & Federal Crimes, 
     (5) Forensic & Technical Services, (6) Field Support, (7) 
     Training & Education, and (8) Criminal Justice Services. The 
     Committee notes that an on-going review of classification 
     issues has precluded the need for any decision unit totals to 
     be rolled up in the formal budget submission or any 
     supporting documents. The Committee congratulates the Bureau 
     on this breakthrough.
       Last year, the Committee concluded that the FBI's inability 
     to respond swiftly to changing patterns of crime was in part 
     attributable to an antiquated budget structure

[[Page 638]]

     that did little to protect the Director's strategic 
     priorities, ease management of high risk programs, or provide 
     the transparency necessary for effective oversight.
       The new structure, all but identical to last year's 
     proposed restructuring, will: (1) focus FBI resources on the 
     Director's top three priorities, (2) elevate and sustain a 
     number of longstanding Congressional priorities, (3) afford 
     field-level managers the flexibility to use their workforce 
     to maximum advantage in addressing local criminal 
     investigatory priorities, (4) consolidate the funding of a 
     number of mutually-supportive initiatives that are currently 
     scattered across multiple decision units, and (5) eliminate 
     the current artificial isolation of a number of cross-cutting 
     functions and activities.
       The Committee believes that the new budget structure will 
     significantly enhance FBI performance and commends the Bureau 
     for its support in developing this proposal.


                              Construction

Appropriations, 2002........................................$33,791,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,250,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,250,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,250,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level, less non-recurring costs, and to the budget 
     request.

                    Drug Enforcement Administration


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,481,783,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,545,919,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,477,470,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,477,470,000. The recommendation is $68,449,000 below the 
     budget request. The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 
     percent pay adjustment for Federal employees. The reduction 
     in this account is largely attributable to a transfer of 
     resources described below. The Committee expects the large 
     balance of prior year Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund 
     carryover to be expended not later than April 1, 2003 on 
     vehicles, bullet proof vests, and other basic equipment 
     essential to officers in the performance of their duties. The 
     Committee directs the DEA to provide it with an accounting of 
     carryover spending not later than April 2, 2003.
       Enhancements.--The recommendation provides $24,683,000 for 
     DEA's requested Homeland Security enhancements for 
     information security and anti-terrorism security measures. 
     None of these funds shall be obligated until a spend plan has 
     been submitted to and approved by the Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       Information security.--The DEA is seeking funds to initiate 
     an information security program. The FBI has just completed a 
     thorough review of its information security needs, and has 
     undertaken wide-ranging improvements noteworthy for their 
     simplicity and cost effectiveness. Prior to the release of 
     funds for the DEA's information security program, the DEA 
     shall sign with the head of the FBI's Security Division and 
     the Chief Information Officer of the Justice Department a 
     memorandum of understanding [MOU] that charges the latter two 
     signatories with providing technical assistance to DEA 
     program managers with an emphasis on no- or low-cost 
     government- or commercial-off-the-shelf solutions. The 
     Committee expects to be briefed on the details of DEA's plan, 
     the contents of the MOU, and FBI and Justice contributions to 
     a successful rollout not later than 60 days after the signing 
     of the MOU.
       Financial Investigations.--The Committee also provides 
     $4,121,000 for financial investigations to increase efforts 
     to target drug organizations that finance terrorist 
     activities. Additional personnel shall work closely with 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement as well as private 
     and regulatory sectors of the financial community to identify 
     individuals and institutions for investigation, and identify 
     money laundering techniques employed by terrorists. 
     Additional personnel and emphasis shall be placed in the 
     following locations: Denver, Colorado, Wilmington, Delaware, 
     Chicago, Illinois, New York City, New York, Charleston, South 
     Carolina, and Dallas, Texas.
       Overseas Offices.--While DEA repeatedly defends its 
     presence overseas, very little effort has been made to 
     monitor and evaluate the need for all of these foreign 
     offices after they have been opened. The DEA is therefore 
     directed to submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations that provides the productivity level, 
     workload, and mission for each existing overseas office no 
     later than February 28, 2003. The report shall include a 
     review and rightsizing proposal for each of the overseas 
     offices to ensure that the most urgent needs are being met 
     with the limited resources available.
       Integrated Drug Enforcement Assistance.--The Committee is 
     pleased with the Administrator's new initiative for drug 
     prevention and treatment, known as Integrated Drug 
     Enforcement Assistance [IDEA]. IDEA is a coordinated anti-
     drug plan that combines law enforcement with intensive 
     community follow-up designed to reduce drug demand. IDEA 
     teams DEA agents with State and local law enforcement to 
     arrest and prosecute drug traffickers within designated 
     communities, and then forms coalitions to reduce demand 
     through drug prevention and treatment. The recommendation 
     provides $5,926,000 to expand IDEA. The DEA is directed to 
     report back to the Committees on Appropriations on how it 
     intends to use these funds not later than March 15, 2003.
       Aviation assets.--Helicopters and light aircraft play an 
     essential role in the covert surveillance, pursuit, and 
     capture of drug traffickers. The Committee understands that 
     the DEA's aging fleet of air assets suffers from low 
     availability and high maintenance hours, and costs, per 
     flight hour. The Committee recommendation provides $6,336,000 
     for single engine light enforcement helicopters. The DEA is 
     directed to report back to the Committees on Appropriations 
     on how it intends to use these funds not later than March 15, 
     2003.
       Methamphetamine lab clean-up.--The Committee remains 
     alarmed by the public health and safety menace posed by 
     methamphetamine labs. The by-products of methamphetamine 
     production: anhydrous ammonia, ether, sulfuric acid, and 
     other toxins are volatile, corrosive, and poisonous. Often, 
     lab operators secrete these waste products in abandoned or 
     little-used buildings located in populous areas or dump them 
     in rivers and streams. Danger of explosion is real and the 
     potential for serious environmental contamination well 
     documented. Therefore, the Committee recommendation includes 
     $20,000,000 that shall only be available to reimburse the 
     DEA, States and localities for the costs associated with 
     assisting in, or undertaking, the removal and disposal of 
     hazardous materials at clandestine methamphetamine labs.
       Drug Enforcement Equipment.--The effectiveness of DEA 
     agents is threatened by shortfalls and delays in the 
     distribution of critical equipment. The Committee believes 
     that agents must have state-of-the-art equipment in order to 
     stay ahead of or merely keep pace with that of drug 
     traffickers. The Committee recommendation therefore provides 
     $4,733,000 for high priority equipment. The DEA is directed 
     to report back to the Committees on Appropriations on how it 
     intends to use these funds not later than March 1, 2003.
       Northern New Mexico Anti-Drug Initiative.--The Committee 
     acknowledges the need for a focused response to illegal drug 
     trafficking in northern New Mexico and expects the DEA to 
     continue to devote sufficient resources to this problem in 
     cooperation with other Federal law enforcement agencies.
       Division of labor.--The ``war on drugs'' is in the midst of 
     the most significant restructuring in memory. The terrorist 
     attack on America has forced many agencies to redirect 
     manpower and resources from the drug war to homeland security 
     and combating terrorism. This has stretched DEA resources 
     thin. Under these circumstances, the Committee believes that 
     every effort should be made to decapitate the leadership of 
     drug cartels and the businesses that aid and abet drug 
     trafficking. This calls into question the value of DEA's 
     Mobile Enforcement Teams [METs], which target street-level 
     dealers by swarming localities for short periods of time. 
     While emotionally satisfying and useful for boosting arrest 
     statistics, METs, ultimately, are taking pawns in a deadly 
     game of chess. Kingpins, their lieutenants, and 
     ``legitimate'' businessmen in league with drug lords are the 
     pieces the Committee is most interested in seeing swept from 
     the board. Therefore, the Committee has transferred MET 
     resources in this account to the DEA line in the 
     ``Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement'' [ICDE] account. 
     Joint operations funded by the ICDE account focus on the most 
     long-term, resource-intensive, high payoff drug cases. The 
     Committee has left in place funding for Regional Enforcement 
     Teams, and will monitor their results to determine whether 
     they should be retained or transferred to the ICDE account.
       ``Drug Diversion Control Fee'' Account.--The Committee has 
     provided $89,021,000 for DEA's Drug Diversion Control 
     Program. The Committee notes that the request included an 
     additional $24,616,000 for program enhancements based on an 
     unresolved Final Rule. The draft rule proposing a fee 
     increase to support these enhancements has not been published 
     yet. Moreover, the earliest new collections could begin is 
     July 1, 2003, 2 months prior to the end of fiscal year 2003. 
     The request clearly precipitates the ability of the DEA to 
     collect the fees to support these program increases. Should 
     the DEA determine that these enhancements more accurately 
     reflect the mission of the Drug Diversion Control Program 
     than current activities, the DEA may redirect existing 
     resources within this account through the reprogramming 
     process.

                 Immigration and Naturalization Service


                 (INCLUDING OFFSETTING FEE COLLECTIONS)

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,371,440,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,241,787,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,076,509,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $3,076,509,000. The recommendation is $165,278,000 below the 
     budget request.
       The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     increase. The reduction is attributable to the termination of 
     a single program, discussed below, the transfer of

[[Page 639]]

     Chimera funding to a separate account, and the transfer of 
     terrorism task force resources to the Attorney General. The 
     Committee is aware that up to $51,366,000 in carryover will 
     be available to apply to this account and expects that new 
     found efficiencies will free up additional resources.
       Managing into crisis.--Despite clear language in last 
     year's conference report directing the INS to report 
     shortfalls in the ``user fee account'' and instructing INS to 
     fully cover ``base'' expenses in that account before 
     undertaking program initiatives, the INS approached the 
     Committee in June 2002 regarding an impending shortfall in 
     the ``user fee account''. Congressional direction had been 
     ignored, new spending initiated, and, predictably, crisis 
     resulted. In earlier years, INS has allowed excessive, 
     unbudgeted, temporary duty and overtime expenditures to eat 
     deeply into capital investment accounts, resulting in serious 
     shortfalls of basic equipment, vehicles, and facilities. 
     There is only so much that can be done to nurse the INS 
     through these self-inflicted wounds. Therefore, not later 
     than 30 days after date of enactment of this Act, the INS 
     shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations detailed 
     spend plans for each appropriated and fee account under this 
     heading. Each plan shall clearly demonstrate INS' strategy 
     for living within its means in fiscal year 2003. The 
     Committee will not entertain reprogrammings or supplemental 
     requests increasing funding for any INS accounts short of the 
     most extraordinary of circumstances.
       Training.--The long-awaited report on the effectiveness of 
     basic training for Detention Enforcement Officers [DEOs] 
     confirms the Committee's worst fears about the inadequacy of 
     DEO training. INS has undertaken four initiatives to better 
     prepare DEOs for their duties: (1) a review and 
     reclassification of the DEO position description, (2) a 
     revision of the course curriculum development process and 
     training methodology, (3) an increase in the scope and length 
     of the DEO basic training program, and (4) an expansion of 
     continuing education to include all officers in the DEO 
     program. The Committee is anxious to learn whether these 
     initiatives are improving DEO preparedness for an 
     increasingly complex job. Therefore, the Committee directs 
     the INS to provide a follow up report on the effectiveness of 
     basic training and continuing education for DEOs. The report 
     shall be delivered not later than March 1, 2004.
       Information technology.--In a sense, the INS has the most 
     difficult job of all in the war on terrorism. The volume of 
     people moving across our border on a daily basis is 
     staggering. Aliens that already have visas arriving at ports 
     of entry benefit from a presumption of innocence, because 
     they have been screened and passed by the U.S. Government 
     once. Cues that inspectors might think indicate 
     suspiciousness, such as an unwillingness to lock eyes, often 
     have cultural roots that will muddle the results of spot 
     interviews. How does an inspector pick out the terrorist from 
     thousands of innocent people?
       Intelligence is the key, but this is intelligence of an 
     order we have never seen. Many of the perpetrators of 
     terrorist attacks are from good families, have no criminal 
     record, and give no indication of a propensity for violence 
     until they immolate themselves and everyone near. It is not 
     enough to target and eliminate the masterminds. We must also 
     identify and neutralize the recruit before his or her mission 
     is accomplished.
       The current approach taken by the INS to address this 
     problem, more bodies, more overtime, more of everything, will 
     only hinder the most clumsy or conscience-stricken 
     terrorists, a record borne out by whom we have picked up and 
     whom we haven't. INS inspectors and Border Patrol agents must 
     have real-time access to intelligence files. Not back in 
     headquarters or at their offices, but at their posts or in 
     their vehicles. Only then can they hope to discern targets 
     from clutter.
       Unfortunately, the tangle of stovepiped data bases that 
     comprise the INS' current information technology [IT] 
     capabilities will take years to untangle. The Chimera system, 
     mentioned above, will someday provide the backbone for a 
     universal network, but the dream will not become reality for 
     several years. In the meantime, investments must be targeted 
     at existing systems that will ultimately integrate into 
     Chimera. New stand alone systems, or antiquated systems 
     scheduled for decommissioning as Chimera comes on line, do 
     not merit further investment. The Committee looks forward to 
     the IT strategy that will be proposed by Justice Management 
     Division on behalf of the INS.
       Border Patrol Staff and Equipment.--Since the terrorist 
     attacks on September 11, 2001, the security of our borders 
     has become paramount. To ensure there are sufficient 
     personnel to protect our borders, the Committee 
     recommendation includes an additional $76,276,000 for 570 
     additional Border Patrol agents, as authorized. Along with 
     additional personnel, the recommendation includes an 
     additional $28,000,000 to enhance the Enforcement Case 
     Tracking System [Enforce] database and to deploy additional 
     biometric equipment to better document and track the 
     investigation, identification, apprehension, detention, and/
     or removal of immigration law violators.
       Entry-exit system.--The Committee has begun to analyze the 
     full implications of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa 
     Entry Reform Act of 2002, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, the 
     Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act of 2000, the Immigration 
     and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement Act of 
     2000, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 
     Responsibility Act of 1996, and the Immigration Act of 1990 
     regarding travel to and from the United States by Americans 
     and foreigners. In brief, to fully implement laws currently 
     on the books, it will be necessary for every traveler leaving 
     or entering the United States, be they U.S. citizens or not, 
     to be fingerprinted and to carry a machine-readable, tamper-
     proof travel document with at least one unique biometric 
     identifier. Information on all travelers, including 
     biographical information, biometrics, and entry and exit 
     dates, will be retained within a central database, readily 
     available to Federal, State, and local law enforcement 
     agencies. Mandatory interviews for visa applicants will be 
     required to provide necessary intelligence information and 
     certain aliens will be required to register periodically. 
     Cost estimates to properly implement the current body of law 
     runs into the tens of billions of dollars. Based upon 
     information provided to date, it is unclear what the proposed 
     entry-exit system is or will become, and how it will address 
     these expansive directives. More importantly, the case has 
     yet to be made as to how entry-exit would stop would-be 
     terrorists from entering the country. Therefore, no funds 
     have been provided for this project.
       Border security--On its own initiative, the Justice 
     Department recently unveiled the National Security Entry-Exit 
     Registration System [NSEERS]. The ignoring of reprogramming 
     requirements aside, it is alarming to see INS establishing 
     what appears to be a new application to a stovepiped legacy 
     computer system. It was exactly this kind of system 
     development, the narrow design of systems or applications to 
     replicate paperwork transactions that were unable or only 
     marginally able to communicate with other databases, that 
     created the information technology disaster that confronts 
     the INS. NSEERS should be an application of Chimera. Also, 
     the value of NSEERS remains questionable. Billed as a 
     terrorist dragnet, only the most feeble-minded terrorist is 
     apt to be tripped up by the questioning of an INS inspector. 
     Although the Department recently claimed that NSEERS had 
     nabbed 180 people, the implication being that they were 
     terrorists, all 180 were routine criminals. Commendable, to 
     be sure, but an inadvertent gain rather than mission success. 
     The Committee cannot support expanding this program until it 
     has a far better idea of how NSEERS fits into the INS' new 
     enterprise database and how brief interviews will reveal 
     terrorists for whom they are.
       Pay Upgrades.--Attrition rates among Border Patrol agents 
     and INS inspectors is at an all time high. To help address 
     this ever increasing crisis, the Committee recommendation 
     includes an additional $37,200,000 for a Border Patrol pay 
     increase from the GS-9 level to the GS-11 level for 
     journeymen with 1 year of successful work experience and 
     $20,600,000 for a pay increase for INS inspectors with 1 year 
     of successful work experience at the GS-9 level.
       Land Border Inspectors.--The recommendation includes 
     $34,000,000 to hire, train and deploy 460 additional 
     immigration inspectors that will enhance border security at 
     land border ports-of-entry.
       Staffing Levels.--The Committee notes that INS staffing 
     levels at the Santa Teresa and Columbus Ports of Entry [PoEs] 
     in New Mexico are not sufficient to meet the needs of those 
     ports. In particular, though non-commercial traffic has 
     significantly increased over the past year at Santa Teresa, 
     INS staffing has not kept pace. The Committee urges the INS 
     to give full consideration to the needs of the New Mexico 
     PoEs when making staffing decisions.
       The Committee is aware of a growing number of illegal 
     aliens in Iowa and Illinois. The Committee directs the INS to 
     review the INS law enforcement needs of the Quad Cities, a 
     metropolitan area incorporating the Iowa communities of 
     Davenport and Bettendorf, and the Illinois communities of 
     Moline and Rock Island.
       In addition, the Committee recognizes the heavy and 
     increasing workload in the upper Shenandoah Valley, and 
     encourages the INS to establish a sub-office with an officer-
     in-charge in Roanoke, Virginia.
       Alternatives to Detention.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $7,300,000 for the Alternatives to Detention 
     Program. This funding will allow community-based 
     organizations to screen asylum seekers and other INS 
     detainees for community ties, provide them with necessary 
     services, and help to assure their appearance at court 
     hearings.
       Legal Orientation Programs.--The Committee recommends 
     $2,800,000 for non-governmental agencies to provide ``live 
     presentations'' to persons in INS detention prior to their 
     first hearing before an immigration judge. These 
     presentations will provide immigration detainees with 
     essential information about immigration court procedures and 
     the availability of legal remedies to assist detainees in 
     distinguishing between meritorious cases and frivolous cases.

[[Page 640]]

       Information Resource Management.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes an additional $83,400,000 for an 
     ``interoperable law enforcement and intelligence data 
     system'' for the INS, referred to as Chimera, within a 
     separate account under General Administration to be managed 
     by the Justice Management Division.
       Green Cards.--The Committee is aware that resident aliens 
     in the United States are using over 2,000,000 green cards 
     with no expiration date. These documents do not have the 
     secure features of the optical memory cards currently used as 
     green cards, and thus could be subject to extensive 
     counterfeiting and represent a major impediment to securing 
     the nation's borders. The Committee directs the INS to submit 
     a report not later than July 1, 2003 to the Committees on 
     Appropriations with the number of green cards currently 
     issued with no expiration date, the original date they were 
     issued, as well as a proposed plan to replace these older 
     green cards.
       The recommendation also includes $6,544,000 for the Debt 
     Management Center, $16,289,000 for the Law Enforcement 
     Support Center, and an additional $100,000,000 to address 
     shortfalls in vehicles and equipment.


                       Offsetting fee collections

       As in past years, the Committee directs the INS to allocate 
     funding for base activities before it undertakes any program 
     enhancements.


                          Immigration user fee

       The Committee recommends a spending level of $658,295,000, 
     the full amount requested.
       To the degree that fee resources are available, the 
     Committee includes an increase of $51,503,000 over fiscal 
     year 2002 for 760 additional inspectors and support staff for 
     inspections operations at airports and seaports.
       INS Inspector Staffing.--The Committee recommends the INS 
     give full consideration to the needs of the Miami 
     International Airport and the Ed McNamara Terminal Northwest 
     Airlines World Gateway when making airport inspector staffing 
     decisions.
       Passenger and Crew Manifests.--The Committee directs the 
     INS to fully cooperate with and provide up to $25,000,000 as 
     a reimbursement to the Transportation Security 
     Administration's [TSA's] Office of Maritime and Land Security 
     in developing and establishing a Maritime Intelligence System 
     [MIS], as defined in Section 70113 of the Maritime 
     Transportation Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-295). The 
     MIS system shall integrate and analyze collected data on 
     passenger and crew manifests and any other information that 
     could be construed as potential threats against the United 
     States.


                      Immigration examinations fee

       The Committee recommends a spending level of 
     $1,462,803,000, the full amount requested.
       To the degree that fee resources are available, the 
     Committee recommendation includes an increase of $50,496,000 
     to accelerate the pace of efforts to reduce the time required 
     to adjudicate immigration benefit applications. With this 
     funding, the INS claims it will be able to attain a 6-month 
     national average for the processing of all benefits 
     applications and ensure application processing and related 
     services are timely, consistent, fair and of high quality.


                      Breached Bond/Detention Fund

       The Committee recommends a spending level of $171,275,000, 
     the full amount requested.
       Detention and Removals.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $50,069,000 for the planning and construction of 
     additional detention bed space. This funding will address the 
     increasing number of apprehended illegal aliens, which 
     consistently exceeds available detention space.


                              Construction

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$228,054,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................267,138,000
Committee recommendation....................................267,138,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $267,138,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request.
       The recommendation includes $14,000,000 for building 
     demolition, perimeter security, and dormitory and classroom 
     construction at the Charleston Border Patrol Academy and 
     $250,000 for the construction of an INS processing and office 
     facility in Nome, Alaska.

                         Federal Prison System


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,808,600,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,081,765,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,068,237,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $4,068,237,000, including, within available resources, a 4.1 
     percent pay increase. The recommendation is $13,528,000 below 
     the budget request.
       Activation of new prisons.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes funding for activation of four new facilities which 
     will add 4,416 beds: FCI Gilmer, West Virginia, USP Big 
     Sandy, Kentucky, USP McCreary County, Kentucky, and USP 
     Victorville, CA. The Committee also recommends activation 
     funding for expansions at USP Marion, Illinois and FCI 
     Safford, Arizona. These two expansions will add nearly 800 
     beds.
       Female inmates.--The Committee supports the National 
     Institute of Corrections' continuing work with correctional 
     systems (State and Federal) to address the issue of staff 
     sexual misconduct involving female inmates in correctional 
     institutions through the provision of technical assistance, 
     education and training, and other monitoring activities 
     pursuant to the recommendations of the General Accounting 
     Office.


                        Buildings And Facilities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$813,552,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................395,243,000
Committee recommendation....................................470,221,000

       The Committee recommends a total of $470,221,000 for fiscal 
     year 2003 for the construction, modernization, maintenance, 
     and repair of prison and detention facilities housing Federal 
     prisoners. This amount is $74,978,000 above the budget 
     request.
       The Committee continues to strongly support the BOP's 
     construction program, designed to provide sufficient inmate 
     beds to manage overcrowding in facilities and maintain them 
     in a safe and secure manner for staff, inmates and 
     surrounding communities. The funding provided for facilities 
     includes:


                      Sentenced Capacity Projects

Expansion of Existing Facilities:
  FCI Sandstone, MN (Housing Unit)............................5,300,000
  FCI Otisville, NY (Witness Security Unit)..................11,600,000
  USP Florence, CO (Special Housing Unit).....................5,600,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal.................................................22,500,000
                                                       ================

New Facilities:
  Hazelton, WV (Secure Female Unit)..........................66,600,000
  FCI Pollock, LA...........................................116,872,000
  USP Berlin, NH (With Work Camp and Protective Custody Unit)20,000,000
  FCI Mid-Atlantic Region....................................34,837,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal................................................238,309,000
                                                       ================

    Total New Construction Program Increases................260,809,000

       The Committee commends the BOP for working diligently to 
     increase inmate housing capacity by expanding existing 
     facilities within available funds. The Committee fully 
     supports these cost effective efforts and expects the BOP to 
     provide reprogramming and funding transfer requests in a 
     timely manner to expedite these construction projects.-

                    Federal Prison Industries, Inc.


                (Limitation On Administrative Expenses)

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,429,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,429,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,429,000

       This Committee recommends a limitation on administrative 
     expenses of $3,429,000 for the Federal Prison Industries, 
     Inc. This amount is equal to the fiscal year 2002 funding 
     level and to the amount requested.
       The Committee continues to strongly support Federal Prison 
     Industries [UNICOR] and recognizes its importance in the 
     efficient and safe management of Federal prisons. UNICOR 
     provides prison inmates with the opportunity to learn 
     important work habits, participate in meaningful employment 
     which keeps them productively occupied during work hours, and 
     develop improved job skills which reduces recidivism. The 
     Committee also recognizes the necessity for UNICOR to grow as 
     the inmate population increases. Finally, UNICOR is a self-
     supporting revolving fund the resources of which are derived 
     from sales of its products. In the future, the BOP is 
     directed to submit only UNICOR's appropriations language 
     exhibit.

                       Office of Justice Programs


                           Justice Assistance

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$437,008,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................214,024,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,232,057,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $2,232,057,000. The recommendation is $2,018,033,000 above 
     the budget request.
       The funding provided for justice assistance includes funds 
     to States for research, evaluation, statistics, information 
     sharing, emergency assistance, missing children assistance, 
     counterterrorism programs, and the management and 
     administration of grants provided through the Office of 
     Justice Programs.


                           Justice Assistance


                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

National Institute of Justice..............................$64,879,000 
  The Office of Science and Technology.....................(38,000,000)
  The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology C(22,000,000)

[[Page 641]]

Bureau of Justice Statistics................................32,335,000 
Missing children............................................29,000,000 
Regional information sharing system.........................28,278,000 
White Collar Crime Center....................................9,230,000 
Office of Domestic Preparedness..........................2,038,000,000 
                                                       ================

Management and administration...............................30,335,000 
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total justice assistance.............................2,232,057,000 

       National Institute of Justice [NIJ].--The Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $64,879,000. The 
     recommendation is $13,422,000 below the budget request and 
     $10,422,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level.
       Office of Science and Technology.--The Committee commends 
     the efforts of the leadership of the National Institute of 
     Justice's [NIJ] Office of Science and Technology [OS&T]. This 
     office has assisted local law enforcement in making 
     significant advances in the areas of non-intrusive, concealed 
     weapons and contraband detection, vehicle stopping, DNA 
     testing, public safety standards development, officer 
     protection, less-than-lethal incapacitation, public safety 
     communications, information management, counterterrorism, 
     crime mapping, location and tracking, secure communications, 
     and noninvasive drug detection. In addition, the Committee 
     commends and encourages the continuing partnership that OS&T 
     has developed with the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology with the goal of developing standards and carrying 
     out scientific and engineering research related to the public 
     safety community.
       To implement the mission of OS&T, pursuant to The Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296), the Committee 
     recommends $38,000,000 for OS&T from within the overall 
     amount provided for NIJ. In addition, within the funds 
     provided for the local law enforcement block grant program, 
     $20,000,000 is for OS&T to assist local law enforcement units 
     in identifying, selecting, developing, modernizing, and 
     purchasing new technologies in accordance with the 
     aforementioned Act.
       The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology 
     Centers.--Since 1994, the National Law Enforcement and 
     Corrections Technology Centers [NLECTC] have served the State 
     and local law enforcement and corrections communities by 
     providing support, research findings, and technical expertise 
     on issues that allow them to perform their jobs safer and 
     more effectively. The NLECTC system consists of facilities 
     located across the country and each facility specializes in 
     one or more specific areas of research and development. The 
     Committee commends the work that NIJ's Office of Science and 
     Technology [OST], and through it the NLECTC system, has done 
     to improve the capabilities of the law enforcement and 
     corrections communities. To further the work of the NLECTC 
     system, the Committee recommends $22,000,000 for the 
     continued support of the system. Within available funds, the 
     Committee recommends that NIJ consider funding the Center for 
     Civil Force Protection and the Public Safety Technology 
     Assessment Facility at Sandia National Laboratories in New 
     Mexico. The Center provides important physical security 
     counterterrorism assistance to Federal, State, and local law 
     enforcement. Of the amount provided, the Committee directs 
     that funds be distributed in the following manner to the six 
     Regional Centers:


   The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Regional 
                                Centers

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                                 Amount

Northeast Regional Center.........................................3,000
Southeast Regional Center.........................................3,000
Rocky Mountain Regional Center....................................3,000
Western Regional Center...........................................3,000
Rural Law Enforcement Technology Center...........................3,000
Northwest Center..................................................3,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total for Regional Centers...................................18,000

       In addition to the above activities, within the amounts 
     provided, NIJ is to provide grants for the following 
     projects:
       --$750,000 for Lane County, Oregon's Breaking the Cycle of 
         Juvenile Drug Abuse program to decrease juvenile crime 
         and drug abuse through early identification and 
         intervention;
       --$1,500,000 is for the Center for Task Force Training 
         Program;
       --$750,000 to the North Carolina Attorney General's Office 
         for Telemarketing Fraud Enforcement and Privacy Project; 
         and
       --$650,000 for the Mistral Security Non-Toxic Drug 
         Detection and Identification Aerosol Technology.
       --$350,000 for the Pennsylvania Task Force on Prison 
         Overcrowding;
       --$750,000 for Operation Ceasefire in Charleston, SC for 
         overtime for response teams.
       Bureau of Justice Statistics [BJS].--The Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $32,335,000. The BJS is 
     responsible for the collection, analysis, and publication of 
     statistical information on crime, criminal offenders, victims 
     of crime, and the operations of the Nation's justice systems.
       Office of Victims of Crime.--The Office of Victims of Crime 
     [OVC] administers formula and discretionary grants designed 
     to benefit victims, provide training to professionals who 
     work with victims, develops projects to enhance victims' 
     rights and services, and undertakes public education and 
     awareness activities on behalf of crime victims. In fiscal 
     year 2002, OVC was provided $68,100,000 to respond to the 
     September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The Committee directs 
     that the OVC provide a report to the Committee no later than 
     March 15, 2003 on the status of how the emergency funds have 
     been spent.
       Missing Children Program.--The issue of child exploitation 
     has been raised to the forefront of the national conscience 
     due to the recent string of child pornography and missing 
     children cases that have been highlighted in the media over 
     the last few months. The Committee continues to strongly 
     support the Missing and Exploited Children Program run by the 
     Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Committee recommends 
     $29,000,000 to continue and expand efforts to protect the 
     nation's children, especially in the areas of locating 
     missing children, as well as the growing wave of child sexual 
     exploitation found on the Internet.
       Within the amounts provided, the Committee has included the 
     following:
       (1) $12,500,000 to expand the Internet Crimes Against 
     Children Task Forces [ICAC Task Force]. These task forces 
     assist State and local law enforcement agencies in acquiring 
     the knowledge, equipment, and personnel resources necessary 
     to successfully prevent, interdict, and investigate cases of 
     child exploitation on the Internet.
       (2) $12,500,000 for National Center for Missing and 
     Exploited Children [NCMEC]. The NCMEC is the clearinghouse 
     and national resource center regarding the issue of missing 
     and exploited children. Last year the Center accepted over 
     155,000 hotline calls from law enforcement, prosecutors, and 
     citizens requesting information or services. The Center also 
     assisted in the recovery of more than 5,000 missing, 
     abducted, and runaway children.
       In addition, the Committee created the CyberTipline under 
     the NCMEC in fiscal year 1999. The CyberTipline provides 
     online users an effective means of reporting Internet-related 
     child sexual exploitation in the areas of distribution of 
     child pornography, online enticement of children for sexual 
     acts, and child prostitution. Within the amounts provided for 
     the NCMEC, the Committee recommends $2,245,000 for the 
     continuation of the Cybertipline.
       (3) $3,000,000 for the Jimmy Ryce Law Enforcement Training 
     Center for training of State and local law enforcement 
     officials investigating missing and exploited children cases.
       Regional Information Sharing System [RISS].--The Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $28,278,000. The RISS program 
     provides funds to maintain six regionally-based information 
     sharing centers which allow for information and intelligence 
     services to be disseminated nationwide addressing major, 
     multi-jurisdictional crimes. The Committee supports the 
     current effort to link the RISS system with the Law 
     Enforcement On-Line [LEO] information system, which will 
     greatly expand access to critical law enforcement information 
     at the Federal, State, and local level.
       Management and Administration.--The Committee provides 
     $30,335,000 for management and administration of the Bureau 
     of Justice Assistance account. The Committee directs that the 
     current hiring freeze that has been placed on the Office of 
     Justice Programs [OJP] be lifted and that OJP actively fill 
     all authorized vacant positions. Furthermore, the OJP is 
     directed to provide quarterly reports to the Committee on the 
     status of its hiring process.
       Competitive sourcing.--The Department has reported to the 
     Committee that ``OJP is not outsourcing OJP activities. OJP 
     is undertaking a `competitive sourcing' effort''. The 
     Committee supports this effort if it can be assured that 
     effectiveness is improved and savings are attained. However, 
     utilizing competitive sourcing for a large percentage of the 
     OJP workforce is not acceptable. The Department still needs a 
     majority of personnel who are sworn to support and defend the 
     Constitution of the United States against all enemies. The 
     Committee directs that, before proceeding with any change, 
     OJP shall provide a detailed plan to the Committees on 
     Appropriations. The plan shall be approved by both Committees 
     before the Department proceeds with ``competitive sourcing''.
       The Office of Domestic Preparedness.--The Committee has 
     long viewed State and local jurisdictions' ability to detect, 
     prevent and respond to a terrorist attack as one of its 
     highest priorities. State and local responders are first to 
     arrive on the scene when a terrorist attack occurs and must 
     be prepared to protect life and property. This function is 
     inherently non-Federal, although Federal resources and 
     expertise are needed to manage the crisis and provide support 
     to State and local assets when an attack overwhelms their 
     resources.
       The recommendation demonstrates the Committee's continued 
     support for the Office

[[Page 642]]

     of Domestic Preparedness [ODP]. ODP must continue its vital 
     and successful program for assisting State and local response 
     agencies. Continued funding to ODP is more critical now than 
     ever, given the unprecedented threat to our national security 
     that we currently face. Responding to an act of terrorism is 
     manifestly different than responding to natural disasters. 
     Grouping terrorism preparedness and response, especially as 
     it concerns weapons of mass destruction [WMD], under an 
     emergency management ``all hazards'' approach puts our first 
     responders, as well as the general public, at risk. Treating 
     both types of catastrophe response in the same manner does 
     not account for the fundamental differences between the 
     national security/law enforcement response to terrorism and 
     the emergency management response to terrorism.

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

State Strategic Planning........................................60,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
Web Site Pilot...................................................5,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
Equipment:
  Grants.....................................................1,047,000 
  Pine Bluff....................................................10,000 
  Equipment Standards and Testing...............................15,000 
  POD Enhancements..............................................20,000 
  NSSE POD.......................................................5,000 
  IAB............................................................1,000 
  Emerging Equipment Demo/Test-bed program......................15,000 
  T/A for State Plans...........................................15,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Equipment......................................1,128,000 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Training:
  NDPC Training Program........................................190,000 
    CDP........................................................[50,000]
    LSU........................................................[35,000]
    NMT........................................................[35,000]
    TEEX.......................................................[35,000]
    NTS........................................................[35,000]
  Dugway........................................................10,000 
  Continuing and Emerging Training.............................125,000 
    Consequence Training........................................[5,000]
  State Training Competitive Discretionary Grants...............80,000 
  New Training Centers..........................................60,000 
  Virtual Medical Campus.........................................2,000 
  Dartmouth Institute for Security and Technology Studies.......18,000 
  Oklahoma City National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of 
    Terrorism...................................................18,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Training.......................................503,000 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Exercises:
  Grants.......................................................200,000 
  Top Officials [TOPOFF] Exercise Series........................15,000 
  Federal, State and Local [FSL] Regional Exercise Series........5,000 
  Improved Response Program [IRP]...............................10,000 
  Interagency Exercise Fund......................................8,000 
  Cross-border Exercises.........................................3,000 
  Prepositioned Equip. Program POD Exercises.....................3,000 
  Evaluation & After Action Program..............................5,000 
  Emerging Exercise Needs........................................3,000 
  Exercise Support Program......................................20,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Exercises........................................272,000 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Technical Assistance [TA].......................................50,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
Management and Administration...................................20,000 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, Office of Domestic Preparedness...................2,038,000 

       The recommendation includes $60,000,000 for State Strategic 
     Planning. This funding will allow States to begin formalizing 
     their planning for homeland security, a process that will be 
     headed by the homeland security offices established by the 
     Governors. ODP is directed to work with the States to 
     reassess their response capabilities and to update and 
     enhance their Three-Year Statewide Domestic Preparedness 
     Strategies in fiscal year 2003. In updating and enhancing 
     their Strategies, States are expected to consult with local 
     governments on all aspects of their respective strategies and 
     on the allocation of resources in support of those 
     strategies. Also, of the funds provided, $5,000,000 is for 
     ODP to continue a pilot project to develop a comprehensive, 
     interactive web site to support the Nation's State and local 
     first responders and disseminate to them a wide spectrum of 
     critical information needed for domestic preparedness.
       Equipment.--The recommendation includes $1,128,000,000 for 
     the equipment grant program managed by the Office of Domestic 
     Preparedness [ODP]. This program provides funding to enhance 
     the capabilities of State and local jurisdictions to respond 
     to and mitigate the consequences of terrorist attacks. The 
     Committee urges ODP to work with the States to develop 
     procedures that expedite the awarding of equipment grants. 
     The Committee does not support the concept of requiring 
     States to match equipment grants funds in order to qualify 
     for funding under this program.
       Of the funds provided for equipment, the recommendation 
     includes $1,047,000,000 for grants to the States based on 
     their approved Three-Year Statewide Domestic Preparedness 
     Strategies. These funds are available to all States on a 
     formula basis, as authorized by section 1014 of the USA 
     PATRIOT ACT, (Public Law 107-56). Also of the funds provided 
     for equipment, $10,000,000 is recommended to continue and 
     expand ODP's successful mobile equipment training program at 
     Pine Bluff Arsenal. The augmentation of this program will be 
     required because of the significant increases in funding for 
     equipment for first responders contained in this Act. Also of 
     the funds provided for equipment, $15,000,000 is for the 
     development of standards for personal protective, 
     decontamination, detection, and communications equipment. 
     These types of equipment are lacking in operational standards 
     for use in a WMD incident. Also within the funds provided for 
     equipment, $1,000,000 is for the Interagency Board [IAB] to 
     continue its efforts to develop equipment standards. The IAB 
     was established by the Justice Department in 1999 to advise 
     and make recommendations to the Attorney General on matters 
     concerning first responder equipment and standards. Also of 
     the funds provided for equipment, $20,000,000 is for ODP's 
     Prepositioned Equipment [POD] Program. This program has 
     established sets of prepositioned equipment designated to be 
     deployed immediately to the scene of a terrorist attack for 
     use by first responders. This funding will provide for the 
     maintenance and operational costs of the 11 equipment pods 
     currently funded under this program. Also of the funds 
     provided for equipment, $5,000,000 is recommended for the 
     purchase and operation of an equipment pod that can be 
     strategically positioned during designated National Security 
     Special Events [NSSE]. This pod will provide specialized 
     equipment for 150 responders to immediately replenish 
     equipment that is lost, damaged, or destroyed during a WMD 
     attack at a NSSE. Also of the funds provided for equipment, 
     $15,000,000 is for the development of an Emerging Equipment 
     Demonstration and Test-bed Program. This program is designed 
     to rapidly deploy new and emerging technologies into the 
     field for true operational testing. This program will help 
     bring state-of-the-art technologies to first responders in 
     the field. Finally, $15,000,000 is recommended for technical 
     assistance for State plans.
       Training.--The recommendation includes $503,000,000 for ODP 
     for first responder training programs. Of the funding 
     provided for training, $190,000,000 is for the continuation 
     and expansion of the training currently underway at the 
     existing Consortium training centers. Of this amount, the 
     Center for Domestic Preparedness shall receive $50,000,000; 
     Louisiana State University, New Mexico Institute for Mining 
     and Technology, Texas A&M University, and Nevada Test Site, 
     shall each receive $35,000,000.
       The Three-Year Statewide Domestic Preparedness Strategies 
     exposed a ``preparedness gap'' in this Nation. The number of 
     individuals that must receive training before we can consider 
     ourselves prepared for terrorism involving WMD is 
     considerable. However, in order to provide training to 
     greater numbers of responders, additional capacity must be 
     built. Of the funding provided for training, $10,000,000 
     shall be used to continue an already-established program 
     between Dugway Proving Ground and the National Domestic 
     Preparedness Consortium [NDPC] to develop and deliver 
     advanced bio-terrorism training utilizing the Dugway Proving 
     Ground's specialized facility.
       The Committee further expects that, with the funding 
     provided, ODP will develop and implement a comprehensive and 
     aggressive training standardization program. This should 
     include the establishment of training standards for each of 
     the key public safety disciplines involved in terrorism 
     response. The Committee expects that all current and future 
     training will adhere to these standards, once developed.
       New Training Centers.--Of the funds provided, $60,000,000 
     shall be to establish new training centers. Decisions 
     concerning the establishment of the new training centers 
     shall be made by ODP in consultation with the Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       Dartmouth Institute for Information Infrastructure 
     Protection.--Of the funds provided, $18,000,000 is 
     recommended for the Institute for Information Infrastructure 
     Protection [I3P], a consortium of not-for-profit and academic 
     research institutions (including national laboratories 
     operated by private contractors) managed and led by the 
     Institute for Security Technology Studies at Dartmouth 
     College. Within this amount, $15,000,000 is for grants. The 
     I3P will collaborate with the Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy, the President's Critical Infrastructure 
     Protection Board, other relevant government agencies, and the 
     private sector to develop a prioritized national research and 
     development [R&D] agenda in cyber security and information 
     infrastructure protection [IIP]. It will also fund research 
     to address R&D priorities identified by the I3P

[[Page 643]]

     agenda and leadership, and promote collaboration and 
     information sharing among cyber security and IIP research 
     institutions in academia, industry, and government.
       Oklahoma City National Memorial Institute for the 
     Prevention [MIPT].--Of the funds provided, $18,000,000 is 
     recommended for MIPT. MIPT's Best Practices/Lessons Learned 
     Knowledge Base is an Internet repository where emergency 
     responders can share best practices, observations, and 
     lessons learned to improve our ability to combat terrorism on 
     U.S. soil. It provides a forum for responders in every State, 
     Territory, and community across the United States. This 
     information sharing will allow trend analysis to strengthen 
     civilian responder training programs, identify equipment 
     shortfalls, and focus research agendas.
       Exercises.--The recommendation includes $272,000,000 for 
     ODP to assist State and local jurisdictions in planning and 
     conducting WMD exercises to test and validate their terrorism 
     response plans and make determinations regarding future 
     needs. Based on its pre-September 11 review of the Statewide 
     Strategies, ODP estimated that more than 2,500 State and 
     local jurisdictions needed to conduct WMD exercises. Within 
     the amount provided for exercises, $200,000,000 is for grants 
     to meet critical combating terrorism exercise needs 
     identified in the Three-year Statewide Domestic Preparedness 
     Strategies. These grants will provide the resources to 
     properly design, develop, conduct, and evaluate performance-
     based exercises under a State-administered multi-year 
     exercise program.
       In May, 2000, ODP ran the highly successful ``Top 
     Officials'', or ``TOPOFF'', exercise. This was an exercise 
     series which provided a cycle of performance-based exercises 
     for Federal, State, and local officials and first responders. 
     TOPOFF demonstrated coordinated national crisis and 
     consequence management capabilities in response to a range of 
     WMD threats. The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the 
     continuation of the TOPOFF series, with TOPOFF II scheduled 
     to take place in May, 2003. TOPOFF II involves 9 major 
     exercise activities, culminating in a full-scale national 
     exercise.
       Within the funds made available for exercises, $5,000,000 
     is for the Federal, State, and local [FSL] exercise program. 
     This program integrates regional homeland security activities 
     through a comprehensive cycle of exercises. This program's 
     particular emphasis is on rural homeland security, multi-
     State emergency management assistance compacts [EMACS], and 
     multi-jurisdictional mutual aid agreements [MAAs].
       For the continuation of the Nunn-Lugar-Domenici [NLD] 
     Domestic Preparedness Program, the Committee recommends 
     $10,000,000 for the NLD Chemical and Biological Improved 
     Response Program [IRP] to conduct analysis and evaluations of 
     response improvements, including doctrine, plans, policies, 
     procedures, protocols, equipment, and exercises to address 
     terrorism involving chemical or biological weapons.
       Federal, State, and local participation in national-level 
     combating terrorism exercises is hampered by inadequate and 
     uneven funding. This results in incomplete or diminished 
     participation by State and local jurisdictions, thwarting 
     effective analysis of combating terrorism preparedness. Of 
     the funds made available for exercises, $8,000,000 shall be 
     to establish an exercise fund, to be administered by ODP, to 
     ensure full participation by key Federal, State, and local 
     entities in national-level combating terrorism exercises. For 
     periodic exercises required to test and evaluate pod 
     deployment and use, the Committee recommends $3,000,000. 
     Also, $3,000,000 is recommended for Cross Border Exercises 
     with Mexico and Canada.
       Due to the scope, pace, and complexity of the National 
     exercise program, $5,000,000 is recommended for an evaluation 
     program. This program will allow ODP to conduct evaluations 
     of programs and program activities conducted in support of 
     existing ODP training, exercise, technical assistance, and 
     equipment programs.
       For emerging exercise needs, $3,000,000 is recommended. The 
     Committee directs ODP to conduct a comprehensive review of 
     government and commercial exercise and simulation 
     applications and methodologies. This will augment the 
     capacity of State and local jurisdictions to effectively 
     address their exercise requirements.
       Also within funds made available for exercises, $20,000,000 
     is for specialized technical support to assist States and 
     local jurisdictions in administering multi-year combating 
     terrorism exercise programs. This assistance shall consist of 
     direct technical support to States and local jurisdictions 
     for exercise design, development, and evaluation, and the 
     conduct of performance-based exercises.
       Technical assistance.--The recommendation includes 
     $50,000,000 for the ODP's technical assistance and planning 
     support for the States. The Committee directs ODP to provide 
     targeted, site-specific assistance to local jurisdictions. Of 
     this amount, $7,000,000 is to develop a pilot program to 
     field and evaluate strategies for assessing and reducing 
     vulnerabilities at events involving large concentrations of 
     people in both urban and rural environments. This program 
     should establish generic vulnerability assessment tools for 
     State and local government self-assessments; provide 
     assistance for the application of such tools in support of 
     State and local public and private entities responsible for 
     coordinating such events; work with event coordinators, 
     emergency managers, and first responders to expose 
     vulnerabilities via exercises and simulations; identify, 
     field, and evaluate emerging technologies and structural 
     procedures to mitigate vulnerabilities; prepare and circulate 
     a newsletter that describes and evaluates the performance of 
     emerging technologies; and evaluate overall vulnerability 
     assessment program impacts, and transition ``lessons 
     learned'' in support of State and local planning activities.
       Management and administration.--The Committee recommends 
     $20,000,000 for the Office of Domestic Preparedness to manage 
     the expansion of its domestic preparedness programs, as 
     directed in this Act.


               State And Local Law Enforcement Assistance

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,654,454,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................751,878,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,368,415,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,368,415,000. This recommendation is $616,537,000 above the 
     budget request. These funds provide assistance to State and 
     local governments in their drug control and other law 
     enforcement efforts as follows:


 Office of Justice Programs--State and local law enforcement assistance

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

Local law enforcement block grant..............................400,000 
  Boys and Girls Clubs.........................................[90,000]
  Law Enforcement Technology...................................[20,000]
Cooperative agreement program...................................20,000 
Indian assistance...............................................48,000 
  Indian Country Prison Grants.................................[35,000]
  Alcohol and Substance Abuse...................................[5,000]
  Indian tribal courts program..................................[8,000]
Byrne grants:
  Discretionary................................................134,700 
Drug courts.....................................................50,000 
Juvenile accountability incentive block grant..................249,450 
Violence Against Women Act programs............................390,565 
Substance abuse treatment for state prisoners...................70,000 
Safe Return Program................................................900 
Law enforcement family support programs..........................1,500 
Senior citizens against marketing scams..........................2,000 
Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention...................................1,300 
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total, State and local law enforcement assistance........1,827,715 

       Local law enforcement block grant.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $400,000,000 to continue the local 
     law enforcement block grant program which provides grants to 
     localities to reduce crime and improve public safety. Of the 
     amounts provided, $20,000,000 will be provided to NIJ to 
     assist local units to identify, select, develop, modernize, 
     and purchase new technologies for use by law enforcement. The 
     recommendation for funding for the local law enforcement 
     block grant continues the commitment to provide local 
     governments with the resources and flexibility to address 
     specific crime problems in their communities.
       Boys and Girls Clubs.--Within the amounts provided for the 
     local law enforcement block grants, the Committee recommends 
     $90,000,000 for the Boys and Girls Clubs. The Committee 
     commends Boys and Girls Clubs of America for its effort to 
     reach all children who are in need of support and 
     affirmation.
       Indian Country Grants.--The recommendation provides 
     $48,000,000 for Indian Country grants. Of this amount, 
     $8,000,000 is to assist tribal governments in the 
     development, enhancement, and continuing operation of tribal 
     judicial systems by providing resources for the necessary 
     tools to sustain safer and more peaceful communities and to 
     implement Section 201 of title II of the Indian Tribal 
     Justice Technical and Legal Assistance Act of 2000, and 
     $35,000,000 is for Indian Country Prison Construction. The 
     Committee understands that the Comprehensive Indian Resources 
     for Community Law Enforcement (CIRCLE) initiative is working 
     well in three Indian communities in which it is deployed. The 
     Committee urges the department to consider ways to expand the 
     CIRCLE project into other communities. In addition, the 
     Committee requests that not later than June 15, 2003, the 
     Department submit a proposal to expand the CIRCLE project by 
     integrating and coordinating resources from across the 
     Federal agencies for purposes of Indian law enforcement, 
     public safety, substance abuse, tribal justice systems, and 
     facilities construction into a small grant program to Indian 
     tribes and tribal consortia.

[[Page 644]]

       Within the amount for prison construction, the Committee 
     directs that grants be provided for the following projects:
       --$5,000,000 to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in South 
         Dakota for a Juvenile Detention and Recovery Facility;
       --$2,900,000 to the Yankton Sioux Tribe in South Dakota for 
         the construction of a Juvenile Detention Facility;
       --$900,000 to the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe for the 
         construction of a detention facility.
       Edward Byrne Grants to States.--The Committee 
     recommendation provides $134,700,000 for the Edward Byrne 
     Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program, 
     which is for discretionary grants.
       Within the amount provided for BJA discretionary grants, 
     the Committee expects the Bureau of Justice Assistance to 
     provide:
       --$12,000,000 for the continuation of Project HomeSafe for 
         safety packets which include a gun locking device and 
         information on how to handle and store guns safely. These 
         safety packets are distributed by the foundation at no 
         charge to any municipality that adopts the program. The 
         Committee continues to expect that no funds be obligated 
         for this purpose until at least an interim gun lock 
         standard is adopted to ensure that the locks being 
         distributed are not vulnerable to accidental or 
         intentional disengagement. In addition, the Committee 
         expects that a final gun lock standard be adopted no 
         later than March 1, 2003.
       --$4,500,000 for the motor vehicle title information 
         system, as authorized by the Anti-car Theft Improvement 
         Act.
       --$500,000 for the Adams County, Pennsylvania Emergency 
         Services Training Facility for program enhancements;
       --$150,000 to the University of North Dakota's Agricultural 
         Law Program to ensure that farmers, agribusiness and 
         other rural residents are well informed and represented 
         on agriculture related issues;
       --$1,100,000 for an alcohol interdiction program designed 
         to investigate and prosecute bootlegging crimes as part 
         of a statewide effort to reduce fetal alcohol syndrome in 
         Alaska;
       --$210,000 to the Alaska D.A.R.E. Drug Rehabilitation 
         Program for a statewide coordinator and for the 
         implementation new DARE curriculum;
       --$1,000,000 for the Alaska Native Justice Center for a 
         restorative justice program;
       --$1,540,000 for the City of Alexandria for costs related 
         to the Moussaoui, Lind, and Hanssen trials;
       --$1,500,000 for New York's Alfred University Rural Justice 
         Institute to provide support services to youths and 
         families who are victims of domestic violence;
       --$1,500,000 for the An Achievable Dream in Newport News, 
         Virginia, which provides services to ask-risk youth to 
         help them perform better academically and socially;
       --$750,000 for the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission;
       --$250,000 to the Beaverton, Oregon Police Department for 
         the Identity Theft Prevention Initiative;
       --$200,000 to the Bristol, Rhode Island Police Department 
         for the outfitting of, and support training for, a mobile 
         command post;
       --$500,000 for the Oglala Sioux Tribe in South Dakota to 
         automate the functions of the court system, so as to 
         enhance the capacity of the Oglala Sioux Tribe justice 
         system to arrest, prosecute, convict, and rehabilitate 
         offenders;
       --$350,000 for the Children's Medical Assessment Center in 
         South Carolina to extend forensic healthcare services to 
         outlying rural areas, and to extend the tracking and 
         medical case management programs to all law enforcement 
         jurisdictions in the local Tri-County area;
       --$150,000 to the Chattanooga Endeavors program in 
         Tennessee to expand services and establish new public-
         private partnerships;
       --$500,000 for the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention 
         in Illinois;
       --$750,000 to the City of Cincinnati, Ohio to improve 
         training for police recruits and current officers;
       --$1,000,000 to the City of Ocean Springs, Mississippi to 
         equip an Emergency Management and Public Safety Facility;
       --$250,000 for the City of Wellston, Missouri for a holding 
         cell;
       --$500,000 for the Community Safety Initiative in Kansas 
         City, Missouri;
       --$100,000 for the Criminal Justice Institute in Arkansas 
         for DNA training and law enforcement;
       --$750,000 to Iowa State University for the creation of a 
         Cyber Protection Laboratory which will test and evaluate 
         computer crime defense mechanisms;
       --$2,750,000 for the D.A.R.E. program to re-train all 
         D.A.R.E. officers nationwide and produce D.A.R.E. 
         workbooks;
       --$1,000,000 to the Alaska Department of Corrections for a 
         web based corrections offender information system, to be 
         implemented in cooperation with Utah, New Mexico, 
         Colorado, and Idaho;
       --$499,477 for the New Mexico Administrative Office of the 
         Courts to establish Dependency Drug Courts in three 
         judicial districts;
       --$80,000 to the Marysville, California police department 
         for a mobile command center;
       --$2,000,000 to the South Carolina Department of Natural 
         Resources for expanded responsibilities related to 
         homeland security;
       --$300,000 to the Metropolitan Family Services in Illinois 
         for the Domestic Violence and Substance Abuse program;
       --$600,000 for Tulane University in Louisiana for a 
         domestic violence clinic;
       --$200,000 to the Native American Community Board in Lake 
         Andes for the continuation of the Domestic Violence 
         shelter and Community Prevention Program;
       --$300,000 to the Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic 
         Violence for the establishment of the Rhode Island 
         Supreme Court's Domestic Violence Training and Monitoring 
         Unit (DV Unit);
       --$1,000,000 for the TRIAD senior fraud prevention program;
       --$550,000 for the Albuquerque, NM DWI Resource Center to 
         fund drunk driving awareness and prevention programs;
       --$215,000 to Edmunds County, South Dakota for a county-
         wide emergency warning system;
       --$4,000,000 for the Eisenhower Foundation for the Youth 
         Safe Haven program;
       --$5,750,000 to establish the Emergency Providers Access 
         Directory [EPAD], which provide a comprehensive list of 
         all State and local first responders so that resources 
         can be quickly marshaled in the case of future large 
         scale disaster.
       --$50,000 for the Court Appointed Special Advocate [CASA] 
         program in Davison, South Dakota which will provide 
         advocates for children in the First Circuit;
       --$200,000 for Franklin County, New York's Domestic 
         Violence Intervention Program to establish a third 
         shelter in Northern New York and to increase the 
         program's outreach efforts;
       --$500,000 to Gallatin County, Montana for the Gallatin 
         County Re-Entry Program to provide supervision, support, 
         and training to offenders referred by Gallatin County 
         Courts;
       --$500,000 for the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 
         Department's Hispanic American Resources Team [HART] to 
         provide enhanced resources to Las Vegas' Hispanic 
         community;
       --$30,000 to the Huntington County, Pennsylvania Courthouse 
         for security enhancements;
       --$750,000 for the Sam Houston State University in Texas to 
         establish the Institute for the Study of Violent Groups;
       --$750,000 for the Iowa Elderly Fraud Prevention 
         Initiative;
       --$1,000,000 to the Iowa Department of Public Health for an 
         intense drug treatment initiative aimed at nonviolent 
         drug offenders serving time in Polk, Linn, and Story 
         counties;
       --$1,000,000 for Jane Doe, Inc. in Massachusetts;
       --$1,500,000 to Jefferson County Alabama for an county-wide 
         Emergency Warning System;
       --$1,970,000 for the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Bi-State 
         Safety Project to provide safety mechanisms, medical 
         services, and communications systems for visitors to the 
         Lewis and Clark trail during the Bicentennial 
         Commemoration;
       --$2,000,000 for the New Hampshire Department of Safety to 
         train safety and municipal officers in the North Country 
         (Litteton Area Learning Center);
       --$3,000,000 for the Mental Health Courts Program in 
         accordance with the America's Law Enforcement and Mental 
         Health Project Act;
       --$300,000 for Louisiana's Metropolitan Battered Women's 
         Program;
       --$240,000 to the Minneapolis, Minnesota Police Department 
         for its Crises Intervention Team;
       --$1,000,000 to the University of Mississippi for TechLaw 
         online training for police;
       --$400,000 to continue support for an innovative and 
         effective program which helps single head-of-household 
         women with children reject a life of crime and drugs and 
         build a self supporting lifestyle;
       --$4,750,000 for the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys to 
         support the National District Attorneys Association's 
         participation in legal education training at the National 
         Advocacy Center;
       --$400,000 for the New Hampshire Department of Safety to 
         purchase two Remotec Andres V-A1 hazardous duty robot;
       --$5,000,000 for the National Center for Justice and the 
         Rule of Law at the University of Mississippi School of 
         Law to sponsor research and produce judicial education 
         seminars and training for judges and other criminal 
         justice professionals;
       --$6,000,000 to continue the effective crime prevention 
         program (McGruff the Crime Dog) and meet the enormous 
         demand from local law enforcement organizations regarding 
         effective crime prevention practices;
       --$3,000,000 for the National Fatherhood Institute, the 
         National Physicians Center for Family Resources, and the 
         Alabama Police Institute to study the causes and 
         consequences of out-of-wedlock childbirth and its impact 
         on criminal activity;

[[Page 645]]

       --$150,000 to the University of North Dakota's Native 
         Americans into Law program to recruit and retain American 
         Indian law students;
       --$270,000 to the University of South Carolina for the 
         National Center for Prosecution Ethics;
       --$250,000 to the University of South Carolina's Children's 
         Law Office for programs to improve the professional 
         practice in child maltreatment and juvenile justice in 
         South Carolina;
       --$600,000 to the New Hampshire Department of Corrections 
         for the purchase of digital radios to allow officers in 
         the Department to communicate with other law enforcement 
         officers around the State;
       --$500,000 for program expansion at the Northeastern 
         Illinois Public Safety Training Academy;
       --$185,000 for South Dakota's Northern Hills Area court 
         Appointed Special Advocate [CASA] Program for the 
         expansion of the volunteer advocate network and to create 
         an extension office to serve the Fourth Circuit;
       --$5,000,000 to the New York City Police Department for 
         safety equipment to respond to a chemical or biological 
         incident;
       --$3,000,000 for the New Hampshire State Police's and US 
         Attorneys Office's cooperative effort to combat crime at 
         the border, gang-related crime, and in investigating 
         outlaw motorcycle gangs;
       --$350,000 to Alaska's Partners for Downtown Progress for 
         an innovative program for alcohol offenders, using 
         treatment in lieu of incarceration;
       --$500,000 for the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Safe Streets 
         Initiative;
       --$500,000 for the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Police Bureau's 
         Virtual Perimeter Video Surveillance system, which allows 
         live monitoring of multiple locations by robotic cameras;
       --$410,781 for the Colorado Springs, Colorado Police 
         Department to integrate the Police Accountability and 
         Service Standards (PASS) Model department-wide;
       --$300,000 to the Rhode Island Select Commission on Race 
         and Police-Community Relations for its Police 
         Professionalism Initiative;
       --$350,000 for Turtle Mountain Community College's `Project 
         Peacemaker' which seeks to increase the number of 
         American Indians trained in either Tribal government or 
         law;
       --$8,250,000 for the South Carolina State Ports Authority 
         [SCSPA] for the implementation of Project Seahawk. This 
         project is designed to enhance security at and around the 
         Port of Charleston. Funding is provided for the 
         acquisition of communications equipment, computer 
         software and hardware technology, and research and 
         development needed to execute the project;
       --$3,000,000 to include New Hampshire police, medical and 
         fire services in a comprehensive public safety training 
         and communications system;
       --$105,000 for the Multnomah County, Oregon sheriff's 
         Office to purchase portable radios to be used by the 
         fifty-one members of its reserve unit;
       --$1,000,000 for the Ridge House Treatment Facility to 
         provide stabilization, habilitation, and re-entry skills 
         to the Nevada criminal justice population;
       --$250,000 for Riverfront District Community Policing 
         Stations in Montgomery, Alabama;
       --$500,000 to the Robinson Community Learning Center in 
         South Bend, Indiana to support efforts at reducing the 
         rate of local youth violence and young adult homicide;
       --$100,000 to the Safe Harbor Domestic Violence Shelter in 
         Aberdeen, South Dakota for equipment and programming;
       --$2,500,000 for the Salt Lake Valley, Utah Emergency 
         Communications Center;
       --$2,000,000 for the San Joaquin Valley, California Rural 
         Agricultural Crime Prevention Program;
       --$450,000 for the City of Savannah, Georgia to expand the 
         Savannah Impact Program [SIP];
       --$2,000,000 for continued support for the expansion of 
         Search Group, Inc. and the National Technical Assistance 
         and Training Program to assist States, such as West 
         Virginia, to accelerate the automation of fingerprint 
         identification processes;
       --$1,750,000 to the City of Fairfield, California for 
         planning, equipment, and training necessary for response 
         in the event of an emergency involving hazardous 
         materials;
       --$2,000,000 for Standing Against Global Exploitation 
         [SAGE] to replicate and expand training materials, 
         regional training modules, and intensive technical 
         assistance for survivors of prostitution, sexual 
         exploitation, violence, abuse, and trauma;
       --$250,000 to the State of Wisconsin Court Interpreter's 
         Program for statewide training programs for current and 
         potential court interpreters;
       --$1,000,000 to Stop the Violence in South Carolina for 
         programs to reduce crime and create sustainable 
         neighborhood development through a successful model of 
         community involvement;
       --$180,000 for the Homeless Outreach Team [HOT] in San 
         Diego, California which assists the homeless in San Diego 
         in being placed in the appropriate social services 
         programs;
       --$1,500,000 for the National Judicial College in Reno, 
         Nevada to provide education and training to judges, 
         focusing particularly on judicial proficiency, 
         competency, skills, and productivity;
       --$2,500,000 for the Tools for Tolerance Program;
       --$5,000,000 for grants to implement Sections 101, 102, and 
         103 of Title I of the Indian Tribal Justice Technical and 
         Legal Assistance Act of 2000;
       --$508,476 for the Shonshone-Bannock Tribe at the Fort Hall 
         Reservation in Idaho. Funds will be used for the 
         architectural and engineering fees associated with 
         construction of a new Justice Center;
       --$400,000 to the University of New Hampshire for the 
         violent crime against women on campus reduction program;
       --$3,000,000 for the development of a security system at 
         the Emergency Operations Center located in Virginia;
       --$1,000,000 for Washington County, Oregon for its County 
         Alcohol and Drug Free Housing project;
       --$250,000 to the University of Southern Colorado for the 
         Western Forensic Science and Law Enforcement Training 
         Center;
       --$200,000 to the Yell County, Arkansas Juvenile Detention 
         Center for drug and alcohol detoxification, counseling, 
         and rehabilitation program; and
       --$500,000 for Montana's Yellowstone County Family Drug 
         Court which provides services to parents and guardians 
         whose children have been removed from the home because of 
         abuse or neglect due to substance abuse.
       Drug courts.--The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for drug 
     courts. The Committee notes that localities can also access 
     funding for drug courts from the Local Law Enforcement Block 
     Grant and Juvenile Accountability Block Grant. In addition, 
     the Committee directs OJP to provide a report to the 
     Committee no later than December 31, 2003, on the long term 
     sustainability of the drug courts being established under 
     this program.
       Juvenile accountability incentive block grant.--The 
     Committee recommends $249,450,000 for the Juvenile 
     Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program to address the 
     growing problem of juvenile crime by encouraging 
     accountability-based reforms at the State and local level.
       Violence Against Women Act programs.--The Committee 
     recommends $390,565,000 for grants to support the Violence 
     Against Women Act. Grants provided under this recommendation 
     are for the following programs:


                  Violence Against Women Act programs

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

General formula grants.........................................184,765 
  National Institute of Justice..................................5,200 
  OJJDP-Safe Start Program.....................................[10,000]
  BJS Study of domestic violence case processing.................1,000 
Grants to encourage arrest policies.............................65,000 
Rural domestic violence.........................................40,000 
Legal Assistance Program........................................40,000 
Campus Violence Program.........................................10,000 
Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation...........................5,000 
Safe Haven Program..............................................15,000 
Education and Training to Assist Disabled Female Victims.........7,500 
Stalker Database Expansion.......................................3,000 
Training programs................................................5,000 
Victims of child abuse programs:
  Court appointed special advocates [CASA]......................12,000 
  Training for judicial personnel................................2,300 
  Grants for televised testimony.................................1,000 
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total, VAWA programs...................................390,565,000 

       The fiscal year 2003 funding will be used to develop and 
     implement effective arrest and prosecution policies to 
     prevent, identify, and respond to violent crimes against 
     women, strengthen programs addressing stalking, and provide 
     much needed victims services. This includes specialized 
     domestic violence court advocates who obtain protection 
     orders. In addition, programs should be strengthened to 
     encourage reporting of domestic violence by providing 
     assurances that law enforcement and attorney support systems 
     would be available. This funding is to be distributed to 
     States to significantly enhance the availability of services, 
     prosecutors, and law-enforcement officials to women and 
     children who are subjected to domestic violence. The fiscal 
     year 2002 Senate Report required the Department to submit a 
     report detailing a plan to address violence against

[[Page 646]]

     women with particular emphasis on Alaska which ranks first in 
     the Nation for domestic violence and child abuse. The report 
     was to be completed by May 1, 2002, but has yet to be 
     received by the Committee. The Department is directed to 
     provide monthly updates on its progress until the report is 
     completed as required.
       Substance abuse treatment for State prisoners.--The 
     Committee recommends $70,000,000, for the Residential 
     Substance Abuse Treatment Program for State Prisoners [RSAT]. 
     The RSAT Program provides financial and technical assistance 
     to assist State and local governments in developing and 
     implementing residential treatment programs within State and 
     local correctional and detention facilities in which inmates 
     are incarcerated for a period of time sufficient to permit 
     substance abuse treatment. Consistent with the authorizing 
     statute, States must agree to require drug testing of 
     individuals enrolled in the treatment program and give 
     preference to projects that assist in the placement of 
     program participants with community-based aftercare services, 
     such as parole supervision, education and job training, and 
     halfway houses. In addition, as in fiscal year 2002, up to 10 
     percent of the total program level maybe used for the 
     treatment of parolees. These grants should only fund 
     treatment for individuals up to 1 year after they are 
     released from a State prison.
       Safe Return Program.--The Committee recommends $900,000 to 
     continue and expand training of law enforcement and other 
     emergency response personnel to locate missing Alzheimer 
     patients.
       Law enforcement family support programs.--The Committee 
     recommendation provides $1,500,000 for this program to assist 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in 
     developing and implementing policies and programs to reduce 
     stress and provide appropriate support services for law 
     enforcement officers and their families.
       Senior citizens against marketing scams.--The 
     recommendation provides $2,000,000 for this program to assist 
     law enforcement in preventing and stopping marketing scams 
     against the elderly. The Committee requests that some program 
     sessions be held at the National Advocacy Center. Also, the 
     Committee directs that this effort be coordinated with the 
     Federal Trade Commission.
       Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention.--The recommendation 
     provides $1,300,000 for grants to combat motor vehicle theft.


                         Weed and Seed Program

Appropriations, 2002........................................$58,925,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................58,925,000
Committee recommendation.....................................58,925,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $58,925,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request.
       The Committee also recommends bill language, similar to 
     that included in previous fiscal years, making funds 
     available for grants or agreements with State agencies or to 
     reimburse Federal agencies in order to execute the weed and 
     seed strategy, and also allows for the use of other 
     Department of Justice funds to support the Weed and Seed 
     Program.


                  Community Oriented Policing Services

                    Violent Crime Reduction Programs

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,050,440,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,381,034,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,120,228,000

       The Committee recommends $1,120,228,000 for the Community 
     Oriented Policing Services [COPS]. The recommendation is 
     $310,406,000 below the budget request, which included 
     $800,000,000 for the proposed Justice Assistance Grant 
     Program that was to be transferred to OJP and that the 
     Committee does not fund. The Committee provides funding under 
     this account as follows:
     Public Safety and Community Policing Programs
       COPS Hiring Program.--The Committee recommends $330,000,000 
     for the COPS hiring program. Within the amounts available for 
     officer hiring, up to $180,000,000 is available for the 
     hiring of school resource officers. To date, the COPS Office 
     has made over 32,700 grants to more than 12,400 of the 
     Nation's 18,000 law enforcement agencies. Through its hiring 
     grant programs, COPS has funded over 114,000 officers, 
     including 4,500 School Resource Officers. The Committee does 
     not support the Administration's proposal of eliminating the 
     COPS hiring programs. There continues to be a need at the 
     State and local level for additional law enforcement 
     officers, especially in light of the fact that the nation's 
     first responders are now recognized as the front line of 
     defense against future terrorist attacks.
       The Committee also recognizes that State and law 
     enforcement agencies depend on technology and communications 
     equipment to perform their jobs safely and effectively. 
     Therefore, the Committee includes language for a new 
     communications technology grant program under the COPS Crime-
     Fighting Technologies section of this report.
       Protecting our children.--Terrorists have the ability to 
     confront the United States with contingencies we have never 
     considered. One such contingency involves our children. 
     Therefore, the Committee provides $10,000,000 for training to 
     assist school resource officers in preventing terrorist acts 
     aimed at schools. The officers will be trained in non-
     intrusive defensive measures to reduce the vulnerability of 
     schools to terrorist attacks and offensive measures to 
     prevent, deter, and respond to terrorism. The Committee 
     directs that a report be provided to the Committees on 
     Appropriations no later than April 5, 2003, to include a 
     spending plan for this effort.
       Training and Technical Assistance.--The COPS Office has 
     created a network of Regional Community Policing Institutes 
     [RCPIs] that are strategically located throughout the country 
     and make up a national network that disseminates training and 
     technical assistance to officers and community members on a 
     diverse array of issues, including community policing, the 
     effective use of computers and communications technology, and 
     police integrity. To date, more than 173,000 law enforcement 
     personnel and community members have been trained through the 
     RCPI network and the Community Policing Consortium. The 
     Committee recommendation includes $21,000,000 for COPS to 
     continue providing training and technical assistance to the 
     law enforcement community.
       Indian Country.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $40,000,000 to be used to improve law enforcement 
     capabilities on Indian lands and native villages, both for 
     hiring uniformed officers, including village public safety 
     officers, and for the purchase of equipment and training for 
     new and existing officers. The Committee recommends that 5 
     percent of the COPS funds be provided directly to tribal 
     judicial systems to assist Tribal courts with the increased 
     caseload associated with the increased arrests as a result of 
     the additional funds for tribal law enforcement.
       Police Corps.--The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the 
     Police Corps Program. The Committee understands that the 
     Police Corps program has sufficient unobligated balances 
     available to allow the program to maintain its activities in 
     fiscal year 2003 at the prior year level.
       Methamphetamine Enforcement and Clean-Up.--The Committee 
     recommends $45,000,000 for State and local law enforcement 
     programs to combat methamphetamine production and 
     distribution, to target drug ``hot spots,'' and to remove and 
     dispose of hazardous materials at clandestine methamphetamine 
     labs. Since fiscal year 1998, COPS has provided $141,900,000 
     in funding to more than 60 State and local law enforcement 
     agencies to hire personnel, purchase equipment, and clean-up 
     labs, as well as obtain training in methamphetamine related 
     interdiction tactics, investigation, and prosecution.
       Within the amounts provided, the Department is expected to 
     review, in consultation with DEA, the following proposals, 
     provide grants if warranted, and report to the Committees on 
     its intentions:
       --$500,000 for personnel, training, and equipment under the 
         Arizona Methamphetamine Initiative;
       --$2,000,000 to the Arkansas State Police for the Arkansas 
         Methamphetamine Law Enforcement Initiative;
       --$414,977 for the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and 
         Dangerous Drug Control to properly train and equip 
         officers for operations involving clandestine 
         methamphetamine labs;
       --$150,000 for the Criminal Justice Institute at the 
         University of Arkansas at Little Rock to train rural law 
         enforcement officers in the issues of safety, 
         investigation, and evidence collection related to 
         methamphetamine production;
       --$1,000,000 for the Iowa Office of Drug Control Policy to 
         combat the spread of methamphetamine in east central 
         counties through intelligence gathering, enforcement, and 
         lab clean up operations;
       --$5,000,000 for Hawaii County, Hawaii to carry out 
         enforcement, prosecution, and cleanup activities 
         associated with the manufacture, use, and distribution of 
         methamphetamine;
       --$1,500,000 for the Indiana State Police to combat the 
         production, distribution, and use of methamphetamine;
       --$500,000 to the Iowa Office of Drug Control Policy to 
         create a secure intelligence system;
       --$400,000 for the Iowa Tanks-A-Lock project to equip 
         anhydrous ammonia tanks with locking mechanisms that 
         prevent theft by manufacturers of methamphetamine;
       --$250,000 for the Jackson County, Mississippi Sheriff's 
         Department to combat methamphetamine;
       --$1,000,000 to the Nebraska State Patrol for a 
         Methamphetamine Drug Use Enforcement and Research 
         Program. Funding is provided for drug treatment, 
         enforcement enhancements, and laboratory enhancements;
       --$200,000 to Marion County, Oregon for its Meth Lab 
         Surveillance and Eradication project, which will provide 
         law enforcement with training, equipment, and an improved 
         communications system;
       --$5,000,000 for the continuation of the Washington State 
         Methamphetamine Program;
       --$1,750,000 for the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics to 
         combat methamphetamine

[[Page 647]]

         and to train officers on the proper recognition, 
         collection, removal, and destruction of methamphetamine;
       --$3,500,000 for the Missouri Drug Eradication Initiative, 
         to be divided among Missouri's 29 drug task forces. This 
         amount includes $200,000 for the Jefferson County 
         Sheriff's Office, and $50,000 for the Phelps County 
         Sheriff's Department I-44 Drug Interdiction Project;
       --$1,500,000 for MoSmart. Funding is to assist sheriffs and 
         rural drug task forces in combating methamphetamine 
         production, use, and distribution by providing needed 
         equipment, training, and lab clean up resources;
       --$1,500,000 for the Sioux City, Iowa Regional 
         Methamphetamine Training Center, to provide training to 
         officers from eight States;
       --$500,000 for the Minot State University, ND, rural 
         methamphetamine project;
       --$1,000,000 to the Central Utah Narcotics Task Force for 
         the Sevier Region Methamphetamine Project;
       --$500,000 for the Iowa Office of Drug Control Policy to 
         combat the spread of methamphetamine in south central 
         Iowa through intelligence gathering, enforcement, and lab 
         clean-up operations;
       --$1,000,000 to the Vermont Department of Public Safety to 
         support the Vermont Drug Task Force;
       --$1,400,000 for the Wisconsin Methamphetamine Law 
         Enforcement Initiative; and
       --$1,250,000 for Yellowstone County, Montana's 
         Methamphetamine Initiative which will focus on increased 
         drug enforcement and clean-up.
       Bullet-proof Vests Grant Program.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $26,000,000 to continue this program 
     for formula grants to States, local governments, and Indian 
     tribes to be used for the purchase of armored vests for law 
     enforcement officers in the jurisdiction of the grantee.
     Crime-Fighting Technologies Programs
       Law Enforcement Technology Program.--The Committee 
     recommends $128,815,000 for continued development of 
     technologies and automated systems to assist State and local 
     law enforcement agencies in investigating, responding to and 
     preventing crime.
       Within the amount provided, the COPS office should examine 
     each of the following proposals, provide grants if warranted, 
     and submit a report to the Committees on its intentions for 
     each proposal:
       --$650,000 to the City of El Centro, California for the 
         purchase of 800 MHZ portable and mobile radios for 
         emergency operations;
       --$3,000,000 to the City of Owensboro, Kentucky and Daviess 
         County, Kentucky to implement an improved emergency 
         responder and 911 operations system;
       --$250,000 to the City of Flint, Michigan for upgrades to 
         its 911 emergency response system;
       --$750,000 for the Abilene, Texas Police Department to 
         upgrade and expand the emergency response and 
         communications network;
       --$2,000,000 to the State of Alaska to build statewide 
         shared multi-agency communications network;
       --$1,500,000 for the Alaska Department of Public Safety to 
         upgrade its communications systems;
       --$100,000 for the Brooklyn, Ohio Police Department to 
         purchase a computer aided dispatch system and mobile data 
         terminals;
       --$1,500,000 for Brown County, South Dakota to replace 
         radio equipment, modernize the telephone infrastructure, 
         and purchase computer-aided dispatch technology for the 
         county's Regional Communications Center;
       --$3,500,000 to the City of Jackson, Mississippi for the 
         public safety automated technologies system;
       --$375,000 for South Dakota's Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe to 
         modernize its current court system by upgrading computer 
         systems and acquiring court service processors;
       --$200,000 to the Choctaw County, Alabama Emergency 
         Management Agency for a Emergency Warning Notification 
         System;
       --$1,400,000 for the City of Cincinnati, Ohio to implement 
         a record management system;
       --$2,000,000 to the City of Seattle, Washington for digital 
         video surveillance cameras;
       --$2,000,000 to the City of Oceanside, California to 
         upgrade the public safety radio system;
       --$30,000 to the Charter Township of Mt. Morris, Michigan 
         for closed circuit video camera technology;
       --$8,000,000 for a grant to the Southeastern Law 
         Enforcement Technology Center's Coastal Plain Police 
         Communications initiative for regional law enforcement 
         communications equipment. The State capitol of Columbia 
         should be given due consideration in this year's 
         implementation;
       --$1,250,000 to the Columbia, Mississippi Police Department 
         for technology;
       --$8,000,000 for the Consolidated Advanced Technologies for 
         Law Enforcement [CAT lab] Program;
       --$910,000 for the City and Borough of Juneau, Alaska for 
         equipment and technology enhancements at the Juneau 
         Dispatch and Evidence Center;
       --$300,000 for the City and Borough of Ketchikan, Alaska 
         for an Emergency and 911 Dispatch system;
       --$3,400,000 to Montgomery County, Maryland to establish an 
         integrated criminal justice information system;
       --$1,500,000 for the Rockville, Maryland Police Department 
         to upgrade communications, records management, and 
         emergency services systems;
       --$1,000,000 to the City of Wasilla, Alaska for a regional 
         dispatch center;
       --$800,000 for the City of Jackson, Tennessee to install 
         mobile data terminals in police vehicles;
       --$1,000,000 to the City of Memphis, Tennessee to install a 
         regional law enforcement communications system;
       --$2,000,000 for Cowlitz County, Washington to replace its 
         emergency response radio system;
       --$7,100,000 for the Southwest Border Anti-Drug Information 
         System of which $3,500,000 is to go to the State of 
         Idaho;
       --$950,000 to equip the Critical Infrastructure Protection 
         Project [CIPP] in Virginia;
       --$500,000 for Curry County, Oregon to fund upgrades and 
         repairs needed to maintain the integrity of the 
         communications system;
       --Up to $3,000,000 for the acquisition or lease and 
         installation of dashboard mounted cameras for State and 
         local law enforcement on patrol. One camera may be used 
         in each vehicle, which is used primarily for patrols. 
         These cameras are only to be used by State and local law 
         enforcement on patrol;
       --$1,500,000 for the Delaware State Police to upgrade 
         communications and video capabilities, purchase a real-
         time x-ray machine, and portable receivers;
       --$250,000 to the City and County of Denver, Colorado for 
         an intelligent emergency service dispatch system;
       --$1,500,000 for the City of Des Moines, Iowa to develop a 
         regional geographic information system that will enhance 
         homeland defense and emergency response capabilities;
       --$500,000 for the Downriver Mutual Aid Data Network for an 
         800 mhz digital communications system;
       --$500,000 to Eau Claire County, Wisconsin's Police 
         Communications Project for a computer aided dispatch and 
         records management system;
       --$500,000 to the Sandy City, Utah Police Department for an 
         automated records storage and communications system to 
         operate in conjunction with the court system;
       --$4,250,000 for the Montana Public Safety Services Office 
         to acquire enhanced 9-1-1 communications technology;
       --$1,000,000 for Hamilton County, Ohio to replace and 
         upgrade the current dispatch system;
       --$2,500,000 to the Harrison County, Mississippi Sheriff's 
         Department for the Public Safety Automated Systems 
         project;
       --$400,000 to the Indianapolis, Indiana Police Department 
         to upgrade the existing laptop computer system to a 
         wireless land area network;
       --$850,000 to the National Center for Victims of Crime 
         INFOLINK Program;
       --$1,500,000 for Jefferson County, Alabama to upgrade the 
         public safety radio system and improve interoperability;
       --$1,000,000 to the Johnson County, Kansas Sheriff's 
         Department for a computer-aided dispatch system;
       --$200,000 for the Town of Johnston, Rhode Island to 
         acquire mobile data computers, a video surveillance 
         system for police headquarters, and an automated 
         telephone system;
       --$1,000,000 to the State of Kansas for the Public Safety 
         Communications Network;
       --$25,000 to Bath and Menifee Counties in Kentucky for the 
         purchase of law enforcement equipment;
       --$60,000 to the Rowan County, Kentucky Sheriff's Office 
         and the Morehead Police Department for the purchase of 
         radar units, mobile cameras, communications equipment, a 
         records management system, and other investigative 
         equipment;
       --$3,000,000 for Law Enforcement On-Line [LEO] information 
         system which provides criminal justice information to law 
         enforcement agencies throughout the country;
       --$1,000,000 to the University of Houston in Texas to 
         acquire, test, evaluate, and expand upon existing police 
         vehicle technology;
       --$95,000 for Leake County, Mississippi for police 
         technology and equipment;
       --$3,000,000 for the Louisiana Commission on Law for a 
         statewide Technology Coordination Project;
       --$1,500,000 to the City of Madison, Wisconsin Police 
         Department's Consolidated Communications Project for new 
         hardware, software, data conversion, training, and 
         project administration;
       --$1,000,000 to the Maine State Police for a new voice and 
         data communications system;

[[Page 648]]

       --$1,500,000 to the Metropolitan Radio Board in Minnesota 
         for a regional, digital public safety communications 
         system;
       --$2,000,000 for the City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin's Police 
         Department to purchase and install mobile digital radios 
         in its squad cars, and to increase public access to data 
         through GIS crime mapping and other technologies;
       --$5,000,000 for Minnehaha County, South Dakota to upgrade 
         its existing communications system and to link with the 
         new State of South Dakota Radio System;
       --$2,250,000 to the Missouri Police Chiefs Association for 
         technology, equipment, and regional training;
       --$250,000 to the Madisonville, Kentucky Police Department 
         for mobile data terminals;
       --$500,000 to the City of Montrose, Colorado for a records 
         management system and related technology to interface 
         with the public safety communications system;
       --$20,000 to Moody County, South Dakota for upgrades to the 
         emergency response communications system;
       --$750,000 to the Town of Mountain Village, Colorado for a 
         regional public safety communications system;
       --$2,500,000 for the County of Bergen, New Jersey to 
         implement a multi-agency radio communications system that 
         will provide interoperability capability across all 
         agencies and integrate the operations of the Bergen 
         County government;
       --$5,000,000 to the Pegasus Research Foundation, Inc., in 
         coordination with the National Sheriff's Association, for 
         a multi-state information system that will enable local 
         law enforcement agencies to share important criminal 
         justice information;
       --$2,500,000 for the New Castle County, Delaware Police 
         Department for a new records management system, 
         additional computers and software, and surveillance 
         equipment;
       --$1,200,000 to the Kenton County, Kentucky Sheriff's 
         Office for communications system improvements;
       --$400,000 to the New Hampshire Department of Public Safety 
         to provide equipment and technology to ten small law 
         enforcement agencies throughout New Hampshire;
       --$400,000 to the Newago County Office of Administration 
         for the acquisition of an 800 mhz digital communications 
         system;
       --$4,000,000 to the New Hampshire Police Standards and 
         Training Facility to purchase technology and equipment 
         for training recruits;
       --$350,000 for the City of Huntsville, Alabama to upgrade 
         computer systems in police headquarters and district 
         stations;
       --$575,000 for the Billings, Montana Police Department for 
         vehicle enhancements, including automatic vehicle 
         locators, in-car report writing modules, and mobile 
         roaming technology;
       --$1,050,000 for the Towns of Barre, St. Albans, and 
         Springfield, Vermont to be divided equally, providing 
         $350,000 for each. This funding will be used to upgrade 
         communications capabilities and for the purchase of 
         mobile data terminals;
       --$1,000,000 for the Lubbock, Texas Police Department to 
         purchase mobile data terminals and related software;
       --$1,000,000 for Project Hoosier SAFE-T, a Statewide 
         emergency response and telecommunications project;
       --$3,250,000 for the County of Passaic, New Jersey for the 
         purchase of a trunked radio system;
       --$1,500,000 for the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety 
         to provide comprehensive radio and data communications 
         capabilities for all emergency response agencies units in 
         Oklahoma;
       --$400,000 for the Louisville-Jefferson County, Kentucky 
         Public Safety Communications System to study requirements 
         and develop a plan to implement a common interoperable 
         voice and data communications system for public safety 
         organizations in the metropolitan area;
       --$500,000 to the City of Santa Rosa, California for radio 
         communications and emergency response systems upgrades;
       --$1,500,000 for the Borough of Fort Lee, New Jersey to 
         improve the emergency services radio system;
       --$2,000,000 to the North Carolina State Highway Patrol for 
         the development and implementation of an interoperable 
         Voice Trunking Network [VTN] real-time voice 
         communication system throughout the State;
       --$300,000 to REJIS for the establishment of a computer 
         information system to serve the St. Louis Region;
       --$2,000,000 for the Montana Sheriff's & Peace Officers 
         Association for a reverse 9-1-1 system which will allow 
         State and local officials to distribute emergency 
         information to citizens over their phone lines using 
         auto-dialing technologies;
       --$800,000 to the Rockdale County, Georgia Sheriff's Office 
         to purchase mobile data computers and in-car video 
         systems;
       --$1,850,000 to San Miguel County, New Mexico Emergency 
         Services for a county wide communications system;
       --$1,850,000 to Simpson County, Mississippi for a public 
         safety automated technologies system;
       --$2,500,000 for South Dakota's Sheriffs and Police Chiefs 
         Association to acquire communications equipment, 
         computers, and other crime-fighting technologies;
       --$4,000,000 for a grant for the Southeastern Law 
         Enforcement Technology Center to partner with SPAWAR to 
         advance research and development into software radio 
         technology;
       --$1,500,000 to the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety 
         for a statewide public safety communications system;
       --$1,500,000 to the Kansas City, Missouri Police Department 
         for mobile data terminals;
       --$2,500,000 to Wake County, North Carolina's Department of 
         Public Safety and Emergency Management for technology 
         infrastructure improvements for law enforcement vehicles;
       --$300,000 for the Pike County, Illinois Sheriff's 
         Department to upgrade law enforcement technologies and 
         modernize equipment;
       --$50,000 for the City of West Point, Kentucky for the 
         purchase of law enforcement equipment;
       --$2,000,000 for the training of village public safety 
         officers and small village police offices and acquisition 
         of emergency response and search and rescue equipment for 
         rural communities;
       --$8,000,000 for a grant to the Statewide Communications 
         System initiative in Virginia for regional law 
         enforcement interoperable communications equipment;
       --$250,000 to the Warren County, Mississippi Sheriff's 
         Department for technology enhancements;
       --$125,000 for the Wilkinson County, Mississippi Sheriff's 
         Department for police technology and equipment;
       --$1,500,000 for the Wilmington, Delaware Police Department 
         to purchase surveillance cameras, metal detectors, and 
         protective suits for responding to hazardous materials 
         incidents; and
       --$300,000 to the Wyoming Law Enforcement Academy in 
         Douglas, Wyoming for technology upgrades.
       The COPS Interoperable Communications Technology Program.--
     The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the Office of 
     Community Oriented Policing Services [COPS] Interoperable 
     Communications Technology program, to be designed and 
     implemented by the COPS Office, in consultation with the 
     Office of Science and Technology [OS&T] within the National 
     Institute of Justice, as well as the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance [BJA]. The Committee seeks to utilize the 
     expertise of all three organizations so as to create a grant 
     program that is highly responsive to the immediate needs of 
     the State and local law enforcement community and that takes 
     full advantages of the expertise and lessons learned from 
     OS&T's and BJA's research and development in the field of 
     interoperable law enforcement communications, particularly 
     project AGILE. In addition, the Committee is aware that the 
     Office of Domestic Preparedness and the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology [NIST] have significant experience 
     in law enforcement communications, and therefore it is also 
     recommended that COPS seek guidance from these agencies when 
     designing and implementing this program.
       This program should address the critical need of law 
     enforcement to improve cross-jurisdictional communication and 
     information sharing. The Committee directs the COPS Office to 
     develop and submit to the Committee, no later than 45 days 
     after the implementation of this Act, proposed guidelines for 
     the program. Consistent with the COPS Office's existing grant 
     programs, the COPS Interoperable Communications Technology 
     program should include a 25 percent local match requirement. 
     The Committee is aware that the Federal Emergency Management 
     Administration [FEMA] has a similar program designed for Fire 
     Departments and EMS, and therefore COPS should consult with 
     FEMA to ensure that these programs are providing compatible 
     communications equipment that will allow interoperability 
     among all first responders in a given jurisdiction. The 
     Committee urges that grants under these programs be used, 
     when applicable, to purchase cost effective solutions, which 
     allow agencies to make existing communications systems 
     interoperable. Because of the complexities associated with 
     these systems, the Committee provides $3,000,000, within 
     available amounts, to be transferred to the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance to provide technical assistance, utilizing OS&T's 
     expertise, to grantees regarding the implementation of the 
     equipment.
       The Committee understands and support the need for minimum 
     standards for law enforcement communications technology. 
     Therefore, OS&T should assist COPS in incorporating existing 
     minimum standards into the formulation of this grant program. 
     The Committee also provides, within available amounts, 
     $5,000,000 to be transferred to NIST to continue the efforts 
     of the Office of Law Enforcement Standards [OLES] regarding 
     the development of a comprehensive suite of minimum standards 
     for law enforcement communications.

[[Page 649]]

       In addition, the Committee is aware that a number of cross 
     band repeaters have been distributed by the Federal 
     Government to local jurisdictions throughout the United 
     States. The Committee directs that NIJ provide an inventory 
     no later than March 1, 2003 regarding the locations of all of 
     these systems.
       Crime Identification Technology Act.--The Committee 
     recommends $45,000,000 to be used and distributed pursuant to 
     the Crime Identification Technology Act of 1998, Public Law 
     105-251, of which $11,000,000 is to be transferred to the NIJ 
     to develop technologies to improve school safety. Under that 
     Act, eligible uses of the funds are (1) upgrading criminal 
     history and criminal justice record systems; (2) improvement 
     of criminal justice identification, including fingerprint-
     based systems; (3) promoting compatibility and integration of 
     national, State, and local systems for criminal justice 
     purposes, firearms eligibility determinations, identification 
     of sexual offenders, identification of domestic violence 
     offenders, and background checks for other authorized 
     purposes; (4) capture of information for statistical and 
     research purposes; (5) developing multi-jurisdictional, 
     multi-agency communications systems; and (6) improvement of 
     capabilities of forensic sciences, including DNA.
       Within the overall amounts recommended, the OJP should 
     examine each of the following proposals, provide grants if 
     warranted, and submit a report to the Committees on its 
     intentions for each proposal:
       --$500,000 to the Arkansas Crime Information Center and the 
         Arkansas Sheriff's Association for Phase II of the 
         JailNet project;
       --$2,000,000 to the Arkansas State Police for its Automated 
         Fingerprint Identification System;
       --$1,500,000 to the Ogden City, Utah Police Department for 
         an automatic finger print identification system [AFIS];
       --$800,000 for a Centralized Sex Offender Registry Program 
         for the State of Colorado;
       --$2,000,000 for CJIS WareNET to connect all State law 
         enforcement agencies into one information database;
       --$250,000 to the Ogden City, Utah Police Department for a 
         consolidated records management system;
       --$2,500,000 for the Alaska Criminal Justice Information 
         System to integrate Federal, State, and local criminal 
         records along with social service and other records. It 
         expects the system design to include the capability to 
         provide background checks on potential child care workers 
         for child care providers and families with the permission 
         of the job applicant. The State should consult with the 
         National Instant Check System for technical expertise;
       --$7,500,000 for the South Carolina Judicial Department to 
         purchase equipment for the integration of the case docket 
         system into a state-of-the-art comprehensive database to 
         be shared between the court system and law enforcement;
       --$2,000,000 to the Vermont Department of Public Safety for 
         the Criminal Justice Integration System Project;
       --$3,000,000 to the Minnesota Department of Public Safety 
         for the integrated criminal justice information system 
         titled CriMNet;
       --$200,000 for Pennsylvania's Cross Current Corporation 
         Criminal Justice County Integration Project;
       --$1,500,000 to the Sandy City, Utah Police Department for 
         an automated records storage and communications system to 
         operate in conjunction with the court system;
       --$100,000 to the Ogden City, Utah Police Department for a 
         facial recognition system;
       --$2,000,000 to the Great Cities Universities Coalition in 
         Georgia for criminal justice data gathering and analysis;
       --$1,250,000 to the City of Gulfport, Mississippi for the 
         Gulfport Critical Incident Response Technologies;
       --$1,000,000 to the Missouri Office of the State Court 
         Administrator for computer upgrades and modernizations of 
         the juvenile court system;
       --$450,000 for implement a Louisiana Statewide Sex Offender 
         Database;
       --$500,000 Whatcom County, Washington's Multi-
         Jurisdictional Criminal Justice Data Integration Project 
         to develop and implement an integrated county-wide 
         communications system;
       --$500,000 for the Offenders' Unified Tracking for 
         Rehabilitation, Enforcement, Assistance, and Community 
         Health [OUTREACH] program at the University of 
         Pennsylvania Lee Center of Criminology;
       --$2,000,000 for the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation 
         to purchase Live-Scan machines for use by Ohio law 
         enforcement agencies;
       --$4,000,000 for the South Carolina Law Enforcement 
         Division to obtain equipment, convert existing databases 
         and integrate systems for accurate and rapid processing 
         of information to support identifications for criminal 
         and civil purposes;
       --$250,000 to the South Bend, Indiana Police Department for 
         the purchase of an automated fingerprint imaging system 
         [AFIS];
       --$75,000 to the St. Louis, Missouri Police Department to 
         enhance an existing web-based crime analysis and 
         information sharing system;
       --$1,500,000 for the Syracuse University Cross-Information 
         Language Retrieval system to assist law enforcement in 
         the search and analysis of foreign Internet document 
         databases;
       --$1,900,000 to upgrade automated fingerprint 
         identification systems [AFIS] in Hawaii; and
       --$1,850,000 for the University of Southern Mississippi for 
         crime identification technology training.
       Upgrade Criminal History Records (Brady Act).--Within the 
     amounts available for crime identification technology, the 
     Committee recommends $35,000,000, for States to upgrade 
     criminal history records so that these records can interface 
     with other data bases holding information on other categories 
     of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing firearms 
     under Federal or State statute. Additionally, the national 
     sexual offender registry [NSOR] component of the Criminal 
     History Records Upgrade Program has two principal objectives. 
     The registry assists States in developing complete and 
     accurate in-State registries. It will also assist States in 
     sharing their registry information with the FBI system which 
     identifies those offenders for whom special law enforcement 
     interest has been noted.
       Crime Laboratory Improvement Program.--The Committee 
     recommends $35,000,000 for the crime laboratory improvement 
     program.
       DNA Backlog Elimination.--The Committee recommends 
     $40,000,000 to reduce the DNA sample backlog. Within this 
     amount, $5,000,000 is available for Paul Coverdell Forensics 
     Sciences Improvement grants.
       Within the overall amounts recommended for the Crime 
     Laboratory Improvement and DNA Backlog Elimination Programs, 
     the OJP should examine each of the following proposals, 
     provide grants if warranted, and submit a report to the 
     Committees on its intentions for each proposal:
       --$500,000 to Allegheny County, Pennsylvania for the 
         Allegheny County Forensics Laboratory for improvements;
       --$180,000 to the Arkansas State Crime Lab for the 
         continuation of the Arkansas Crime Lab DNA Backlog 
         Reduction program;
       --$142,900 to the Broome County, New York Government 
         Security Division for a computer and video forensics 
         laboratory;
       --$1,500,000 to establish the Metropolitan Forensic Science 
         Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico which will serve law 
         enforcement agencies involved in Indian Country;
       --$1,800,000 for the National Academy for Forensic 
         Computing in Central Piedmont, North Carolina;
       --$2,000,000 for the DNA Testing Center at Florida Gulf 
         Coast University;
       --$750,000 for the Commonwealth of Virginia to enhance 
         existing State forensic laboratory capabilities for 
         analysis and training;
       --$400,000 for the Birmingham Police Department to improve 
         and update their forensic laboratory;
       --$500,000 for the Forensics Laboratory at East Stroudsburg 
         University, Pennsylvania to assist Pennsylvania's law 
         enforcement community by expediting the processing of the 
         State's DNA backlog;
       --$500,000 to the Indiana State Police, Laboratory Division 
         for personnel, equipment, supplies, and contractual needs 
         in order to meet the increased demands on the DNA 
         Analysis Unit;
       --$500,000 to the Kansas Bureau of Investigation for lab 
         equipment and an information management system to track 
         evidence;
       --$3,000,000 for the Marshall University [MU] Forensic 
         Science Program in West Virginia;
       --$1,750,000 for the Mississippi Crime Lab;
       --$750,000 for the University of Tennessee to continue the 
         development of technology, forensic training, and 
         research;
       --$2,500,000 for the State University of New York at Albany 
         to establish the North East Regional Forensic Institute;
       --$500,000 for upgrades at the Northern Illinois Police 
         Crime Laboratory;
       --$800,000 to the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation for 
         improvements to its Forensic Science Lab;
       --$900,000 to the Pikes Peak Metro Crime Lab in Colorado 
         for renovations necessary to meet the demand for DNA 
         analysis services;
       --$2,000,000 to the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division 
         for equipment to support a Federal and State 
         collaboration of investigators and forensics experts to 
         solve high technology crimes through one center;
       --$3,000,000 to the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division 
         for continued funding to support the growing State and 
         local law enforcement needs in the only full service 
         forensic laboratory in South Carolina;
       --$970,000 to the Southeast Missouri Crime Lab for 
         modernizations and equipment;

[[Page 650]]

       --$500,000 to Texas Tech University for the Southwest 
         Institute for Forensic Sciences;
       --$2,250,000 for the State of Maryland and the City of 
         Baltimore DNA Labs to be evenly divided among each; and
       --$4,000,000 for the West Virginia University [WVU] 
         Forensic Identification Program.
     Prosecution Assistance Programs
       Southwest Border Prosecutions.--The Committee recommends 
     $50,000,000 to provide assistance to State and local 
     prosecutors located along the Southwest border, including the 
     integration and automation of court management systems. This 
     program will provide financial assistance to Texas, New 
     Mexico, Arizona, and California for the State and local costs 
     associated with the handling and processing of drug and alien 
     cases referred from Federal arrests.
       Gun Violence Reduction Program.--The Committee recommends 
     $50,000,000 for a new program that will encourage States to 
     increase the prosecution of gun criminals. This program 
     encompasses a broad range of gun violence strategies, 
     including hiring and training of local prosecutors and 
     implementing public awareness campaigns to advertise tough 
     sentences for gun crimes and foster community support.
     Community Crime Prevention
       Police Integrity Program.--The Committee recommends 
     $17,000,000 for the Police Integrity Program. This program 
     promotes police integrity, the appropriate use of police 
     authority, and community policing through delivering training 
     and technical assistance to local communities, as well as by 
     providing grants that will help agencies create or strengthen 
     local programs that help build trust between police and their 
     communities.
       The Offender Re-entry Program.--The Committee recommends 
     $15,000,000 for the Offender Re-entry Program. The Department 
     of Justice, in collaboration with the Departments of Labor, 
     Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and 
     Education, OJP will provide grants to communities to design, 
     implement, enhance, and evaluate reentry programs for 
     serious, violent offenders.
       Project Sentry.--The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for 
     Project Sentry. This program will create a new Federal and 
     State partnership establishing safe schools task forces 
     across the country that will prosecute and supervise 
     juveniles who violate Federal and State firearms laws and 
     adults who illegally furnish firearms to them. An additional 
     $5,000,000 is provided for this initiative through the 
     Juvenile Justice programs, for a total funding level of 
     $20,000,000.
       Safe Schools Initiative.--The Committee recommends 
     $20,013,000 for programs aimed at preventing violence in 
     public schools, and to support the assignment of officers to 
     work in collaboration with schools and community-based 
     organizations to address the threat of terrorism, crime, 
     disorder, gangs, and drug activities.
       Within the amount provided, the COPS office should examine 
     each of the following proposals, provide grants if warranted, 
     and submit a report to the Committees on its intentions for 
     each proposal:
       --$500,000 for the Alaska Community in Schools Mentoring 
         Program;
       --$1,000,000 for the Police Athletic League of New Jersey 
         to implement a short term residential summer camp program 
         for youth;
       --$1,500,000 for the East Orange Police Athletics League to 
         provide services and programs, including parenting 
         classes, computer training, GED preparation, mentoring 
         and recreational programs;
       --$1,000,000 for Wisconsin's Families & Schools Together 
         [FAST] Prevention Program to provide services to at-risk 
         youth;
       --$60,000 for Washington County, Oregon's Hillsboro Boys 
         and Girls Club Gang Prevention Program which is a 
         targeted outreach program to deter young people from gang 
         involvement;
       --$1,000,000 for the Safe Schools Initiative in the City of 
         Macon, Georgia to allow public schools to expand programs 
         that are dedicated to addressing gangs, drugs, and 
         violence;
       --$500,000 for the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Program 
         in Macon, Georgia. This funding will be used to improve 
         mentoring programs that are dedicated to reducing 
         incidences of juvenile crime, violence, and substance 
         abuse;
       --$1,500,000 to the National ``I Have A Dream'' Foundation 
         for at-risk youth;
       --$400,000 for the New Mexico Police Athletic League to 
         continue the statewide Law enforcement and Professional 
         Business Volunteer Technology and Mentoring program and 
         to expand its program to assist at-risk youth to 14 
         additional sites;
       --$3,300,000 for the University of Montana to facilitate a 
         statewide community based curriculum development 
         initiative that promotes responsible behavior and reduces 
         youth violence in schools and communities;
       --$100,000 for the Jefferson County, Illinois Sheriff's 
         Office and Hamilton-Jefferson County Regional Office of 
         Education to implement a safe schools program;
       --$500,000 for New Mexico's School Security Technology and 
         Resource Center [SSTAR] to provide public schools with 
         physical security assessments, to test existing school 
         security systems, and to implement tailored security 
         plans;
       --$2,295,000 for the Watch D.O.G.S. Across America in 
         Springdale, Arkansas to enhance school safety; and
       --$1,500,000 to provide community-based, cost-effective 
         alternative programs for juveniles who are, have been or 
         maybe subject to compulsory care, supervision or 
         incarceration in public or private institutions in 
         several States including South Carolina.
       Management and Administration.--The Committee recommends 
     $35,000,000 for the management and administration of the COPS 
     Office. Within the funds provided, the Committee directs the 
     COPS office to maintain a staffing level of no less than 215 
     full-time positions. The Committee shall be provided a report 
     no later than December 31, 2002 on the efforts being made by 
     COPS to achieve this staffing goal.

                       Juvenile Justice Programs

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$305,860,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................257,801,000
Committee recommendation....................................315,425,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $315,425,000. 
     The recommendation is $57,624,000 above the budget request.
       Juvenile justice and delinquency prevention.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes a total of $298,425,000 for 
     administrative expenses and grants to States and localities 
     for projects in the areas of education, research, prevention, 
     and rehabilitation including:
       1. $7,112,000 for the Office of Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention [OJJDP] (Part A).
       2. $88,800,000 for formula grants for assistance to State 
     and local programs (Part B).
       3. $60,415,000 for discretionary grants for national 
     programs and special emphasis programs (Part C).
       Within the amounts provided for Part C discretionary grants 
     and all of the other funds provided under Juvenile Justice 
     programs, the Committee directs OJJDP to provide the 
     following grants:
       --$500,000 to the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan 
         for a victims of crime program;
       --$550,000 to the After School and Counseling Programs for 
         At-Risk Native American Youth in South Dakota;
       --$600,000 to Task Inc. for a demonstration project with 
         the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois to serve non-
         violent offenders who demonstrate mental illness and/or 
         substance abuse;
       --$35,000 for the City of Fort Thomas, Kentucky to develop 
         and implement a drug education and prevention program in 
         the school system;
       --$90,000 to Lewis County, Kentucky and the City of 
         Vanceburg, Kentucky to develop and implement a drug 
         education and prevention program in the school system and 
         provide additional resources to address law enforcement 
         problems associated with drug use;
       --$500,000 to the Patriot Center in Rockford, Illinois for 
         programs for at-risk youth;
       --$750,000 to the Bethesda Home for Boys in Savannah, 
         Georgia to assist in providing delinquency intervention 
         counseling;
       --$500,000 to the Birmingham, Alabama Education Technology 
         [BET] Center for at-risk-youth programs;
       --$3,000,000 for the Cal Ripken, Sr. Foundation for youth 
         prevention programs aimed at leadership, teamwork, and 
         drug prevention;
       --$500,000 for the Camden City, New Jersey Housing 
         Authority to establish a drug prevention program for 
         children in low income housing developments;
       --$840,000 for Oregon Partnership's Champions for Healthy 
         Kids and Communities program to provide local youth and 
         adult leadership development education and training on 
         underage drinking and drug use;
       --$60,000 to the South Coast Inter-Agency Narcotics Team, 
         Coquille, Oregon for drug prevention;
       --$600,000 to the United Way of Chittendon County, Vermont 
         to continue the Champlain Mentoring Initiative Project;
       --$700,000 to Charles Mix County, South Dakota for a full-
         time substance abuse counselor for local youth, and for 
         the expansion of youth programs in Lake Andes and Wagner, 
         South Dakota;
       --$5,000,000 to I-Safe America for internet safety 
         education for grades K-12 to prevent child predation on 
         the internet;
       --$75,000 to the Nez Perce Tribe in Lapwai, Idaho for the 
         Child Protection Program to coordinate the services of 
         human resource programs;
       --$4,000,000 to the National Center for Missing and 
         Exploited Children for the Child Sexual Exploitation 
         Campaign to expand services to law enforcement in cases 
         ofchild pornography, child molestation, and sexual 
         exploitation;
       --$400,000 to Ohio's Children Who Witness Violence Program 
         for crisis intervention,

[[Page 651]]

          assessment and treatment services to children and 
         families impacted by violence;
       --$400,000 for Parents and Children Together (PACT) to 
         provide gang prevention services, counseling and 
         outreach, and supervised, alternative activities to youth 
         in the Kuhio Park Terrace and Kuhio Homes housing units 
         in Honolulu, Hawaii;
       --$5,000,000 to the University of New Hampshire's Crimes 
         Against Children Research Center;
       --$400,000 for the Elizabeth Buffum Chace Family Resource 
         Center in Warwick, Rhode Island to provide services for 
         members of the community affected by domestic violence;
       --$100,000 for the Family Ties Supervised Visitation 
         Services in Wakefield, Rhode Island to provide domestic 
         violence prevention and services;
       --$4,500,000 to Fox Valley Technical College of Appleton, 
         Wisconsin to increase and expand services offered to 
         local law enforcement involved in the investigation of 
         child abuse and neglect;
       --$200,000 to From Darkness to Light in Charleston, South 
         Carolina which seeks to prevent child abuse and obtain 
         services for victims of child abuse by providing 
         information about the prevalence and consequences of 
         child sexual abuse;
       --$2,500,000 to expand and replicate the Beyond Bars 
         program;
       --$1,500,000 for Girls and Boys Town, USA;
       --$2,500,000 for the National Council of Juvenile and 
         Family Court Judges to improve the juvenile and family 
         court judicial system, specifically in handling child 
         abuse and neglect cases;
       --$900,000 for the Iowa Big Brothers Big Sisters Rural 
         Youth Mentoring Initiative;
       --$300,000 to the City of Jackson, Mississippi for a 
         juvenile justice program;
       --$2,000,000 to Western Kentucky University for the 
         Juvenile Delinquency Project;
       --$1,890,000 for the Juvenile Fire Setters program;
       --$2,000,000 to the State of Alaska for a Child Abuse 
         Investigation Program;
       --$750,000 to Alaska's LOVE Social Services to establish 
         and enhance after school programs in Fairbanks, AK for at 
         risk youth;
       --$400,000 to the Second Judicial District Juvenile Justice 
         Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, for a truancy 
         prevention program to help reduce juvenile delinquency 
         and juvenile crime;
       --$600,000 for the Boys and Girls Home of Nebraska to 
         expand programs geared towards youth who have committed 
         minor offenses and/or have unique mental, psychological 
         and behavioral problems;
       --$500,000 for a statewide at-risk youth mentoring program 
         in Alaska involving community based organization, 
         schools, and non-profit entities including Boys and Girls 
         Clubs and Big Brother-Big Sisters.
       --$500,000 for Juvenile Offender Treatment and Prevention 
         Project to provide mental health treatment and prevention 
         services to youth and families involved with or at high 
         risk of involvement with the Tulsa County juvenile 
         justice system;
       --$500,000 for the Kansas Big Brothers Big Sisters to 
         expand services to all 105 counties in the State;
       --$1,000,000 to the City of Los Angeles, California for the 
         Family Violence Program;
       --$100,000 for Marion County, Oregon's Life Directions Peer 
         Mentoring Partnership which seeks to break the cycle of 
         drug addiction, violent crime, and teenage pregnancy;
       --$1,000,000 to Montana's Yellowstone Boys and Girls Ranch 
         for the Living Independently and Fostering Empowerment 
         (LIFE) program, which prepares emotionally troubled youth 
         between ages 18 and 22 for independent living;
       --$125,000 to Virginia's Lonesome Pine Office on Youth for 
         the continuation of delinquency prevention and youth 
         development programs;
       --$1,000,000 to the Low County Children's Center in South 
         Carolina for continued support for a collaborative effort 
         among local organizations in Charleston that provide full 
         services to children who have been abused;
       --$400,000 for Pennsylvania's Martin Luther King, Jr. 
         Center for Non-Violence to continue its Life Skills 
         program which enables students to work alongside business 
         and industry mentors;
       --$1,500,000 to Mission St. Joseph's child protection 
         program in North Carolina, which addresses the abuse and 
         neglect of children in the Southern Appalachians who 
         suffer from developmental disabilities;
       --$1,400,000 for the National Child Protection Development 
         and Training Center in Minnesota;
       --$3,000,000 for the National Council of Juvenile and 
         Family Court Judges to provide special training and 
         education for judges assigned to juvenile and family 
         courts nationwide;
       --$600,000 to Prevent Child Abuse America for the National 
         Family Support Roundtable;
       --$2,000,000 to the National Center for Missing and 
         Exploited Children for the NETSMARTZ Initiative to expand 
         the program into schools, homes, and youth organization 
         nationwide;
       --$250,000 for Nevada Child Seekers to assist in locating 
         missing children and providing resources for the families 
         of missing children;
       --$750,000 for the Afterschool Services Pilot program 
         operated by the New Mexico State University Cooperative 
         Extension Service to serve youth who are at home alone or 
         are unsupervised between 2 and 6 in the afternoon;
       --$60,000 for the North Shore Youth Council in Long Island, 
         New York to provide family counseling and youth 
         development services to underserved children in the 
         Miller Place and Rocky Point school districts;
       --$3,000,000 for Parents Anonymous, Inc., to develop 
         partnerships with local communities to build and support 
         strong, safe families and to help break the cycle of 
         abuse and delinquency;
       --$3,000,000 for the `Innovative Partnerships for High Risk 
         Youth' demonstration;
       --$1,250,000 for Prairie View Prevention Services in Sioux 
         Falls, South Dakota to establish a pilot project for the 
         long-term treatment of juvenile methamphetamine abuse and 
         dependence;
       --$150,000 to the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe in South Dakota 
         for Project Safe;
       --$400,000 for the Rapid Response Program in Washington and 
         Hancock Counties in the State of Maine;
       --$500,000 for the Safer Learning Center in Chicago, 
         Illinois for expansion of mentoring and peer-learning 
         programs;
       --$500,000 to Boysville of Michigan and SER Metro Detroit 
         for the Samaritan Center;
       --$4,800,000 for the South Carolina Truancy and Dropout 
         Prevention Initiative;
       --$580,000 for St. Joseph's Indian School in South Dakota 
         for juvenile delinquency prevention programs;
       --$100,000 for the St. Louis for Kids program to provide 
         afterschool programs for at-risk elementary school 
         students in inner city St. Louis, Missouri;
       --$450,000 for the State of Pennsylvania Witness Protection 
         Program;
       --$1,000,000 for the Arkansas Boys and Girls Clubs to 
         expand after-school programs, drug and violence 
         prevention activities, and mentoring of at-risk children;
       --$400,000 for a grant for the Milwaukee Summer Stars 
         Program;
       --$2,250,000 for the Teens, Crime and Community program;
       --$60,000 to the Child Advocacy Center in Springfield, 
         Missouri for support services;
       --$2,500,000 to The Family Development Foundation in Las 
         Vegas, Nevada for domestic violence prevention and 
         intervention;
       --$1,900,000 for law related education for continued 
         support;
       --$300,000 for the University of Southern Mississippi 
         Juvenile Justice Prevention Partnership program;
       --$300,000 to the Vermont Children's Forum to expand the 
         teen leadership training program as well as develop 
         strategies to combat teen delinquency and promote teen 
         leadership development;
       --$300,000 for a grant to the Vermont Coalition of Teen 
         Centers;
       --$1,000,000 for the Wisconsin Safe & Sound Program which 
         combines aggressive enforcement, community organizing, 
         and the establishment of ``safe places'' for children to 
         go during non-school hours in Milwaukee's highest crime 
         areas;
       --$600,000 to Utah State University for the Youth and 
         Families with Promise Program;
       --$300,000 for the Youth Center of Wyoming Valley, 
         Pennsylvania to provide preventative substance abuse 
         education programs;
       --$500,000 for the Vermont Department of Employment and 
         Training to establish a statewide young offender reentry 
         system targeted at young men aged 18-21;
       --$250,000 to Jefferson County, Colorado for the Youth 
         System Improvement Project;
       --$500,000 for the Youth Violence Prevention Research 
         Project at the University of South Alabama;
       --$200,000 for the City of Aberdeen, South Dakota to 
         establish a Youth-Adult Partnership of Aberdeen [YAPA] 
         community youth center, which will provide structured 
         out-of-school activities for teens; and
       --$1,000,000 for Kansas YouthFriends to expand the school 
         mentorship program.
       4. $12,000,000 for the Youth Gangs (Part D) Program which 
     provides grants to public and private nonprofit organizations 
     to prevent and reduce the participation of at-risk youth in 
     the activities of gangs that commit crimes.
       5. $10,000,000 for discretionary grants for State challenge 
     activities (Part E). This program authorizes the OJJDP 
     Administrator to award grants which could increase the amount 
     of a State's formula grant by up to 10 percent, if that State 
     agrees to undertake all of the 10 challenge activities 
     included in

[[Page 652]]

     this program. These challenge activities are designed to 
     improve various aspects of a State's juvenile justice and 
     delinquency prevention program.
       6. $16,000,000 for the Juvenile Mentoring Program [JUMP] 
     (Part G). This program seeks to reduce juvenile delinquency, 
     improve academic performance, and reduce the dropout rate 
     among at-risk youth through the use of mentors. This program 
     has proven successful in reaching at-risk youth and has 
     significant support at the local level. The program brings 
     together young people in high crime areas with law 
     enforcement officers and other responsible adults who are 
     willing to serve as long-term mentors. The Committee 
     encourages OJP to focus on applications submitted by 
     community based organizations with a proven history of 
     providing effective and efficient one-on-one services. Within 
     the amounts provided, the Committee provides $5,000,000 for 
     the Big Brothers/Big Sisters program to expand its capacity 
     to serve more at-risk youth.
       7. $95,000,000 for the At Risk Children's Program (Title 
     V). Under Title V of juvenile justice programs, the At Risk 
     Children's Program provides funding to support comprehensive 
     delinquency prevention plans formulated at the community 
     level. The program targets truancy and school violence; 
     gangs, guns, and drugs; and other influences that lead 
     juveniles to delinquency and criminality. Within the amounts 
     provided, up to $5,000,000 may be used for the Project Sentry 
     program.
       Safe Schools Initiative [SSI].--The Committee includes 
     $15,000,000 within the Title V grants for the Safe Schools 
     Initiative. This effort may include training and services 
     such as: training for teachers to recognize terrorist 
     activities, accountability and responsibility training; 
     violence reduction training, including dispute resolution; 
     juvenile mentoring; training for teachers and families to 
     recognize troubled children; and parent accountability and 
     family strengthening education. Of the amounts provided for 
     the School Safety Initiative, the Committee directs that 
     $10,000,000 be transferred to the Part C discretionary grant 
     program to fund juvenile justice prevention programs that 
     seek to improve the lives of the nation's youth, and thereby 
     improve children's educational environments.
       Tribal Youth Program.--The Committee includes $12,500,000 
     within Title V grants for programs to reduce, control, and 
     prevent crime both by and against tribal and Native youth; 
     for interventions for court-involved tribal youth; for 
     improvement to tribal and Native juvenile justice systems; 
     and for prevention programs focusing on alcohol and drugs, 
     including the Alaska Federation of Natives to develop an 
     underage drinking prevention program in rural Alaska that 
     includes assessment and education and focuses on the children 
     of alcoholics. Within this amount, the Committee directs that 
     $2,000,000 be provided for a grant to fund the Alaska Illegal 
     Drug and Alcohol Use Initiative.
       Enforcing the Underage Drinking Laws Program.--The 
     Committee recommends $25,000,000 within Title V grants to 
     assist States in enforcing underage drinking laws. Each State 
     shall receive $360,000 and $6,640,000 shall be available for 
     discretionary grants to States. The Office of Justice 
     Programs is directed to provide a report to the Committee no 
     later than March 1, 2003 on the accomplishments of the 
     program to date. Within the amounts provided for underage 
     drinking, OJP shall make an award to the Alaska Federation of 
     Natives to develop an underage drinking prevention program in 
     rural Alaska including assessment and education, focusing on 
     the children of alcoholics.
       Juvenile justice research, evaluation, training, and 
     technical assistance.--The Committee recognizes that high 
     quality research, evaluation, and statistical analysis are 
     critical to understanding and addressing the causes of youth 
     crime, understanding the scope of delinquency and its impact 
     on the juvenile justice system, and identifying effective 
     approaches to delinquency control that can be replicated at 
     the State and local levels. The Committee recommendation 
     allows the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
     Prevention Programs [OJJDP] to set aside 2 percent for 
     training and technical assistance and 10 percent for 
     research, evaluation, and statistics activities.
       Report card.--Over many years the Committee has provided 
     hundreds of millions of dollars for juvenile justice 
     programs. The Committee directs the Office of Juvenile 
     Justice and Delinquency Prevention to provide $250,000 to the 
     American Prosecutors Research Institute to create and report 
     on benchmarks to measure the use of individual programs and 
     juvenile justice system performance in up to four pilot 
     States. This funding shall be provided from the 2 percent 
     set-aside under the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant 
     program for technical assistance.
       8. Victims of Child Abuse Act.--The Committee recommends 
     $11,000,000 for the various programs authorized under the 
     Victims of Child Abuse Act [VOCA]. Funds, provided to 
     establish regional and local children's advocacy centers, may 
     not be used to provide legal aid. The recommendation includes 
     $11,000,000 to improve investigations and prosecutions 
     (subtitle A) as follows:
       --$2,500,000 to establish regional children's advocacy 
         centers, as authorized by section 213 of VOCA;
       --$5,500,000 to establish local children's advocacy 
         centers, as authorized by section 214 of VOCA;
       --$1,000,000 for the National Children's Advocacy Center in 
         Huntsville, Alabama to develop and implement a training 
         program; and
       --$850,000 for a continuation grant to the National Network 
         of Child Advocacy Centers for technical assistance and 
         training, as authorized by section 214a of VOCA.


                     Election Reform Grant Program

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation....................................$50,000,000

       The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for the Office of 
     Justice Programs to establish an election reform grant 
     program as authorized by The Help America Vote Act of 2002 
     (Public Law 107-252). In the awarding of grants under this 
     heading, priority shall be given to districts where greater 
     than 50 percent of registered voters are Federally-recognized 
     racial or ethnic minorities and disabled persons.


                    Public Safety Officers Benefits

Appropriations, 2002........................................$37,724,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................53,054,000
Committee recommendation.....................................53,054,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $53,054,000. 
     The recommendation is equal to the budget request and 
     provides all mandatory funding for death benefits under the 
     Public Safety Officers Benefits Program. This program 
     provides a lump-sum death benefit payment to eligible 
     survivors of Federal, State, and local public safety officers 
     whose death was the direct and proximate result of a 
     traumatic injury sustained in the line of duty. In addition, 
     $4,000,000 is provided to pay for disability benefits to 
     public safety officers who are permanently disabled in the 
     line of duty. Within the available carryover balances, 
     sufficient funding is available for the program which 
     provides payments for education purposes to the dependents of 
     Federal, State, and local public safety officers who are 
     killed or permanently disabled in the line of duty. No 
     additional funding is provided to expand the education 
     benefits program in fiscal year 2003.

               General Provisions--Department of Justice

       The Committee recommends the following general provisions:
       Section 101 makes up to $60,000 of the funds appropriated 
     to the Department of Justice available for reception and 
     representation expenses.
       Section 102 allows the Department of Justice to spend up to 
     $10,000,000 for rewards for information regarding acts of 
     terrorism against U.S. citizens or property at levels not to 
     exceed $2,000,000 per reward and makes payments available for 
     a judgment against the United States.
       Section 103 allows the Department of Justice, subject to 
     the Committee's reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5 
     percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the 
     amount that can be transferred into any one appropriation.
       Section 104 provides technical assistance funds to improve 
     oversight of certain grant programs.
       Section 105 transfers certain collections from one fee 
     account to another under the Immigration and Naturalization 
     Services.
       Section 106 allows Justice to collect reimbursements from 
     manufacturers for warranty work done in-house.
       Section 107 delays implementation dates for Juvenile 
     Justice reauthorization changes.
       Section 108 establishes a baseline for Justice Department 
     capital planning and investment for education and training 
     facilities.
       Section 109 begins to dismantle modular cost budgeting.

         TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND RELATED AGENCIES

       The Committee recommends a total of $6,068,173,000 for the 
     U.S. Trade Representative, the International Trade 
     Commission, and the Department of Commerce for fiscal year 
     2003. This amount is $429,673 above the total request.

                  Trade and Infrastructure Development

       The Committee has included under this section of title II, 
     the U.S. Office of the Trade Representative, the 
     International Trade Commission, and the Department of 
     Commerce agencies responsible for trade promotion and 
     enforcement and economic infrastructure development.

                            RELATED AGENCIES

                Office of the U.S. Trade Representative


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$30,097,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................32,299,000
Committee recommendation.....................................33,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $33,000,000 
     for the U.S. Trade Representative. The recommendation is 
     $701,000

[[Page 653]]

     above the budget request. The recommendation includes a 4.1 
     percent pay adjustment for Federal employees. The budget 
     request recommended shifting jurisdiction over the U.S. Trade 
     Representative to the Executive Office of the President. The 
     Committee does not concur with this recommendation.
       The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is responsible 
     for developing and coordinating U.S. international trade, 
     commodity, and direct investment policy, and leading 
     negotiations with other countries on such matters. The U.S. 
     Trade Representative's areas of responsibility include all 
     matters within the World Trade Organization, including 
     implementation of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade 
     agreements; trade, commodity, and direct investment matters 
     dealt with by international institutions such as the 
     Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the 
     United Nations Conference on Trade Development; industrial, 
     agricultural and services trade policy, and trade-related 
     intellectual property protection and environmental issues.

                     International Trade Commission


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$51,440,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................54,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................54,600,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,600,000. 
     The recommendation is $600,000 above the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The International Trade Commission [ITC] is an independent, 
     quasi-judicial agency responsible for conducting trade-
     related investigations, providing Congress and the President 
     with independent technical advice relating to U.S. 
     international trade policy, and performing other statutory 
     responsibilities such as quasi-judicial determinations on 
     trade matters filed with the Commission.

                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                   International Trade Administration


                     Operations And Administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$345,547,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................363,678,000
Committee recommendation....................................350,242,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $350,242,000. 
     In addition, the Committee anticipates $3,000,000 in fees. 
     The recommendation is $13,436,000 below the budget request 
     and includes a 4.1 pay adjustment for Federal employees. The 
     recommendation includes a $13,100,000 increase to hire 82 
     full-time equivalents within Market Access and Compliance, 
     Import Administration, and the U.S. Foreign and Commercial 
     Service for continuation of the trade compliance and 
     monitoring initiatives.
       The Committee does not recommend the Administration's 
     estimate of $13,000,000 in fees during fiscal year 2003. 
     Rather, as in past years, the Committee recommends $3,000,000 
     in fees. The Administration proposed a $10,000,000 fee 
     increase as part of its fiscal year 2003 budget request. The 
     ITA's plan was to commission a study during fiscal year 2002 
     to identify areas of cost recovery on fee collections. The 
     Administration has not provided the Committee with findings 
     from such a study or an explanation of the fees' source. 
     Until such an explanation is available, the Committee will 
     not recommend that there be an increase in fee collections.
       The Committee recommendation includes $13,325,000 for 
     Administration and Executive Direction. The Administration's 
     proposal included a $10,375,000 increase over the fiscal year 
     2002 level for this line office. Under the Administration's 
     proposal, to fund this increase, $8,700,000 would be removed 
     from the U.S. Foreign and Commercial Service budget; $775,000 
     would be removed from the Import Administration budget; 
     $350,000 would be removed from the Market Access and 
     Compliance budget; and $550,000 would be removed from the 
     Trade Development budget. This increase would reflect ITA's 
     consolidation of Chief Information Officer [CIO] activities 
     to ensure that all systems within the bureau communicate and 
     compliment each other. The Administration maintains that this 
     transfer would assure centralized leadership and management 
     of ITA information technology decisions, planning, management 
     and updating. The Committee finds the goal of streamlining 
     CIO functions laudable and recommends that in the future, the 
     Department of Commerce work with the Committee to promote 
     such an effort throughout the Department. To date, however 
     the Department has not submitted a plan as to exactly how 
     such a consolidation would move forward. The Committee 
     therefore does not recommend this effort and rather 
     recommends restoration of funds to the ITA line offices. 
     These funds may be transferred to the Administration and 
     Executive Director account upon approval of a section 605 
     reprogramming by the Committee on Appropriations.
       The recommended funding levels are reflected in the 
     following table:


                              ITA Funding

Trade development..........................................$68,083,000 
Market access and compliance................................28,197,000 
Import Administration.......................................44,006,000 
U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service........................199,631,000 
Administration/executive direction..........................13,325,000 
Offsetting Fee Collections......................................(3,000)
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    ITA total appropriation................................350,242,000 

       Trade Development.--The Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $68,083,000. The recommendation is 
     $10,687,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
     recommends continued funding for the enhancement of the 
     agency's export data base, funding for the National Textile 
     Center at a level of $10,000,000 and the Textile/Clothing 
     Technology Center at a level of $3,000,000.
       Market Access and Compliance.--The Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $28,197,000. The recommendation is 
     $7,619,000 below the budget request. Assuring that U.S. 
     companies receive the full benefit of our trade agreements is 
     critically important. In fiscal year 2002, the Committee 
     approved a large increase for compliance and enforcement. The 
     Committee directs the Office of Market Access and Compliance 
     [MAC] to continue with their compliance effort and recommends 
     $23,525,000 within available funds for this purpose.
       The Committee recommends $1,500,000 within available funds 
     for ITA to continue to place and maintain support for 
     compliance officers in China, Japan, and the European Union, 
     and other key markets so that they can detect and swiftly 
     address compliance problems U.S. companies face in these 
     markets.
       Import Administration.--The Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $44,006,000. The recommendation is 
     $7,741,000 below the budget request. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $1,500,000 for the Import 
     Administration to continue to place and maintain overseas 
     enforcement officers, including monitoring compliance with 
     the World Trade Organization and other international 
     commitments on antidumping and subsidies.
       The Committee recommendation provides $3,500,000 for the 
     Import Administration to monitor import data and customs 
     flows for surges in key markets and sectors, such as steel 
     and lumber, and take immediate action when such surges are 
     detected. Such action should include using resources to 
     expedite unfair trade cases so U.S. companies can receive 
     relief at the earliest possible date. In addition, Import 
     Administration must vigorously monitor foreign subsidies so 
     that action can be taken if the subsidies violate trade 
     agreements.
       The Committee recommends $2,500,000 to review and evaluate 
     in-depth China and Japanese compliance with antidumping and 
     countervailing duty commitments. China and Japan represent 
     the majority of unfair trade actions, and the Committee 
     believes there is an urgent need for greater attention to 
     both Japanese and Chinese trade practices.
       U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service [US&FCS].--The 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $199,631,000. The 
     recommendation is $5,713,000 below the request.
       The Committee supports the Commercial Service's work on the 
     Appalachian-Turkish Trade Project, a project to promote 
     opportunities to expand trade, encourage business interests, 
     stimulate foreign studies, and to build a lasting and 
     mutually meaningful relationship between the Appalachian 
     States and the Republic of Turkey, as well as the neighboring 
     regions, such as Greece. The Committee expects the agency to 
     support the project.
       Administration and Executive Direction.--The Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $13,325,000. The 
     recommendation is $1,540,000 below the budget request. Bill 
     language is included which prohibits certain offices from 
     taking funds from other accounts. If additional funds are 
     needed, a reprogramming request should be submitted to the 
     Committee for approval.

                    Bureau of Industry and Security

Appropriations, 2002........................................$70,649,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................100,198,000
Committee recommendation....................................100,198,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $100,198,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Bureau of Industry and Security [BIS] is the principal 
     agency involved in the development, implementation, and 
     enforcement of export controls for dual-use technologies and 
     weapons of mass destruction. The Export Enforcement Division 
     detects, prevents, investigates, and assists in the 
     sanctioning of illegal dual-use exports. Within available 
     funds, the Committee recommends $33,441,000 for Export 
     Administration; $33,122,000 for Export Enforcement; and 
     $6,879,000 for Management and Policy Coordination. Also 
     within available funds, $26,756,000 is for Critical 
     Infrastructure and Information Intelligence/Homeland 
     Security, within which $20,000,000 is for a public-private 
     partnership on critical infrastructure protection. Of the 
     funds recommended for Export Enforcement, $5,356,000 is for 
     BIS to enhance its export control efforts, including a new 
     initiative under which BIS will send a limited number of 
     export enforcement agents (attaches) overseas to conduct end-
     use checks. The Committee directs

[[Page 654]]

     that, prior to the assignment of any attaches at U.S. 
     missions overseas, BIS provide a detailed report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations describing where the attaches 
     will be posted and what their specific responsibilities will 
     be. Additionally, the report should provide details about the 
     arrangement between BIS and the Department of State 
     concerning accommodations for the attaches at Department of 
     State facilities. This is to ensure that facilities to which 
     the attaches will be assigned are adequately sized and 
     outfitted to meet all of their requirements.
       The Committee directs BIS to conduct a comprehensive study 
     on the health, competitiveness, and the contribution of the 
     U.S. textile and apparel industry to the U.S. economy and in 
     particular to the U.S. armed forces. The study should include 
     a review of whether the United States is increasing its 
     dependency on foreign sources for critical textile-related 
     materials; potential threats to internal security from 
     increased foreign sourcing and dependency; whether the Berry 
     amendment and other Buy-American restrictions are being 
     effectively enforced by the Department of Defense. The 
     Committee requests that the study be completed no later than 
     July 1, 2003 and recommends $750,000 within available funds 
     for this purpose.
       The Committee recommendation fully funds the fiscal year 
     2003 request for authorized CIAO activities. The Committee 
     does not recommend funding for the Technology and Evaluation 
     Program, which exceeds CIAO's authority. Rather, the 
     Committee recommendation includes $20,000,000 for the Bureau 
     to develop a program under CIAO to address the private 
     sector's inattention to the threat of terrorism against our 
     national critical infrastructure. The Committee directs CIAO 
     to develop under this program a public-private partnership, 
     to consist of a team of experts that have both the 
     technological and legal expertise to provide support to the 
     private sector. This initiative should first target those 
     sectors and companies that are highest in importance to U.S. 
     national security. The Committee directs that the CIAO 
     develop a spending plan for this initiative, to be submitted 
     to the Committees on Appropriations for approval before any 
     funds are expended.

                  Economic Development Administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$365,557,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................348,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................288,651,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $288,651,000. 
     The recommendation is $59,349,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Economic Development Administration [EDA] provides 
     grants to local governments and nonprofit agencies for public 
     works, planning, and other projects designed to facilitate 
     economic development. Funding amounts for the two 
     appropriations accounts under this heading are displayed 
     below.


                Economic Development Assistance Programs

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$335,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................317,235,000
Committee recommendation....................................257,886,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $257,886,000. 
     The recommendation is $59,349,000 below the budget request.
       The Committee recommendation provides funding of 
     $172,886,000 for public works grants (title I), $24,000,000 
     for planning assistance, $10,500,000 for trade adjustment 
     assistance, $40,900,000 for economic adjustment grants (title 
     IX), and $9,100,000 for technical assistance.
       The Committee is aware of several proposals for economic 
     development or adjustment assistance and strongly urges EDA 
     to consider applications for the following proposals within 
     applicable procedures and guidelines and provide a grant, if 
     warranted: (1) the Vermont Economic Development Fund; (2) 
     infrastructure improvement at Discovery Square and Lancaster 
     Square, PA; (3) a proposal for economic development in 
     Albuquerque, New Mexico; (4) development of a multi-purpose 
     dock in Seward, AK; (5) a proposal for a wireless initiative 
     in Taylor County, KY; and (6) a proposal for technology 
     initiatives at Mississippi Valley State University.
       The Committee lauds EDA for its continued efforts to 
     strengthen private sector business activity and development 
     on Indian lands, and urges that it act expeditiously to 
     develop an implementation plan for the recently enacted 
     Native American Business Development, Trade Promotion, and 
     Tourism Act.
       The Committee expects EDA to continue its efforts to assist 
     communities impacted by economic dislocations relating to 
     industry downswings as well as to assist communities impacted 
     by downturns due to environmental concerns. This includes the 
     timber and coal industries, United States-Canadian trade-
     related issues, communities in New England, the mid-Atlantic, 
     Hawaii, and Alaska impacted by fisheries regulations, and 
     communities in the Southeast impacted by downturns due to 
     NAFTA.


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$30,557,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................30,765,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,765,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,765,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request.

                  Minority Business Development Agency


                     Minority Business Development

Appropriations, 2002........................................$28,381,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................28,906,000
Committee recommendation.....................................28,906,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,906,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level and a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for Federal 
     employees. The Committee notes that since its inception in 
     1969, neither the Minority Business Development Agency nor 
     its predecessor, the Office of Minority Business Enterprise, 
     have ever been authorized.

                Economic and Information Infrastructure

       The Committee includes under this section of the bill the 
     Department of Commerce agencies responsible for the Nation's 
     basic economic and technical information infrastructure, as 
     well as the administrative functions which oversee the 
     development of telecommunications and information policy.

                   Economic and Statistical Analysis


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$62,515,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................73,220,000
Committee recommendation.....................................72,158,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $72,158,000. 
     The recommendation is $1,062,000 below the budget request and 
     includes funding to continue the necessary task of updating 
     and improving statistical measurements of the U.S. economy 
     and international transactions. The recommendation includes a 
     4.1 percent pay adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Economic and Statistics Administration is responsible 
     for the collection, tabulation, and publication of a wide 
     variety of economic, demographic, and social statistics and 
     provides support to the Secretary of Commerce and other 
     Government officials in interpreting the state of the economy 
     and developing economic policy. The Bureau of Economic 
     Analysis [BEA] and the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs 
     are funded in this account.
       The Committee recommends $66,961,000 for BEA. The 
     recommendation includes an increase of $4,810,000 for BEA to 
     generate more timely economic data. The recommendation also 
     includes an increase of $3,598,000 to upgrade BEA's 
     statistical processing systems. The economic data produced 
     and disseminated by BEA is important to the health of the 
     U.S. economy. The recommendation for BEA represents an 18 
     percent increase over the fiscal year 2002 level.

                          Bureau of the Census

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$490,800,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................705,316,000
Committee recommendation....................................558,919,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $558,919,000. 
     The recommendation is $146,397,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees. The Committee's 
     recommendations for the Census Bureau accounts are described 
     in more detail below.


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$169,424,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................204,996,000
Committee recommendation....................................173,223,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $173,223,000. 
     The recommendation is $31,773,000 below the budget request. 
     This account provides for the salaries and expenses 
     associated with the statistical programs of the Bureau of the 
     Census, including measurement of the Nation's economy and the 
     demographic characteristics of the population. These programs 
     are intended to provide a broad base of economic, 
     demographic, and social information used for decision-making 
     by governments, private organizations, and individuals.
       The Committee has provided funding for the key programs of 
     the Census Bureau. The Committee is particularly concerned 
     that key reports on manufacturing, general economic and 
     foreign trade statistics are maintained and issued on a 
     timely basis.
       The Committee recommendation includes an increase of 
     $5,463,000 to improve estimates of the Nation's Gross 
     Domestic Product and an increase of $5,192,000 to measure the 
     impact of electronic business on the economy. The Committee 
     does not recommend funding increases for trade statistics or 
     restoration of the Survey of Income and Program 
     Participation.
       The Committee requests that the Bureau provide the 
     Committee on Appropriations a report on the reimbursements it 
     has received for work requested by other Federal agencies or 
     private organizations. The report should be provided no later 
     than May 1, 2003.


                     Periodic Censuses And Programs

Appropriations, 2002........................................321,376,000

[[Page 655]]

Budget estimate, 2003.......................................500,320,000
Committee recommendation....................................385,696,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $385,696,000. 
     The recommendation is $114,624,000 below the budget request. 
     This amount, when combined with approximately $15,000,000 in 
     carryover, will fully fund periodic censuses and programs.
       This account provides for the constitutionally mandated 
     decennial census, quinquennial censuses, and other programs 
     which are cyclical in nature. Additionally, individual 
     surveys are conducted for other Federal agencies on a 
     reimbursable basis.
       The Committee recommends $85,682,000 for the 2000 Census. 
     The Committee recommends $94,995,000 for the 2010 Decennial 
     Census. Within this amount, $42,757,000 is for Design and 
     Planning and $52,238,000 is for Master Address File/
     Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing 
     [MAF/TIGER].
       For other programs under this account, the Committee 
     recommends the following: $85,475,000 for economic censuses; 
     $5,773,000 for census of governments; $6,092,000 for 
     intercensal demographic estimates; $27,131,000 for continuous 
     measurements; $12,658,000 for demographic survey sample 
     design; $6,284,000 for electronic information collection; 
     $37,811,000 for geographic support; and $23,795,000 for data 
     processing systems.

       National Telecommunications and Information Administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$81,273,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................60,349,000
Committee recommendation.....................................73,528,000

       The Committee recommends on appropriation of $73,528,000. 
     The Committee recommendation is $13,179,000 above the budget 
     request. The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent 
     pay adjustment for Federal employees.


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$14,054,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................16,581,000
Committee recommendation.....................................14,352,000

       The Committee recommends on appropriation of $14,352,000. 
     The recommendation is $2,229,000 below the budget request.
       The Committee retains language from previous years allowing 
     the Secretary of Commerce to charge Federal agencies for a 
     portion of the cost of coordination of spectrum management, 
     analysis, and operations.


       Public Broadcasting Facilities, Planning, And Construction

Appropriations, 2002........................................$51,716,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................43,556,000
Committee recommendation.....................................43,616,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $43,616,000. 
     The recommendation is $60,000 above the budget request. 
     Public broadcasters face a significant challenge in making 
     the transition from analog to digital broadcasting. The 
     public broadcasters, as well as commercial broadcasters, are 
     required to make the change from analog to digital 
     broadcasting by 2005. This is an expensive task, and is going 
     to be particularly challenging for public broadcasters whose 
     networks include numerous translator stations.
       These challenges are particularly great for those 
     broadcasters who are located in, or who serve, largely rural 
     areas. As in past years, the Committee continues to urge NTIA 
     to place emphasis on the needs of these stations, and to 
     support focusing resources on distance learning initiatives 
     targeting rural areas.


                    Technology Opportunities Program

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,503,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................212,000
Committee recommendation.....................................15,560,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,560,000. 
     The recommendation is $15,348,000 above the budget request. 
     The Committee expects NTIA to limit eligibility for this 
     program.
       In its February 2002 annual report on Internet use, ``A 
     Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the 
     Internet,'' the Department of Commerce reported that while 
     Internet use among the poor and minorities has increased 
     rapidly over the last 3 years, these groups still lag behind 
     a majority of Americans who have access to the Internet. In 
     its fiscal year 2003 budget request, the administration 
     slated the Technology Opportunities Program (TOP) for 
     elimination. According to the Department's fiscal year 2003 
     Budget in Brief, the reason for the elimination is that the 
     program has fulfilled its mission. There are great numbers of 
     people that would continue to benefit from the TOP program 
     and the Committee recommends its full funding.
       The regional information sharing system [RISS] under the 
     Department of Justice provides funding for law enforcement 
     entities which have traditionally obtained funding from the 
     TOP Program. The Committee recommendation excludes law 
     enforcement entities eligible for the RISS Program from 
     applying for TOP funds. The Committee expects NTIA to give 
     preference to applications from consortia and for purposes 
     such as public safety or other uses for which there is no 
     other funding source available.
       The Committee is aware of several proposals for information 
     infrastructure grants and strongly urges NTIA to consider 
     applications for the following proposals within applicable 
     procedures and guidelines and provide a grant, if warranted: 
     (1) a broadband access initiative in Vermont; (2) a 
     technology training initiative proposal by Morgan State 
     University; (3) graduate education and applied research in 
     South Dakota; and (4) a business to business electronic 
     commerce program in Kentucky.

                      Patent and Trademark Office


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,127,501,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,304,357,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,205,571,000

       The Committee recommends total budget resources of 
     $1,205,571,000. The recommendation is $98,786,000 below the 
     budget request. The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 
     percent pay adjustment for Federal employees. The 
     recommendation does not include the $207,000,000 surcharge on 
     patent and trademark fees proposed in the President's fiscal 
     year 2003 budget.
       The Patent and Trademark Office [PTO] is charged with 
     administering the patent and trademark laws of the United 
     States. PTO examines patent applications, grants patent 
     protection for qualified inventions, and disseminates 
     technological information disclosed in patents. PTO also 
     examines trademark applications and provides Federal 
     registration to owners of qualified trademarks. The PTO is 
     subject to the policy direction of the Secretary of Commerce, 
     but the agency has independent control of its budget, 
     expenditures, personnel, procurement and other administrative 
     and management functions.
       Patent laws administered by the PTO encourage invention, 
     innovation and investment. The PTO plays a critical role in 
     promoting the continued development of intellectual property 
     in this country. For established companies, new patents 
     improve competitiveness, increase productivity, help bring 
     new products and services to market, and create jobs.
       Preparing PTO for the Workload Associated with the 21st 
     Century Economy.--For fiscal year 2002, the Committee 
     directed the PTO to develop a 5-Year Strategic Plan for the 
     PTO with three core objectives: (1) prepare the agency to 
     handle the workload associated with the 21st century economy, 
     (2) improve patent quality, and (3) reduce patent and 
     trademark pendency. The Committee directed that the plan 
     include recommendations to improve retention and productivity 
     of the examiner workforce, target hiring increases to deal 
     with high-growth areas, improve training, and increase 
     productivity through E-Government and other capital 
     improvements. The Committee directed that the plan also 
     include benchmarks for measuring progress in achieving each 
     of those objectives.
       While the PTO has briefed the Committee on the outlines of 
     a 5-Year Strategic Plan for the agency that is generally 
     responsive to direction from Congress, the plan calls for 
     some of the most sweeping changes to the patent review 
     process in 200 years.
       The Committee recommendation supports efforts to shift PTO 
     resources to high priority areas and a more gradual increase 
     in staffing to ensure that examiners have the expertise, 
     tools, and training necessary to produce quality patents on a 
     timely basis. This approach is consistent with the outline of 
     the PTO 5-Year Strategic Plan released in June 2002.
       Within the total amounts recommended, the Committee directs 
     that PTO cover all proposed adjustments to base and implement 
     $42,510,000 in proposed fiscal year 2003 savings resulting 
     from implementation of the PTO 5-year Strategic Plan. In 
     addition, the Committee recommends the following targeted 
     funding increases: (1) $9,737,000 to hire 250 new patent 
     examiners to help improve patent quality and reduce patent 
     pendency; (2) $13,400,000 for an e-government initiative. Of 
     this amount, $2,000,000 is provided to begin implementing the 
     PTO's e-trademark initiative, and $11,400,000 is provided for 
     the PTO's e-patent initiative; (3) $1,100,000 is to implement 
     the PTO's information technology initiative; and (4) 
     $4,257,000 for improved patent examiners hiring, training, 
     and supervision.

                         Science and Technology

       The Committee includes agencies involved in technology 
     research and development, scientific assessment and 
     prediction of environmental phenomena, and the administrative 
     and policy functions providing oversight for these 
     activities.

                       Technology Administration


       Under Secretary for Technology/Office of Technology Policy

                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,238,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,886,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,886,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,886,000. 
     The recommendation is

[[Page 656]]

     identical to the budget request and will fully fund the 
     current operations of the Technology Administration. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 pay adjustment for 
     Federal employees.

             National Institute of Standards and Technology

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$686,751,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................563,110,000
Committee recommendation....................................720,869,000

       The Committee recommends a total of $720,869,000 for the 
     National Institute of Standards and Technology [NIST]. The 
     recommendation is $157,759,000 above the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       Competitive sourcing.--The Committee is concerned about 
     efforts within the Department of Commerce to use the 
     implementation of the President's Management Initiative for 
     Competitive Outsourcing (the A-76 process) at the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology [NIST] as a way to 
     reduce staff by more than 50 percent regardless of the impact 
     on NIST's missions. This initiative is designed to compete or 
     directly convert 15 percent of those positions identified as 
     commercial competitive. However, efforts are underway to 
     identify roughly 75 percent of NIST's positions as commercial 
     for purposes of this initiative. While the Committee agrees 
     that there are certain advantages to competitive outsourcing, 
     it is also concerned that blind implementation could severely 
     inhibit the operations of the Institute in the future. For 
     more than a century, the scientists, engineers, and 
     supporting organizations of the Institute have had the 
     mission of establishing the standards that touch nearly every 
     aspect of life and work in America, from the doses of 
     radiation in medical X-rays to the level of protection in 
     bullet-resistant vests used by police officers. NIST's 
     mission plays an ever more critical role today by supporting 
     Homeland Security through the development of standards for 
     mail irradiation, cyber security for Federal IT systems, and 
     by conducting the Federal investigation of the collapse of 
     the World Trade Center buildings. The Committee directs that 
     before proceeding with further implementation, NIST shall 
     provide a detailed plan to the Committees on Appropriations. 
     The plan shall be approved by both Committees before the 
     Department proceeds with ``competitive outsourcing'' in any 
     manner.
       A description of each NIST account and the Committee 
     recommendation follows:


             Scientific And Technical Research And Services

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$321,111,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................384,809,000
Committee recommendation....................................363,433,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $363,443,000. 
     The recommendation is $21,376,000 below the budget request.
       The Committee recommendations are displayed in the 
     following table:

Electronics and Electrical Engineering......................$53,132,000
Manufacturing Engineering....................................21,341,000
Chemical Science and Technology..............................40,313,000
Physics......................................................37,015,000
Material Science and Engineering.............................64,878,000
Building and Fire Research...................................24,765,000
Computer Science and Applied Mathematics.....................55,297,000
Technology Assistance........................................18,467,000
National Quality Program......................................5,522,000
Research Support Activities..................................42,703,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total, STRS.............................................363,433,000

       Within the funds made available for Electronics and 
     Electrical Engineering, $10,000,000 is for the development of 
     standards and guidelines for first responders. This effort 
     shall be administered by the Office of Law Enforcement 
     Standards within the Electronics and Electrical Engineering 
     Program. Within the funds made available for Chemical Science 
     and Technology, $1,000,000 is to restore reductions in 
     environmental measurements at the Hollings Marine Laboratory, 
     and $2,000,000 is for measurements and standards related to 
     In-vitro diagnostic medical devices. Within the funds made 
     available for Physics, $2,500,000 is for nanotechnology 
     research coordinated with the National Nanotechnology 
     Initiative. Within the funds made available for Material 
     Science, $5,000,000 is to enhance the operations of the NIST 
     Center for Neutron Research and $835,000 is for 
     instrumentation. Within the funds made available for Building 
     and Fire Research, $4,000,000 is for the development of 
     standards pertaining to the construction of high-rise 
     buildings and for the continuation of NIST's investigation 
     into the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on 
     September 11, and $2,500,000 is for the continued funding of 
     the Wind Research Program, a cooperative agreement between 
     NIST and Texas Tech University. Within the funds made 
     available for Computer Science and Applied Mathematics, 
     $1,000,000 is to fund the Computer Security Expert Assist 
     Teams, $2,100,000 is for the development of computer security 
     checklists and guidelines for computer hardware and software 
     systems, and $500,000 is provided to begin support of NIST's 
     efforts related to the Help America Vote Act. Within the 
     funds made available for Research Support Activities, 
     $3,900,000 funds utility costs associated with the Advanced 
     Measurement Laboratory, and not more than $12,100,000 is to 
     be used for business systems, also known as the Commerce 
     Administrative Management System [CAMS]. The Committee 
     recommends that no funds be used for FAIR Act studies, in 
     support of the A 76 contracting process.


                     Industrial Technology Services

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$291,032,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................119,607,000
Committee recommendation....................................291,976,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $291,976,000. 
     The recommendation is $172,369,000 above the budget request.
       Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program [MEP].--The 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $106,623,000 to 
     fully fund all of the MEP centers.
       Advanced Technology Program [ATP].--The Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $185,353,000. The 
     recommendation is $39,198,000 above the budget request. This 
     amount, when combined with approximately $34,000,000 in 
     carryover, will fully fund ATP awards at current levels. 
     Within the amounts made available, $45,000,000 shall be used 
     for administrative costs, internal laboratory support, and 
     for Small Business Innovation Research Program [SBIR] 
     requirements. NIST may not apply a contracts and grants 
     processing surcharge to the ATP program.
       In fiscal year 2002, the Committees on Appropriations 
     provided $60,700,000 for new ATP awards, yet the Department 
     committed to issuing only $35,000,000. The Committees on 
     Appropriations clarified Congressional intent on this matter 
     by modifying bill language in the fiscal year 2002 
     Supplemental Appropriations bill. The Committee recommends 
     similar modified bill language which obligates the Department 
     of Commerce to spend $60,700,000 in fiscal year 2003 towards 
     the awards.


                  Construction of Research Facilities

Appropriations, 2002........................................$62,393,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................54,212,000
Committee recommendation.....................................65,460,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $65,460,000. 
     The recommendation is $11,248,000 above the budget request 
     and fully funds the highest priority safety, capacity, 
     maintenance, and repair projects at NIST. Of the amounts 
     provided, $15,000,000 is for equipping and relocation 
     expenses related to NIST's Advanced Measurement Laboratory in 
     Gaithersburg, MD.

            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


                     (including transfers of funds)

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,258,848,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,130,614,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,349,506,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,349,506,000 
     for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA]. 
     Transfers and de-obligations total $75,200,000. The 
     recommendation is $218,892,000 above the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees. During this time of 
     continued budgetary constraint, the Committee recommendation 
     continues to make funding for ocean, coastal, fisheries, and 
     atmospheric programs a high priority.
       As in past years, the Committee expects NOAA and the 
     Department to adhere to the direction given in this section 
     of the Committee report and to observe the reprogramming 
     procedures detailed in section 605 in the general provisions 
     of the accompanying bill.


                  Operations Research, and Facilities

       The Committee recommends discretionary appropriations of 
     $2,352,301,000. The recommendation is $138,219,000 above the 
     budget request.
       Sea Grant College Program.--Through its budget request, the 
     administration slated the National Sea Grant College Program 
     for termination under NOAA and reconstitution under the 
     National Science Foundation [NSF]. The Committee does not 
     support this ill-conceived notion. Instead, the Committee 
     recommends a total appropriation of $63,410,000 for the 
     program. Under the NSF, the program would lose its State 
     matching requirement and it would lack authorization to 
     continue its successful Extension Program. The Sea Grant 
     program has a long-standing commitment to problem-oriented 
     scientific research and education that responds to the needs 
     of industry, government, resource managers, university 
     scientists, and the broader public. The outreach and 
     technology transfer services of the Sea Grant program have 
     improved science-based fisheries management, pollution 
     remediation, seafood safety, marine safety, and marine 
     engineering. The Committee is concerned that NSF, with its 
     tradition of funding basic science, will be less responsive 
     to the research agenda successfully developed by Sea Grant.

[[Page 657]]

       Ocean and Coastal Observing Systems.--The Committee 
     reaffirms its support for the establishment of an integrated 
     interagency ocean and coastal observing system that will 
     provide critical information to a wide variety of users of 
     ocean and coastal information and services. Substantially 
     better information on the current and future state of the 
     ocean and its role in environmental change is needed. 
     Adequate predictive capability is a prerequisite to the 
     development of sound policies at the national and regional 
     level, policies ranging from maritime commerce to public 
     health, from fisheries to safety of life and property, from 
     climate change to national security.
       Broad scale discussions have been underway for almost three 
     decades on this topic, but coordinated attention at the 
     Federal level has begun in earnest only in recent years. In 
     Senate Report 107-42, the Committee directed the Office of 
     Science and Technology Policy to develop an interagency plan 
     for the research, technology demonstration, and ultimately, 
     the implementation of an integrated ocean observing system. 
     The Committee notes that efforts are underway to develop such 
     a plan, but to date, no such interagency plan has been 
     submitted.
       The Committee directs NOAA to work with its partners on the 
     National Ocean Research Leadership Council to submit a plan 
     to the Committee prior to the release of the President's 
     budget for fiscal year 2004. This plan will detail an 
     implementation strategy for the establishment of an 
     integrated ocean and coastal observing system. This plan 
     shall, at a minimum: (1) include an interagency governance 
     structure; (2) define the roles and responsibilities of each 
     agency in implementing and operating the system; (3) provide 
     multi-year funding estimates by agency; and (4) include a 
     process for regional coordination and technical support to 
     ensure development of integrated regional systems with a 
     national observing initiative.
       In addition, as development of an integrated long-term 
     Federal plan proceeds, the Committee urges NOAA to coordinate 
     existing or planned regional coastal observing systems, 
     particularly those for which funding has been provided or 
     those which use Federal platforms such as buoys. The 
     Committee directs NOAA to utilize the data management and 
     technical expertise of the Coastal Services Center to perform 
     this function as well as provide education and outreach to 
     participating Federal agencies, academic institutions, State 
     agencies, and other interests.
       Ocean Health Initiative.--One area where coastal observing 
     systems would be useful is in exploring the relationship 
     between the oceans and human health. In 1999, a National 
     Research Council report, From Monsoons to Microbes: 
     Understanding the Ocean's Role in Human Health, focused 
     attention on the implications of ocean phenomena for human 
     health. The phenomena include climate change, weather events, 
     coastal hazards, infectious diseases, and harmful algal 
     blooms. As the nation faces increasing coastal pressures and 
     scientists identify alarming changes in coastal systems, 
     including changes in sentinel species such as dolphins and 
     fish, NOAA is uniquely positioned to play a strong role in 
     identification, prediction, and prevention of such changes. 
     In addition, genetic and other characteristics of marine 
     organisms can be used for medical advances and NOAA can help 
     build a bridge between marine scientists and human health 
     experts.
       The Committee directs the Under Secretary to establish an 
     Ocean Health Initiative to coordinate and focus agency 
     activities on critical areas of concern and identify critical 
     gaps in coverage. The Committee is providing $10,000,000 that 
     shall be used for critical research and projects aimed at 
     closing identified gaps. The Committee directs NOAA to: (1) 
     work with the NSF and the National Institute of Environmental 
     Health Sciences in developing a joint program that builds on 
     and complements existing NOAA programs; (2) establish an 
     external peer reviewed grant process; and (3) provide for the 
     selection and funding of internationally recognized 
     ``distinguished'' scholars to work in collaboration with NOAA 
     researchers. NOAA will submit a spend plan for approval by 
     the Committees on Appropriations before program funding is 
     obligated.
       Fisheries Management Reform.--The Committee continues to be 
     gravely concerned over the need for reform of the Federal 
     fishery management system. In June 2002, the National Academy 
     of Public Administration [NAPA] and the National Research 
     Council [NRC] issued the report requested by the Committee 
     that continues and expands the review begun in the June 2000 
     report prepared for NOAA, An Independent Assessment of the 
     Resource Requirements for the National Marine Fisheries 
     Service. The NAPA/NRC report confirmed that the agency is in 
     a management crisis that will require years to resolve, and 
     stated that the National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] must 
     demonstrate leadership to ensure the necessary changes are 
     made in the fishery management structure. The Committee 
     supports current efforts by the Agency to strengthen 
     accountability in both the Councils and the Agency.
       However, the Committee is concerned that implementation of 
     the changes has been extremely slow, even when the funds have 
     been provided. More aggressive action is needed, particularly 
     in strengthening analytical capabilities and litigation 
     preparedness. The Committee directs NOAA, no later than June 
     30, 2003, to report to the Committees on Appropriations on 
     its progress in implementing the reforms identified in the 
     NAPA/NRC report, as well as issues identified by NMFS, 
     including how the budget request for fiscal year 2004 helps 
     achieve these reforms.
       Pacific Salmon Funding.--The Committee notes the lack of 
     accountability and performance standards for resources 
     distributed to restore endangered and threatened salmon 
     through the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund. For fiscal 
     year 2002, the Committees on Appropriations provided the 
     National Marine Fisheries Service $111,700,000 to be 
     distributed among certain States and tribes for habitat 
     restoration and salmon recovery. The Secretary of Commerce is 
     imposed with substantial legal obligations under the 
     Endangered Species Act because no less than twenty six runs 
     of Pacific salmon are listed as endangered. Failure to make 
     progress toward recovery under the Endangered Species Act 
     poses adverse legal consequences for the agency. The 
     Committee has no assurances from the Administration that any 
     of these funds have contributed to the recovery of Pacific 
     salmon. This is particularly important at a time when the 
     Department is struggling to respond to a huge litigation 
     caseload, which the Committee has provided substantial funds 
     to help reduce. Furthermore, there appears to be no way to 
     accurately estimate total annual Federal expenditures for 
     Pacific salmon recovery, but funds provided to the various 
     agencies are more than $500,000,000 per year.
       The Committee believes that some mechanism assuring legal 
     and fiscal accountability is required for distribution of 
     funds to States with listed salmon species. Section 6 of the 
     Endangered Species Act provides for such a mechanism, linking 
     the distribution of recovery funds to assurances that the 
     State has an adequate and active program for endangered 
     species conservation. The Committee directs NOAA to enter 
     into Section 6 cooperative agreements with the States and 
     tribes that are using funds for recovery of listed species to 
     clarify State and tribal involvement in regional and local 
     recovery programs. In addition, the Committee directs NOAA to 
     provide an annual report to the Committee no later than March 
     30 of each year on the projects funded through the Pacific 
     Salmon Recovery Fund and their projected and actual results, 
     particularly focusing on progress toward recovery of 
     endangered and threatened salmon species and projected ending 
     date for funding needs based on recovery schedules. The 
     Committee recommends that not less than 1 percent of the 
     amounts made available for the Pacific Coastal Salmon 
     Recovery Fund be made available to NOAA to accomplish this 
     task.
       Enforcement of International Dolphin Agreement.--The 
     Committee is concerned that Mexico and other non-U.S. parties 
     to the International Dolphin Conservation Program [IDCP], of 
     which the United States is a member, are not fully complying 
     with the requirements of the IDCP, particularly with respect 
     to accurate reporting of dolphin interactions and mortality. 
     The Committee directs the Department, in conjunction with 
     NOAA, and in consultation with key U.S. stakeholders, to 
     evaluate and document any lack of compliance by the non-U.S. 
     parties to the IDCP with its provisions, including through 
     on-site visits and discussions with government officials, 
     observers and others with first-hand knowledge of country 
     practices, and to submit a written report describing the 
     findings to the Committee no later than May 1, 2003. The 
     report should include an evaluation of compliance with the 
     on-board observer program, with a focus on national 
     observers; reporting of dolphin interactions and mortality; 
     operational requirements for vessels; and actions by parties 
     to follow-up on infractions identified by the international 
     review panel.


       NOAA Operations, Research, and Facilities Fiscal Year 2003


                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

National Ocean Service.....................................$406,243,000
National Marine Fisheries Service...........................603,052,000
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research............................395,685,000
National Weather Service....................................682,610,000
National Environmental Satellite and Data Information Servic133,841,000
Program Support.............................................202,870,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total Operations, Research, and Facilities--..........2,352,301,000


                         NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Navigation Services:
  Mapping & Charting:
    Mapping & Charting Base......................................36,542
    Coastal Storms................................................1,000
    Joint Hydrographic Center.....................................4,250
    Joint Hydrographic Center--Bathymetric Research...............2,000
    Electronic Navigation Charts..................................3,350
    Shoreline Mapping.............................................2,000

[[Page 658]]

    Address Survey Backlog/Contracts.............................20,450
    MS/LA Digital Coast...........................................1,000
    Vessel Lease/Time Charter.....................................9,900
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Mapping and Charting.............................80,492
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Geodesy:
    Geodesy Base.................................................21,539
    National Spatial Reference System...............................250
    Height Modernization Study--NGS Implementation..................250
    Height Modernization Study NC.................................1,000
    Height Modernization Study CA.................................1,000
    Height Modernization Study MS.................................1,000
    Geodetic Survey--LA...........................................1,000
    S. Carolina Geodetic Survey.....................................500
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Geodesy..........................................26,539
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Tide & Current Data............................................13,709
    PORTS.........................................................3,000
    Coastal Storms................................................1,000
    Upper Cook Inlet Tidal Research.................................500
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Tide & Current Data..............................18,209
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Navigation Services................................125,240
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment:
  Ocean Assessment Program [OAP]:
    Ocean Assessment Program Base................................15,128
    Coastal Observation Technology System.........................1,700
    Center for Integrated Marine Technologies.....................2,500
    Alliance for Coastal Technologies.............................2,500
    Center for Coastal Ocean Observation and Analysis.............2,500
    Carolina Coastal Ocean Observing and Prediction System........2,500
    Wallops Ocean Observation Project.............................2,000
    Coastal Marine Research and Monitoring Program................2,000
    Submersible Microtechnology Research..........................1,500
    Coastal Storms..................................................750
    Beaufort......................................................3,000
    Pfiesteria Research and HAB Rapid Response....................3,925
    Coastal Services Center......................................20,000
    Pacific Coastal Center........................................2,000
    Harmful Algal Blooms..........................................5,000
    Coastal Watershed Groundwater Assessment NH.....................500
    CREST...........................................................450
    Harmful Algal Bloom Task Force SC...............................600
    Aquatic Research Consortium MS................................2,500
    Coop Institute for Coastal and Estuarine Enviro Tech..........6,550
    Hawaii Coral Reef Initiative..................................1,500
    National Coral Reef Institute--Florida........................1,000
    Coral Reef Program...........................................14,000
    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation--NFWF...................1,500
    JASON Education and Outreach..................................2,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Ocean Assessment Program [OAP]...................97,603
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Response and Restoration:
    Response and Restoration Base.................................4,641
    Estuarine and Coastal Assessment..............................2,670
    Estuarine Restoration Program.................................1,200
    Damage Assessment Program.....................................5,200
    Oil Pollution Act of 1990.....................................1,000
    Coastal Protection and Restoration Project....................1,000
    Spill Response and Restoration Program........................2,000
    Marine Debris Removal SC........................................175
    Edisto Beach Marsh Restoration..................................100
    Water Control Impoundments SC...................................700
    Coastal Remediation Technology..................................750
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Response and Restoration.........................19,436
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Oceanic and Coastal Research:
    Oceanic and Coastal Research Base.............................6,293
    Fish Forensics/Enforcement....................................1,300
    MERHL.........................................................4,000
    Murrell's Inlet Special Area....................................200
    Gulf of Alaska Ecosystem Monitoring.............................750
    Nowcast/Forecast Operational System.............................500
    Pfiesteria/Toxins Research....................................1,000
    Aquidneck Island................................................600
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Ocean and Coastal Research.......................14,643
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Coastal Ocean Science:
    Coastal Ocean Program Base...................................12,890
    ECOHAB........................................................4,200
    Long-Term Estuary Assessment Consortium.......................1,200
    Hypoxia.......................................................1,085
    South Florida Ecosystem.......................................1,200
    Joint Hydrographic Center--Bathymetric Research...............1,200
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Coastal Ocean Science............................21,775
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Ocean Resources Conservation & Assessment..........153,457
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Ocean and Coastal Management:
  Coastal Management:
    CZMA Grants..................................................68,963
    CZMA Program Administration...................................3,483
    National Estuarine Research Reserve System...................16,400
    Nonpoint Pollution Implementation Grants......................1,000
    Marine Protected Areas........................................3,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Coastal Management...............................92,846
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Ocean Management:
    Marine Sanctuary Program:
      Marine Sanctuary Program Base..............................33,500
      Northwest Straits Citizens Advisory Commission..............1,200
                                                             __________
                                                             
        Subtotal, Ocean Management...............................34,700
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

        Total, Ocean and Coastal Management.....................127,546
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

        TOTAL, NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE--ORF......................406,243

       Some of the Committee recommendations displayed in the 
     table above are described in more detail in the following 
     paragraphs.
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $406,243,000 
     for the National Ocean Service [NOS].
       Navigation.--The Committee recommends $4,250,000 for the 
     Joint Hydrographic Center. In addition, the Committee 
     recommends $3,200,000 for bathymetric surveys off the 
     Northeast Coast of the United States and around the Aleutian 
     Chain in accordance with the data needs identified by a Joint 
     Hydrographic Center on the potential expansion of United 
     States lands beyond the Exclusive Economic Zone. Within the 
     funding recommendation for Shoreline Mapping, the Committee 
     recommends that NOS focus on mapping the shoreline of the 
     North Slope of Alaska.
       Ocean Resources Conservation and Management.--The Committee 
     recommends continued funding for the Coastal Observation 
     Technology System within the NOS to provide a national 
     framework, technical assistance, and support for sustained 
     coastal observation systems, with particular emphasis on 
     coordinating regional systems. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $15,700,000 for this program.
       The Committee recommends $500,000 for Nowcast/Forecast 
     Operational Systems to coordinate research on waves, 
     temperature, and current dynamics to forecast weather and 
     ocean conditions affecting both wildlife and human safety.
       The Committee recommendation includes $14,000,000 for the 
     Coral Reef Program, subject to approval of a spend plan by 
     the Committees on Appropriations. The Committee recommends 
     $3,000,000 for the Beaufort Laboratory and encourages the lab 
     to pursue opportunities for collaborative research with area 
     universities. Under Response and Restoration, $750,000 is 
     provided for Coastal Remediation Technology to develop a 
     cooperative program with the Cooperative Institute for 
     Coastal and Estuarine Environmental Technology to evaluate 
     innovative environmental technologies for estuary 
     remediation. Under funding for the Coastal Ocean Program, the 
     Committee directs the program to work with and continue its 
     current levels of support for the Baruch Institute's research 
     and monitoring of small, high-salinity estuaries and to 
     continue its current levels of support for the LUCES program. 
     Within the funds provided for the MERHL, the Committee 
     directs NOAA to create a scientific and professional [ST] 
     position to act as Chief Scientist for NCCOS.
       Ocean and Coastal Management.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes full funding for Coastal Zone Management Act 
     Administration. The Committee recommends $3,483,000 under the 
     Administration account. The Committee recommends $33,500,000 
     for the National Marine Sanctuary Program [NMSP]. The 
     Committee supports elevation of the NMSP to that of Office of 
     National Marine Sanctuaries. Further, the Committee

[[Page 659]]

     recommends that this Office have authority to create Regional 
     Offices and recommends an additional five full-time 
     equivalents to implement this regional approach.
       The Committee encourages NOAA to continue its work with the 
     Mariner's Museum and the Navy on efforts to recover and 
     preserve the Monitor.


                   National Marine Fisheries Service

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Base:
  Direct labor...................................................35,919
  Personnel benefits..............................................8,980
  Former personnel................................................1,122
  Travel of persons...............................................2,245
  Rent, Communications, Utilities, Miscellaneous Charges..........6,735
  Contractual services...........................................22,449
  Supplies and materials..........................................4,490
  Equipment.......................................................3,367
  Grants, fixed charges..........................................25,817
  All other.......................................................1,122
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Base.................................................112,246
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Fisheries Research and Management Services:
  Science and Technology:
    AKFIN.........................................................3,200
    Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation.......................1,000
    Alaska Groundfish Monitoring..................................2,087
    Alaska Groundfish Monitoring--Bering Sea Fishermen's Association 
      CDQ...........................................................175
    Alaska Groundfish Monitoring--Crab Research NMFS................473
    Alaska Groundfish Monitoring--Gulf of Alaska Coastal Communities250
    Alaska Groundfish Monitoring--NMFS Field Fishery Monitoring.....300
    Alaska Groundfish Monitoring--NMFS Rockfish Research............350
    Alaska Groundfish Monitoring--Winter Pollock Survey...........1,000
    Alaskan Groundfish Surveys......................................661
    Alaskan Groundfish Surveys--Calibration Studies.................240
    American Fisheries Act Implementation.........................3,525
    Atlantic Herring and Mackerel...................................200
    Bering Sea Pollock Research.....................................945
    Bluefin Tuna Tagging [UNH]......................................850
    Bluefish/Striped Bass...........................................700
    Charleston Bump Billfish Tagging................................150
    Chinook Salmon Research at Auke Bay.............................300
    Computer Hardware and Software................................3,492
    Cooperative Research--National Cooperative Research...........2,750
    Cooperative Research--NE Cooperative Research.................3,250
    Cooperative Research--SE Cooperative Research.................3,000
    Cooperative Research Northeast Consortium.....................5,000
    Driftnet Act Implementation...................................1,800
    Driftnet Act Implementation/Pacific Rim Fisheries...............150
    Driftnet Act Implementation/Science Observer Russian EEZ........250
    Expand Stock Assessments--Improve Data Collection............12,000
    Fish Statistics--Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission..2,000
    Fish Statistics--Economics & Social Sciences Research.........4,000
    Fish Statistics--National Fisheries Information System........2,575
    Fish Statistics--National Standard 8..........................1,000
    Fish Statistics..............................................13,900
    Fisheries Development Program--Hawaiian Fisheries Development.1,000
    Fisheries Development Program--Product Quality and Safety/
      Seafood Inspection..........................................8,685
    Fisheries Oceanography........................................1,000
    FMP Extended Jurisdiction, State of Alaska....................1,500
    GULFFIN Data Collection Effort................................3,500
    Gulf of Maine Groundfish Survey.................................567
    Gulf of Mexico Consortium.....................................3,000
    Halibut Data Collection.........................................450
    Hawaii Seafood Safety and Inspections...........................800
    Hawaii Stock Management Plan....................................750
    Highly Migratory Shark Fishery Research Program...............1,500
    Horseshoe Crab Research.........................................850
    Information Analysis and Dissemination.......................21,890
    JIMAR.........................................................2,500
    Lobster Sampling................................................150
    Magnuson Stevens Implementation off Alaska....................4,350
    MARFIN........................................................2,500
    MARFIN--NE Activities...........................................250
    MARFIN Red Snapper..............................................750
    MARMAP..........................................................850
    Massachusetts Fisheries Institute...............................500
    NAPA/NAS Management Review....................................1,050
    Steller Sea Lion/Pollock Research North Pacific Council and 
      Management..................................................2,000
    New England Stock Depletion...................................1,000
    NMFS Facililties Maintenance..................................4,000
    Observers--Fishery Observers..................................2,000
    Observers/Training--Atlantic Coast Observers..................3,350
    Observers/Training--East Coast Observers........................350
    Observers/Training--Hawaii Longline Observer Program..........4,000
    Observers/Training--N. Pacific Marine Resources Observers.....1,875
    Observers/Training--N. Pacific Observer Program.................800
    Observers/Training--West Coast Observers......................3,730
    PACFIN Catch Effort Data......................................3,000
    Pacific Highly Migratory Species Research.......................750
    Recreational Fishery Harvest Monitoring RECFIN................3,450
    Recreational Fishery Harvest Monitoring RECFIN--SC..............500
    Red Snapper Monitoring and Research...........................7,500
    Reduce Fishing Impacts on EFH...................................500
    SEAMAP........................................................1,400
    Shrimp Pathogens South Carolina.................................450
    South Carolina Taxonomic Center.................................500
    West Coast Groundfish.........................................5,220
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Science and Technology..........................176,340
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Conservation and Management:
    Alaska Near Shore Fisheries State of Alaska...................1,000
    American Fisheries Act........................................2,174
    American Fisheries Act--N. Pacific Council......................499
    American Fisheries Act--National Standards 4 and 8 State of 
      Alaska........................................................499
    Anadromous Fish Commission--North Pacific.......................750
    Anadromous Grants.............................................2,100
    Bering Sea Crab State of Alaska...............................1,000
    Gulf of Alaska Coastal Communities Coalition....................375
    Columbia River Facilities.....................................3,365
    Columbia River Hatcheries--Monitor, Evaluation and Reform.....1,700
    Columbia River Hatcheries and Facilities.....................11,457
    Cooper River Corridor Management................................125
    Driftnet Act Implementation/State Participation--AK/WA..........200
    Fisheries Management Programs................................27,182
    Halibut/Sablefish.............................................1,200
    Hawaiian Community Development..................................500
    Interjurisdictional Fisheries Grants..........................2,590
    International Fisheries Commission State of Alaska..............400
    Interstate Fish Commissions--3 Commissions......................750
    Interstate Fish Commissions--Atlantic Cooperative Management..7,500
    Magnuson Stevens Implementation off Alaska....................2,050
    Management of George's Bank.....................................478
    National Environmental Policy Act.............................5,000
    Pacific Salmon Treaty.........................................5,612
    Pacific Salmon Treaty--Chinook Salmon Agreement...............1,844
    Refine EFH Designations.......................................1,000
    Regional Councils............................................15,000
    SCORE.........................................................3,000
    South Carolina Seafood Marketing................................500
    South Carolina Shrimper Assistance............................1,500
    Yukon River Chinook Salmon State of Alaska....................1,000
    Yukon River Chinook Salmon--Yukon River Drainage Fisheries 
      Association...................................................499
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Conservation and Management.....................102,849
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Fisheries Research and Management Services.........279,189
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Protected Resources Research and Management Services:
  Science and Technology:
    Antarctic Research............................................1,650
    Atlantic Salmon Research........................................710
    Bottlenose Dolphin Research...................................1,000
    Columbia River Endangered Species Studies.......................299

[[Page 660]]

    Dolphin Encirclement..........................................3,300
    Dolphin/Yellowfin Tuna Research.................................250
    Endangered Species Act--Atlantic Salmon.......................1,717
    Endangered Species Act--Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles & Other 
      Species.....................................................3,500
    Endangered Species Act--Other Species.........................2,700
    Endangered Species Act--Pacific Salmon Recovery..............17,450
    Endangered Species Act--Right Whale Activities................3,500
    Endangered Species Act--Sea Turtles...........................5,250
    Hawaiian Monk Seals.............................................825
    Hawaiian Sea Turtles..........................................6,300
    Marine Mammal Protection......................................7,120
    Marine Mammal Protection--Ice Seals.............................250
    Marine Mammal Protection--State of Alaska Harbor Seal Research..900
    Marine Mammal Strandings......................................4,000
    Rancho Nuevo Sea Turtles........................................350
    Recovery of Endangered Large Whales...........................1,000
    Steller Sea Lion Recovery Plan--Alaska Fisheries Foundation...1,000
    Steller Sea Lion Recovery Plan--Alaska Sea Life Center........5,000
    Steller Sea Lion Recovery Plan................................5,000
    Steller Sea Lion Recovery Plan--N. Pacific Universities MM 
      Consortium..................................................2,500
    Steller Sea Lion Recovery Plan--Univ of AK Gulf Apex Predator.1,000
    Steller Sea Lions--Endangered Species Act.......................850
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Science and Technology...........................77,421
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Conservation and Management Services:
    Atlantic Salmon Recovery Plan...................................450
    Chinook Salmon Management.......................................150
    Cook Inlet Beluga...............................................200
    Endangered Species Act--Atlantic Salmon.........................500
    Endangered Species Act--Pacific Salmon Recovery..............20,500
    Endangered Species Act--Right Whale Activities................3,500
    Marine Mammal Strandings--Alaska SeaLife Center...............1,000
    Marine Mammal Strandings--Charleston Health and Risk Assessment.800
    Native Marine Mammals--Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission.........500
    Native Marine Mammals--Alaska Harbour Seals.....................150
    Native Marine Mammals--Aleut Pacific Marine Resources Observers.125
    Native Marine Mammals--Beluga Whale Committee...................225
    Native Marine Mammals--Bristol Bay Native Association........... 50
    Protected Species Management--California Sea Lions..............750
    Protected Species Management--NFWF Species Management.........1,000
    Protected Species Management--State of Maine Salmon Recovery..1,500
    Southeastern Sea Turtles........................................300
    State of Maine Recovery Plan....................................150
    Steller Sea Lion Recovery Plan--State of Alaska...............2,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Conservation and Management Services.............33,850
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Protected Resources Research and Management Service111,271
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Habitat Conservation Research and Management Services:
  Bay Watersheds Education and Training Program...................3,500
  Oxford..........................................................2,900
  Blue Crab Advanced Research Consortium..........................2,500
  Charleston Bump...................................................450
  Chesapeake Bay Multi-Species Management...........................500
  Chesapeake Bay Oyster Restoration...............................2,000
  Chesapeake Bay Studies..........................................3,500
  Center for Marine Education and Research MS.....................2,500
  Community-based Restoration Grants.............................13,050
  Connecticut River Partnership.....................................300
  Coral Reef.....................................................11,000
  Habitat Conservation............................................5,151
  Kenai Peninsula Fish Habitat Restoration........................1,000
  Magnuson Stevens Implementation off Alaska........................850
  Marsh Restoration--NH...........................................1,000
  Mobile Bay Oyster Recovery......................................1,000
  South Carolina Oyster Recovery..................................1,000
  Oyster Chesapeake Bay Project--VA...............................1,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Habitat Conservation Research and Management Services.53,201
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Enforcement and Surveillance Services:
  Driftnet Act Implementation.....................................1,375
  Enforcement and Surveillance...................................20,420
  Enforcement and Surveillance--Cooperative Agreements w/States...5,500
  Enforcement and Surveillance--Vessel Monitoring System..........4,500
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Enforcement........................................31,795
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Partnerships in Enforcement:
    Enforcement and Surveillance--Cooperative Agreements w/States15,000
    SC DNR Research Vessel..........................................350
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Partnerships in Enforcement......................15,350
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Enforcement and Surveillance Services...............47,145
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      TOTAL, NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE--ORF.............603,052

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $603,052,000 
     for the National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS]. Some of the 
     Committee recommendations displayed in the table above are 
     described in more detail in the following paragraphs.
       White paper.--Late this summer, NMFS released a white paper 
     entitled, ``Fiscal Year 2003 Senate Appropriations Committee 
     Mark Impacts--NOAA Fisheries''. Suspiciously, the paper 
     alleged that a host of Congressional priorities might be 
     eliminated were Senate levels enacted into law, even though 
     NMFS was receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in 
     funding. Efforts by the Committee to clarify just what NMFS 
     would do with the money allotted to it by the Senate proved 
     unsuccessful. Therefore, NMFS is directed to fully fund and 
     execute every initiative cited in the aforementioned white 
     paper as well as every initiative listed in the table above 
     and described in the narrative below. No other activities 
     shall be undertaken or continued. NMFS is directed to submit 
     a spending plan to the Committees on Appropriations 
     accounting for every dollar to be spent. The spending plan 
     shall be delivered not later than April 15, 2003, and the 
     Committee cautions NMFS and NOAA not to be late as is often 
     the case.
       Base funding.--The Committee has worked closely with NMFS 
     to differentiate between fixed and variable costs, leading to 
     the first accurate accounting of so-called base funding. The 
     Committee commends those who participated in this endeavor. 
     Transfers of funds between subaccounts within the base 
     account, or into or out of the base account, shall be subject 
     to reprogramming requirements regardless of dollar amount.
       Fisheries Litigation Issues.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $5,000,000 for the NMFS to address National 
     Environmental Policy Act [NEPA] issues. To date, $42,000,000 
     has been appropriated to NOAA to maintain an up-to-date 
     litigation docket and conduct periodic analyses of its 
     litigation record and pending caseload. In the past, the 
     Committee has also directed NMFS to improve its 
     administrative record keeping by employing standardized 
     methods uniformly throughout the regional fisheries 
     management councils, fisheries management regions, and 
     fisheries science centers. The Committee directed that such 
     an administrative record should contain all required 
     analyses, so that officials involved in the process could 
     assure themselves by inspection that the record supported 
     their proposed actions prior to their approval.
       To date, NMFS has ignored this direction. Furthermore, NMFS 
     has provided no justification of how it has spent the funds 
     that have been appropriated for these purposes. The Committee 
     recommends $5,000,000 to establish an Office of National 
     Environmental Policy Act Compliance. This Office will be 
     coordinated by a Senior Executive Service level employee who 
     will report directly to the Undersecretary of Commerce for 
     Oceans and Atmosphere. Under the direction of this National 
     Coordinator, each fisheries management regional office or 
     fisheries management council will house a regional NEPA 
     Coordinator. At a minimum, NOAA will employ 50 individuals by 
     September 30, 2003 to work on its NEPA issues. None of the 
     funds recommended for this effort will be made available for 
     regional council support without prior Committee approval. 
     NMFS shall submit for approval to the Committees on 
     Appropriations a spend plan on this action before April 20, 
     2003.
       The Committee is pleased with the work conducted by 
     National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA] and the 
     National Research Council [NRC] on its report, An Independent 
     Assessment of the Resource Requirements for the National 
     Marine Fisheries Service.

[[Page 661]]

     The Committee recommends that NAPA continue to review NMFS 
     management systems and recommends $750,000 for it to do so. 
     The Committee also recommends $300,000 for the NRC Ocean 
     Studies Board to focus on issues at the interface between 
     research and management such as adequacy of equipment, and 
     staff training. The Committee looks forward to hearing from 
     the NAPA and the NRC on their progress.
       The Committee recommendation includes $7,000,000 for North 
     Atlantic right whale research, management activities, and 
     Atlantic coastal States' implemention of cooperative Federal-
     State right whale recovery plans, such as those concluded 
     under section 6 of the Endangered Species Act [ESA], to be 
     distributed in the manner described in the following table:


                   Northern Right Whale Preservation

Reduce ship strikes.........................................$1,430,000 
  Whale detection technologies................................[400,000]
    Passive acoustic..........................................[160,000]
    Active acoustic............................................[95,000]
    Measuring whale response to approaching vessels...........[145,000]
Reduce entanglement...........................................1,105,000
  Gear modification...........................................[355,000]
  Center for Coastal Studies..................................[300,000]
  New England Aquarium........................................[300,000]
  Southeast disentanglement teams.............................[100,000]
Biology......................................................1,205,000 
Recovery coordination..........................................110,000 
Other..........................................................400,000 
State programs...............................................1,750,000 
Northeast Consortium.........................................1,000,000 

       Within the amounts provided, the Committee expects NMFS to 
     expedite right whale recovery in consultation with the 
     Implementation Team and the Take Reduction Team. The NMFS is 
     expected to support priority management, enforcement, and 
     ship strike prevention activities, including expedited 
     development and deployment of innovative fishing gear and 
     whale tracking technologies, improved stranding response and 
     procedures, a whale-sighting advisory system, and a mandatory 
     ship-reporting system. No more than 20 percent of funds 
     provided to NMFS may be used for salaries of existing 
     personnel.
       Fisheries Research and Management.--The Committee 
     recommends $3,450,000 for the recreational fishing 
     information network [RECFIN] program, and expects that the 
     Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf States shall each receive one-
     third of these funds with funding for inshore recreational 
     species assessment and tagging efforts in South Carolina. In 
     addition,the Committee expects that $500,000 will be used to 
     continue the effort to enhance the annual collection and 
     analysis of economic data on marine recreational fishing. The 
     Committee recommends that the $750,000 for the Interstate 
     Fish Commissions be equally divided among the three 
     commissions. As in prior fiscal years, funds appropriated for 
     the Hawaii Fisheries Development and Hawaii Stock Management 
     Plan programs shall be administered by the Oceanic Institute. 
     The Committee recommends that NMFS double its effort with 
     regard to California Cooperative Fisheries Investigation 
     cruises. Of the amounts recommended for the Stellar Sea Lion 
     Recovery Plan, $1,000,000 is for Alaska Fisheries Foundation 
     to study innovative methods to deter whale predation of sea 
     lions. In addition, the Committee expects NOAA to continue 
     its research initiative on Pacific decadal oscillation, 
     predator-prey relationships with particular emphasis on 
     killer whale predation on sea lion pups, and to explore other 
     factors in the marine environment that may be contributing to 
     the decline of Stellar sea lions and other marine mammal 
     populations.
       Of the amounts recommended for SCORE, $1,000,000 is 
     provided for New Hampshire, $1,000,000 is provided for South 
     Carolina, and $1,000,000 is provided for the Mote Marine 
     Laboratory.
       Protected Resources Research and Management.--Of the 
     amounts provided for Native Marine Mammals, $100,000 is to 
     enable the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission to participate in 
     International Whaling Commission meetings.
       Habitat Conservation.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $3,500,000 for Chesapeake Bay Studies, of which 
     $500,000 is for sea grass restoration. In addition, the 
     Committee recommends that NOAA continue a micro-grant program 
     allowing local governments and non-profit organizations to 
     perform fisheries and shellfish restoration on the Chesapeake 
     Bay. The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 for 
     seven full-time equivalents for the Oxford Laboratory to 
     support the NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office's fisheries, habitat 
     restoration, and ecosystem research needs. The Committee 
     provides a total of $3,500,000 for the Bay Watersheds 
     Education and Training Program to be administered by the NOAA 
     Chesapeake Bay Office. Of this amount, $2,000,000 is to 
     continue the program in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed and 
     $1,500,000 is for pilots in three locations.
       Enforcement and Surveillance.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides $350,000 for a fisheries research vessel for the 
     South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. The Committee 
     recommends continued support at last year's level for marine 
     forensics and southeast fisheries' law enforcement, and the 
     Committee expects continued cooperative laboratory activities 
     between NMFS and State and local governments and the academic 
     community. The Committee recommends that the three interstate 
     marine fisheries commissions may be eligible to receive a 
     portion of the Cooperative Enforcement Program funds for use 
     in providing law enforcement coordination among the States 
     and NMFS. Of the amounts provided for Enforcement and 
     Surveillance-Cooperative Agreements with States, the 
     Committee recommends $3,500,000 for the South Carolina 
     Department of Natural Resources.


                    Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Climate Research:
  Laboratories & Joint Institutes:
    Aeronomy Laboratory (Colorado)................................8,111
    Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory (Florida)5,691
    Air Resources Laboratory (CO,ID,NC,NV,TN).....................3,447
    Climate Diagnostic Center (Colorado)..........................2,555
    Climate Monitoring and Diagnostic Laboratory (Colorado).......5,952
    Environmental Technology Laboratory (Colorado)..................243
    Forecast Systems Laboratory (Colorado)..........................156
    Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (New Jersey)...........14,229
    Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (Washington)..........8,523
    Space Environmental Center (Colorado)...........................236
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Laboratories & Joint Institutions................49,143
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Climate & Global Change Program:
    Base.........................................................68,608
    Aerosols-Climate Interaction..................................2,000
    Variability Beyond ENSO.......................................1,000
    Climate Forcing Agents........................................1,000
    Accelerating Climate Models--IRI..............................2,100
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Climate & Global Change Program..................74,708
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Climate Observations & Services:
    Climate Reference Network.....................................3,000
    Climate Data & Info and CLASS in PAC..........................1,000
    Baseline Operations...........................................2,500
    Regional Assessments, Education and Outreach..................1,750
    Climate Change Assessments......................................650
    Weather-Climate Connection......................................900
    Carbon Cycle..................................................2,300
    Ocean Observations/Ocean Systems..............................3,500
    ARGO-Related Costs............................................7,950
    Climate Modeling Center [GFDL]................................4,000
    Global Climate Atmospheric Observing System...................3,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Climate Observations & Services..................30,550
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Climate Partnership Programs:
    Central CA Ozone Study..........................................500
    East Tennessee Ozone Study......................................300
    International Pacific Research Center (U of HI)...............2,000
    Arctic Research Initiative [SEARCH]...........................2,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Climate Partnership Programs......................4,800
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Climate Research...................................159,201
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Weather & Air Quality Research:
  Laboratories & Joint Institutes:
    Aeronomy Laboratory (Colorado)................................2,054
    Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory (Florida)3,921
    Air Resources Laboratory (CO,ID,NC,NV,TN).....................2,077
    Climate Monitoring and Diagnostic Laboratory (Colorado).........166
    Environmental Technology Laboratory (Colorado)................6,864
    Forecast Systems Laboratory (Colorado).......................10,646
    Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (New Jersey)............3,077
    National Severe Storms Laboratory (Oklahoma)..................7,552
    Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (Washington)............264

[[Page 662]]

    Space Environmental Center (Colorado).........................7,242
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Laboratories & Joint Institutes..................43,863
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  U.S. Weather Research Program:
    Base..........................................................2,750
    Targeted Wind Sensing.........................................2,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, U.S. Weather Research Program.....................4,750
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Weather & Air Partnership Programs:
    Tornado Severe Storm Research.................................1,000
    New England Air Quality Study.................................1,750
    AIRMAP........................................................5,000
    STORM.........................................................1,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Weather & Air Partnership Programs................8,750
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Weather & Air Quality Research......................57,363
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Research:
  Laboratories & Joint Institutes:
    Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory (Florida)3,219
    Environmental Technology Laboratory (Colorado)..................445
    Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory (Michigan)......8,232
    Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (Washington)..........7,389
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Laboratories & Joint Institutes..................19,285
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  National Sea Grant College Program:
    Base.........................................................57,410
    Aquatic Nuisance Species/Zebra Mussel Research................3,000
    Gulf of Mexico Oyster Initiative..............................1,000
    Oyster Disease Research.......................................2,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, National Sea Grant College Program...............63,410
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  National Undersea Research Program [NURP]:
    Base.........................................................13,770
    National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology........5,000
    Aquarius II..................................................12,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, National Undersea Research Program [NURP]........30,770
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Ocean Exploration..............................................20,000
  Ocean & Coastal Partnership Programs:
    Arctic Research...............................................2,000
    Cooperative Institute for Arctic Research.......................350
    Institute for Science Technology and Public Policy............1,000
    Gulf of Maine Council...........................................250
    Lake Champlain Research Consortium..............................300
    NISA/Ballast Water Demonstrations.............................2,250
    NISA/Prevent & Control Invasive Species.........................800
    NISA Alaska...................................................1,500
    NOAA Marine Aquaculture Program...............................2,606
    Ocean Health Initiative......................................10,000
    Cooperative Institute for New England Mariculture and Fisherie3,000
    Aquaculture Education Program--Cedar Point, MS................2,000
    Pacific Tropical Ornamental Fish................................500
    Tsunami Hazard Mitigation.....................................6,300
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Ocean & Coastal Partnership Programs.............32,856
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Research...........166,321
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

High Performance Information Technology..........................12,800
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    TOTAL NOAA RESEARCH--ORF....................................395,685

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $395,685,000 
     for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research [OAR]. Some of the 
     Committee recommendations displayed in the table above are 
     described in more detail in the following paragraphs.
       Base funding.--The Committee has worked closely with OAR to 
     differentiate between fixed and variable costs, leading to 
     the first accurate accounting of so-called base funding. The 
     Committee commends those who participated in this endeavor. 
     The amounts recommended under OAR ``Laboratories and Joint 
     Institutes'', ``Climate and Global Change-Base Program'', and 
     ``U.S. Weather Research Program-Base'', are subject to the 
     following funding guidelines: 32 percent is for direct labor; 
     8 percent is for personnel benefits; 1 percent is for former 
     personnel; 2 percent is for travel of persons; 6 percent is 
     for rent and utilities; 20 percent is for contractual 
     services; 4 percent is for supplies and materials; 3 percent 
     is for equipment; 23 percent is for grants and fixed charges; 
     and 1 percent is for miscellaneous expenses. Transfers of 
     funds between these guidelines, or into or out of the base 
     accounts, shall be subject to reprogramming requirements 
     regardless of dollar amount.
       Climate Change Research Initiative.--The Committee does not 
     recommend $18,000,000 as requested, for the Climate Change 
     Research Initiative. The Committee has, for many years, 
     supported robust funding for the Climate and Global Change 
     Program and activities under Climate Observations and 
     Services. The Committee is concerned that the 
     administration's proposed increases for Climate Change 
     Research are not provided under the Global Change Research 
     Program, but under a separate Climate Change Research 
     Initiative not related to the research program being 
     conducted pursuant to the coordinated Federal process 
     established in the Global Change Research Act of 1990. The 
     Committee supports increased funding for global climate 
     change but the funding should be provided to NOAA for 
     research priorities established under the U.S. Global Climate 
     Research Program decision making structure. The Committee has 
     provided $159,201,000 for climate research. This funding 
     level does not include funds appropriated for climate 
     research elsewhere within NOAA's budget.
       Of the amounts provided for Tsunami Hazard Mitigation, 
     $1,000,000 is for the Tsunami Warning and Environmental 
     Observing in Alaska.
       Ocean Exploration.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $20,000,000 for Ocean Exploration, an increase of $6,000,000 
     over the fiscal year 2002 level. Of this amount, the 
     Committee recommends $1,000,000 for the Center for Marine 
     Cultural Resources. These amounts will be administered by 
     NOAA to establish a Cooperative Institute of Marine Cultural 
     Resources, in collaboration with the University of Rhode 
     Island and NOAA's Ocean Exploration program.
       NISA.--The Committee recommends $2,250,000 for National 
     Invasive Species Act/Ballast Water Demonstrations. The amount 
     recommended is for the Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes ballast 
     water demonstrations to be allocated according to the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. Of the amounts provided, $250,000 is for the 
     Center for Innovative Technologies to continue activities 
     begun in fiscal year 2002.
       NISA Alaska.--The Committee recommends $1,750,000 to 
     address the proliferation of exotic species such as Atlantic 
     salmon in the marine environment in the North Pacific. Of 
     this amount, $750,000 is for the Pacific States Marine 
     Fisheries Commission to prevent the escapement of Atlantic 
     salmon from Alaska streams and to address other invasive 
     species issues including mitten crab, and green crab.
       Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes Research.--Within the 
     amount provided for the Great Lakes Environmental Research 
     Lab, the Committee recommends that NOAA support research 
     programs on aquatic invasive species mitigation and reduction 
     in the Lake Champlain Basin. Of the amounts recommended for 
     the National Sea Grant College Program, no less than 
     $3,000,000 shall be for hiring of additional personnel, at 
     the State program level, to act as liaisons between NOAA, Sea 
     Grant Institutions, and the commercial and recreational 
     fishing industries. The Committee recommends $13,770,000 for 
     the National Undersea Research Program [NURP]. Of the amount 
     provided, $6,885,000 is for research conducted through the 
     east coast NURP centers and $6,885,000 is for the west coast 
     NURP centers, including the Hawaiian and Pacific Center and 
     the West Coast and Polar Regions Center. The Committee 
     expects level funding will be available for Aquarius, ALVIN, 
     and program administration.
       The Committee recommends $12,000,000 for the next 
     generation undersea laboratory/habitat. The Committee directs 
     the Administrator of NOAA, working with NURP, the Office of 
     Ocean Exploration, the Director of the National Marine 
     Sanctuaries in Key Largo, Florida as well as the University 
     of North Carolina Wilmington to design and build a new 
     relocatable undersea laboratory/habitat. This new, modern 
     laboratory/habitat supported by the Committee's 
     recommendation will significantly improve the Nation's 
     ability to conduct valuable research and promote 
     understanding and education of our oceans and its resources. 
     Before deployment, an operational plan shall be put in place 
     to identify locations only within the waters of the United 
     States where this laboratory will be used to address our most 
     important marine challenges in priority order. This plan 
     shall be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations for 
     approval. This new platform shall be deployed first in the 
     Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, in an area such as 
     the Tortugas reserve.
       The Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 for Arctic 
     Research. Of this

[[Page 663]]

     amount, $350,000 is for the Cooperative Institute for Arctic 
     Research.


                        National Weather Service

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

Operations and Research:
  Local Warnings and Forecasts:
    Base........................................................483,178
    Air Quality Forecasting Pilot Program.........................3,000
    Alaska Data Buoys.............................................1,700
    Southern California Data Buoys..................................600
    Aviation Forecast............................................35,596
    Edmunds County Warning System...................................215
    High Resolution Temperature Forecasting.......................3,000
    Mt. Washington Observatory......................................500
    New England Weather Technology Initiative.......................500
    NC Flood Plain Mapping Pilot..................................2,000
    Sustain Cooperative Observer Network..........................1,890
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Local Warnings and Forecasts....................532,179
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Advanced Hydrological Prediction Services.......................4,500
  WFO Maintenance.................................................5,000
  Weather Radio Transmitters:
    Weather Radio Transmitters Base...............................2,320
    NOAA Weather Radio Transmitters--WY.............................400
    North Dakota Ag Weather Network.................................340
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Weather Radio Transmitters........................3,060
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Central Forecast Guidance........................................43,525
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Operations and Research..............................588,264
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Systems Operation & Maintenance:
  NEXRAD.........................................................39,996
  ASOS............................................................7,650
  AWIPS..........................................................36,500
  Weather & Climate Supercomputing Backup.........................7,200
  NWSTG Backup....................................................3,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Systems Operation & Maintenance.......................94,346
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    TOTAL NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE--ORF.........................682,610

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $682,610,000 
     for the National Weather Service [NWS] for operations, 
     acquisitions, and research. Various Committee recommendations 
     displayed in the table above are described in more detail in 
     the following paragraphs.
       Local Warnings and Forecasts.--The ``1995 Secretary's 
     Report to Congress on Adequacy of NEXRAD Coverage and 
     Degradation of Weather Services'' requested further studies 
     of several sites, including Williston, ND and Erie, PA. The 
     Committee provided funds to begin mitigation in fiscal year 
     1999 at these sites. The Committee has provided $4,790,000 to 
     continue current operations at these sites. In addition, the 
     Committee directs the NWS to make appropriate arrangements to 
     maintain a local presence for the maintenance of the NOAA 
     weather radio antenna in Erie, PA and develop a strategy to 
     adequately address the prediction of lake-effect snow in the 
     area.
       The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 to 
     complete analysis of the air quality pilot program, finalize 
     a concept of operations, and begin procurement of the 
     information technology infrastructure necessary to support 
     operational air quality forecasts by the end of fiscal year 
     2004. In addition, $3,000,000 is provided to complete the 
     operational implementation of the temperature forecasting 
     pilot in New England. The Committee recommendation provides 
     for the modernization of a total of 200 meteorological 
     observing stations and for the operational use of high 
     resolution forecasts models at 8 sites in fiscal year 2003.
       Flash floods.--The Committee directs NOAA to commission the 
     National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study to assess the 
     availability, performance, and capability of the NWS NEXRAD 
     located on Sulphur Mountain in Ventura County, California to 
     detect heavy precipitation and aid forecasters at the Los 
     Angeles Weather Forecast Office in providing flash flood 
     warnings and forecasts, and on the basis of that study, to 
     provide the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and 
     Atmosphere with a report on the performance of that mission 
     by the NWS. The report also should include any 
     recommendations for improving the accuracy and timeliness of 
     flash flood warnings in and around western Los Angeles and 
     Ventura Counties, California.


    National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

Environmental Satellite Observing Systems:
  Satellite Command and Control..................................32,461
  Satellite Facilities Security.....................................300
  Product Processing and Distribution............................18,150
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Environmental Satellite Observing Systems..........50,911
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Product Development, Readiness & Application:
  Base...........................................................18,768
  Coral Reef Monitoring.............................................750
  Joint Center/Accelerate Use of Satellites.........................750
  Global Wind Demonstration.......................................4,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Product Development, Readiness & Application.......24,268
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, Environmental Satellite Observing Systems.............75,179
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

NOAA's Data Centers & Information Services:
  Archive, Access & Assessment:
    Base.........................................................32,000
    Archive, Access & Assessment/Climate Database Modernization...6,214
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Archive, Access & Assessment.....................38,214
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Coastal Data Development........................................4,513
  Regional Climate Centers........................................3,600
  Environmental Data Systems Modernization.......................12,335
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, NOAA's Data Centers & Information Services............58,662
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    TOTAL NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SATELLITE, DATA AND INFORMATION 
    SERVICE--ORF................................................133,841

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $133,841,000 
     for the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and 
     Information Service [NESDIS].
       The Committee directs NESDIS to maintain current staffing 
     levels at the Gilmore Creek Tracking Station in fiscal year 
     2003. NESDIS will provide a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations by March 1, 2003 on how it plans to implement 
     the new National Polar Orbiting Environmental Satellite 
     System and its plans for the Gilmore Creek Tracking Station 
     including staffing projections.


                            Program Support

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Corporate Services:
  Under Secretary and Associate Offices Base.....................27,000
  Policy Formulation and Direction Base..........................35,000
  Federal Employee Pay Adjustment................................12,507
  Educational Partnership Program/Minority Serving Institutions..14,000
  National Ocean Science Education Program........................1,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Corporate Services....................................89,507
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Facilities:
  Maintenance, Repairs and Safety.................................4,000
  Boulder Facilities Operations...................................4,500
  National Aquarium Infrastructure Repairs........................1,000
  Environmental Compliance........................................2,000
  Pribilof Islands Cleanup........................................6,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Facilities............................................17,500
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Marine Operations & Maintenance:
  Marine Services:
    Marine Services Base (Data Acquisition)......................64,000
    AGATE PASS (Coastal YTT) Operations.............................350
    FAIRWEATHER Operations........................................4,100
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Marine Services (including base).................68,450
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Fleet Planning and Maintenance:
    Fleet Planning and Maintenance...............................11,213
    AGATE PASS (Coastal YTT) Maintenance............................250

[[Page 664]]

    FAIRWEATHER Maintenance.........................................450
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Fleet Planning and Maintenance...................11,913
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Marine Operations and Maintenance...................80,363
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Aviation Operations: Aircraft Services...........................15,500
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Aircraft Services.....................................15,500
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, Marine and Aviation Operations........................95,863
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    GRAND TOTAL PROGRAM SUPPORT--ORF............................202,870

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $202,870,000 
     for the NOAA program support functions.
       Corporate Services.--The Committee recommends $14,000,000 
     to provide funding to historically black colleges and 
     universities to train scientists. The Committee recommends 
     that this program be extended to Native Hawaiian Serving 
     Institutions and Alaskan Native Serving Institutions as 
     defined in the Higher Education Act.
       Facilities.--The Committee supports improvements to the 
     infrastructure of the National Aquarium and recommends 
     $1,000,000 for needed repairs. The Committee expects the 
     Department of Commerce to draft a 20-year working plan for 
     the National Aquarium to be provided to the Committee on 
     Appropriations no later than July 1, 2003.


               PROCUREMENT, ACQUISITION, AND CONSTRUCTION

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
NOS:
  Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program [CELP]:
    Base.........................................................12,900
    Seacoast, NH..................................................2,000
    Los Cerritos Wetlands, CA.....................................2,000
    Laughlin Cove, WA...............................................300
    Maury Island, WA..............................................1,800
    Rocky Point, RI...............................................1,900
    Satilla River, GA.............................................2,000
    Harbor Herons, NY.............................................2,000
    Deer Island, MS...............................................2,200
    North Bass Island, OH.........................................2,000
    East Sandusky Bay, OH.........................................2,000
    Mill River, CT................................................2,000
    Farm River, CT..................................................300
    Morro Bay Dunes, CA...........................................2,000
    Wetlands Harbor, LA...........................................1,600
    Hawaii Coastal Lands..........................................3,000
    Coastal Bays, MD..............................................2,000
    Chesapeake, Eastern Shore, MD.................................2,000
    Nanjemoy, MD..................................................2,000
    Deer Lagoon, WA.................................................600
    City of Two Harbors, MN.........................................400
    Long Island, NY...............................................1,000
    Bonneau Ferry, SC............................................10,000
    Cooper River, West Branch, SC.................................2,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program..60,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Estuarine Land Acquistion & Construction:
    NERRS Base...................................................10,012
    ACE Basin.....................................................4,500
    Great Bay Partnership.........................................6,000
    Grand Bay, MS.................................................6,000
    Morris Island.................................................4,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, NERRS Acquisition/Construction.....................30,512
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Marine Sanctuaries Construction:
    Base.........................................................10,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Marine Sanctuary Construction....................10,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Other NOS Facilities:
    Kasitsna Bay Laboratory.......................................1,400
    Beaufort Lab....................................................500
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Other NOS Facilities..............................1,900
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total NOS--PAC............................................102,412
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

NMFS:
  Honolulu Lab...................................................15,000
  Kodiak Pier.....................................................2,000
  Ketchikan Facilities............................................3,000
  Pascagoula Laboratory...........................................2,000
  Phase III--Galveston Laboratory Renovation--NMFS................2,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, NMFS--PAC.............................................24,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

OAR:
  Systems Acquisition:
    Comprehensive Large Array Data Stewardship System.............3,600
    Research Supercomputing.......................................6,519
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, OAR Systems Acquisition..........................10,119
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Construction:
    Barrow Planning and Design....................................1,000
    Norman Consolidation Project..................................6,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, OAR Construction..................................7,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, OAR--PAC............................................17,119
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

NWS:
  Systems Acquisition:
    ASOS..........................................................5,125
    AWIPS........................................................16,264
    NEXRAD........................................................8,260
    Radiosonde Network Replacement................................6,500
    Weather and Climate Supercomputing...........................20,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, NWS Systems Acquisition..........................56,149
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Construction: WFO Construction.................................10,630
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, NWS Construction...................................10,630
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, NWS--PAC..............................................66,779
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

NESDIS:
  Systems Acquisition:
    Geostationary Systems.......................................227,398
    Polar Orbiting Systems......................................359,538
    EOS & Advanced Polar Data Processing, Distribution & Archiving 
      Systems.....................................................3,000
    CIP Single Point of Failure...................................2,800
    Coastal Remote Sensing........................................3,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, NESDIS Systems Acquisition......................595,736
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Construction:
    Satellite CDA Facility........................................4,000
    Suitland Facility.............................................8,890
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, NESDIS Construction..............................12,890
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, NESDIS--PAC........................................608,626
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Program Support:
  CAMS...........................................................10,000
  G-IV Instrumentation Upgrades...................................8,400
  Fleet Replacement:
    Small Waterplane Area Twin Hull Vessel........................9,000
    Fisheries Research Vessel Replacement........................50,874
    Hydrographic Equipment Upgrades...............................6,200
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, OMAO Fleet Replacement...........................66,074
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      Total, Program Support--PAC................................84,474
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

      GRAND TOTAL PAC...........................................903,410

       The Committee recommendation provides $903,410,000 for 
     Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction. The 
     recommendation is $92,023,000 above the request.
       Some of the Committee recommendations displayed in the 
     table above are described in more detail in the following 
     paragraphs.
       National Ocean Service.--The Committee recommends 
     $60,000,000 for the coastal and estuarine land conservation 
     program. This program provides funds for matching grants to 
     States, communities, and groups engaged in land conservation 
     efforts that benefit coastal and estuarine areas. These funds 
     will be used expressly to acquire lands or interests in lands 
     that include significant conservation, recreation, 
     ecological, historical or aesthetic values to further the 
     goals of a federally approved Coastal Zone Management Program 
     or a National Estuarine Research Reserve.
       The Committee recommends $500,000 for repairs and 
     facilities improvements at the Beaufort Laboratory. In 
     recognition of the dilapidated conditions at the laboratory 
     due to decades of neglect, the Committee encourages the lab 
     to develop a 10-year facilities plan for Pivers Island.
       Program Support.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $9,000,000 for a Small Waterplane Area Twin Hull vessel to be 
     homeported in New Castle, NH.


                                 Other

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
OPERATIONS, RESEARCH, FACILITIES [ORF]:
  Direct Obligations.........................................2,424,301 
  De-Obligations...............................................(17,000)
Transfers: Coastal Zone Management Fund..........................3,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    TOTAL, DISCRETIONARY ORF BUDGET AUTHORITY................2,404,301 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Transfers: Promote & Develop American Fisheries................(55,000)
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, ORF Transfers....................................(55,000)
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    TOTAL, ORF APPROPRIATION.................................2,349,301 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

PROCUREMENT, ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION [PAC]:
  Direct Obligations...........................................906,610 

[[Page 665]]

  De-Obligations................................................(3,200)
                                                             __________
                                                             
    TOTAL, PAC APPROPRIATION...................................903,410 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

OTHER DISCRETIONARY APPROPRIATIONS:
  Fisherman's Contingency Fund.....................................954 
  Foreign Fishing Observer Fund....................................191 
  Fisheries Financing Program...................................(3,000)
  Coastal Zone Management Fund..................................(3,000)
  Pacific Coastal Salmon Fund...................................98,650 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    TOTAL, OTHER DISCRETIONARY APPROPRIATIONS...................93,795 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    NOAA Grand Total Discretionary Appropriations............3,368,599 


                  Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$157,419,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................110,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................98,650,000

       The Committee recommends $98,650,000 for Pacific Coastal 
     Salmon conservation. Of this amount, $78,650,000 is for the 
     Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund. Within the funding for 
     the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund, the Committee 
     recommends $23,750,000 for the State of Washington, 
     $20,650,000 for the State of Alaska, $11,000,000 for the 
     State of Oregon, $11,000,000 for the State of California, 
     $8,950,000 for the Pacific Coastal Tribes, and $3,300,000 for 
     the Columbia River Tribes. Of the funds provided for the 
     State of Alaska, $5,000,000 is for the Arctic Yukon-Kushokwim 
     Sustainable Salmon initiative, $1,000,000 is for construction 
     of salmon mitigation passes, $1,000,000 is for the Cook Inlet 
     Fishing Community Assistance Program, $500,000 is for the 
     Yukon River Drainage Association, $500,000 is for Fort 
     Richardson fisheries, $500,000 is for Elmendorf AFB 
     hatcheries, $500,000 is for Fort Wainwright fisheries, 
     $450,000 is for universal quality standards, $450,000 is for 
     competitive analysis of global salmon, $250,000 is to restore 
     the king salmon runs in Coffman Cove, $250,000 is to enable 
     the State of Alaska to participate in discussions regarding 
     the Columbia River hydrosystem management, and $100,000 is 
     for United Fishermen of Alaska's subsistence program. Of the 
     amounts provided for the State of Washington, $5,000,000 is 
     for the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and 
     other State and Federal agencies for purposes of implementing 
     the State of Washington's Forest and Fish Report. The funding 
     shall be spent in accordance with the terms and conditions of 
     the Forest and Fish Report and consistent with the 
     requirements of the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water 
     Act. Of the amount provided to the State of Oregon, 
     $1,100,000 is for conservation mass marking at the Columbia 
     River Hatcheries.


                      Fishermen's Contingency Fund

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$952,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................954,000
Committee recommendation........................................954,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $954,000 for 
     the fishermen's contingency fund.
       The fishermen's contingency fund provides compensation to 
     U.S. fishermen for damage or loss of fishing gear and any 
     resulting loss because of natural or man-made obstructions 
     related to oil and gas exploration, development, and 
     production on the Outer Continental Shelf. The Secretary of 
     Commerce is authorized to establish an area account within 
     the fund for any area within the Outer Continental Shelf. A 
     holder of a lease, permit, easement, or right-of-way in such 
     area is required to pay a fee into the appropriate area 
     account in the fund. Each area account, if depleted, will be 
     replenished by assessment. The authorization stipulates that 
     amounts available in each area account can be disbursed only 
     to the extent provided by appropriations acts. Since receipts 
     collected may not be sufficient for this appropriation, the 
     Committee has included language which provides that the sums 
     necessary to eliminate the insufficiency may be derived from 
     the general fund of the Treasury.


                     Foreign Fishing Observer Fund

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$191,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................191,000
Committee recommendation........................................191,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $191,000 for 
     the foreign fishing observer fund.
       Fees paid into the fund are collected from owners and 
     operators of certain foreign fishing vessels that fish within 
     the U.S. fishery conservation zone. The fund supports 
     salaries of U.S. observers and program support personnel, 
     other administrative costs, and the cost of data management 
     and analysis.


                   fisheries finance program account

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$287,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee notes that an appropriation is not necessary 
     for the fisheries finance program account. Of the loan 
     authority provided through bill language, $5,000,000 is for 
     entry level and small vessel individual fishery quota [IFQ] 
     obligation guarantees in the halibut and sablefish fisheries 
     off Alaska pursuant to section 1104A(a)(7) of the Merchant 
     Marine Act of 1936. These funds are provided for IFQ loans in 
     accordance with section 303(d)(4) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
     and section 108(g) of the Sustainable Fisheries Act.

                         Department Management


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$37,652,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................48,254,000
Committee recommendation.....................................41,494,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $41,494,000 
     for Departmental Management. The recommendation is $6,760,000 
     below the budget request. The Committee recommendation 
     includes a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for Federal employees.


                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$20,176,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................22,670,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,635,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,635,000 
     for the Commerce Department's Office of the Inspector 
     General. The recommendation is $2,035,000 below the budget 
     request. The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent 
     pay adjustment for Federal employees.

               General Provisions--Department of Commerce

       Section 201 makes Commerce Department funds available for 
     advanced payments only upon certification of officials 
     designated by the Secretary that such payments are considered 
     to be in the public interest.
       Section 202 makes appropriations for salaries and expenses 
     available for the hire of passenger motor vehicles, and for 
     services, uniforms, and allowances as authorized by law.
       Section 203 prohibits any funds from being used to support 
     hurricane reconnaissance aircraft and activities that are 
     under the control of the U.S. Air Force or the U.S. Air Force 
     Reserve.
       Section 204 provides the authority to transfer funds 
     between Department of Commerce accounts. The language 
     provides that no account may be decreased by more than 5 
     percent or increased by more than 10 percent. The language 
     also makes the transfers subject to the Committee's standard 
     reprogramming procedures.
       Section 205 allows the Secretary to award contracts for 
     certain mapping and charting activities in accordance with 
     the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act.
       Section 206 permits the Department of Commerce franchise 
     fund to retain a percentage of earnings from services 
     provided for capital investments.
       Section 207 provides funding for 4 grants and a cooperative 
     agreement.
       Section 208 clarifies allowable applications of a grant 
     program.
       Section 209 further clarifies allowable applications of a 
     grant program.
       Section 210 promotes foreign tourism to the United States.
       Section 211 salvages an inter-island shipping capability.

                        TITLE III--THE JUDICIARY

       The funds provided in title III of the accompanying bill 
     are for the operation and maintenance of the U.S. courts and 
     include the salaries of judges, magistrates, supporting 
     personnel, and other expenses of the Federal judiciary.
       The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
     $4,951,051,000 for the judiciary. The recommendation is 
     $290,559,000 below the budget request. The Committee is aware 
     that a total of $331,462,000 in fees, reimbursables, and 
     carryover is available in various accounts across this title 
     to supplement direct appropriations.
       Steady growth in costs associated with Defender Services, 
     court security, GSA rental payments, and pay and benefits at 
     a time of declining resources continues to put serious 
     pressure on the judiciary budget. The Committee urges the 
     judiciary to make every effort to contain ``mandatory'' 
     costs.

                   Supreme Court of the United States


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$39,988,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................46,324,000
Committee recommendation.....................................44,399,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $44,399,000 
     for the Justices, their supporting personnel, and the costs 
     of operating the Supreme Court, excluding the care of the 
     building and grounds. The recommendation is $1,925,000 below 
     the budget request. The Committee recommendation includes a 
     4.1 percent pay adjustment and certain mandatory increases 
     for judicial officers.
       Adjustments to Base.--The Supreme Court included as 
     adjustments to base an elevated pay increase, as compared to 
     the 2.6 percent pay increase proposed in the budget for all 
     other Federal employees, as well as police pay parity and 
     overtime. The Committee does not agree with the Court's 
     practice of

[[Page 666]]

     displaying significant program increases as adjustments to 
     base. Accordingly, in developing future budget requests, the 
     Committee directs the Court to include any non-mandatory 
     increases, including cost of living increases above that 
     proposed in the budget for Federal employees, as program 
     increases.


                    Care of the building and grounds

Appropriations, 2002........................................$67,530,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................53,626,000
Committee recommendation.....................................53,304,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $53,304,000 
     for personnel and other services relating to the Supreme 
     Court building and grounds, which is supervised by the 
     Architect of the Capitol. The recommendation is $322,000 
     below the budget request. The Committee recommendation 
     includes a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for Federal employees.
       Adjustments to Base.--The Court included a number of non-
     mandatory increases as adjustments to base, including: an 
     elevated pay increase, as compared to the 2.6 percent pay 
     increase proposed in the budget for all other Federal 
     employees; increases in the cost of training; and exterior 
     painting and caulking. As previously stated, the Committee 
     does not agree with the Court's practice of displaying 
     significant program increases as adjustments to base and 
     directs the Court to include any non-mandatory increases as 
     program increases in all future budget requests.
       Security.--The Committee believes insufficient attention is 
     being paid to the security of the Supreme Court. The 
     Architect of the Capitol's Office [AOC] is being overwhelmed 
     by the construction of the Capitol Visitors Center, a mammoth 
     undertaking. The AOC does not have the resources to manage 
     well both the Visitors Center and the Court's renovation. The 
     Committee believes that the Justices would be better served 
     if management of the Court's upgrade were turned over to the 
     Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts [AO]. The AOC is 
     directed to transfer all project management responsibilities 
     and functions associated with the Court's rehabilitation to 
     the AO not later than March 15, 2003. The Committee expects 
     the AO to continue to utilize AOC expertise as necessary and 
     appropriate in a cooperative, mutually beneficial manner. The 
     Committee directs the AO to deliver to the Committees on 
     Appropriations a meaningful schedule and cost estimate for 
     the renovation project based upon updated design plans not 
     later than June 6, 2003.

             U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$19,287,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................21,893,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,136,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,136,000. 
     The recommendation is $1,757,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment and certain mandatory increases for judicial 
     officers.

                   U.S. Court of International Trade

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$13,064,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................13,777,000
Committee recommendation.....................................13,529,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,529,000. 
     The recommendation is $248,000 below the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment and certain mandatory increases for judicial 
     officers.

    Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,599,259,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,014,107,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee does not recommend any funding for this 
     account. Instead, the recommendation establishes a more 
     sophisticated budget structure for Federal court operations, 
     described below, to better identify and highlight court 
     priorities.

Court of Appeals, District, Magistrate, and Bankruptcy Court Judges and 
                                 Staff


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...................................$718,736,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $718,736,000.
       This new account funds the salaries of judges and judges' 
     immediate staff.

                             Court Support


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.................................$1,051,661,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,051,661,000.
       This new account funds the salaries of court staff, 
     including circuit executives, clerks' office personnel, 
     attorneys, court reporters and interpreters, librarians, 
     Administrative Office of the United States Courts personnel, 
     and other specialized staff, as well as other expenses 
     associated with core court operations. This account also 
     funds administrative costs associated with implementation of 
     the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
       Pay.--A little noticed provision in the Homeland Security 
     bill puts the pay of the Director of the Administrative 
     Office of the U.S. Courts and Circuit Executives on par with 
     that of the Vice President and the Chief Justice of the 
     Supreme Court. This legislation was enacted while judges were 
     pleading for a modest cost of living adjustment [COLA]. At 
     $192,600 per year, these functionaries will make more than 
     Supreme Court Justices ($184,400), Circuit judges ($159,100), 
     and District judges ($150,000). The cost implications of this 
     unexpected pay increase are not yet known, and the Committee 
     is concerned that it may have been placed in the position of 
     having to choose between providing judges COLAs and senior 
     staff pay raises.

                             Court Services


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.................................$1,394,039,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,394,039,000.
       This new account funds court services, including supplies, 
     equipment, and the rental payment to the General Services 
     Administration.

                    Probation and Pretrial Services


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...................................$717,214,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $717,214,000.
       This new account funds probation and pretrial services, 
     including mental health and drug dependency programs.

                           Defender Services

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$500,671,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................588,741,000
Committee recommendation....................................531,792,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $531,792,000. 
     The recommendation is $56,949,000 below the budget request.
       The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment and other enhancements, including increases in the 
     number of representations by the Federal Defender 
     Organization and Criminal Justice Act [CJA] Panel Attorneys. 
     The Committee continues to support the $90 hourly rate for 
     CJA panel attorneys.
       This account funds the operations of the Federal public 
     defender and community defender organizations and the 
     compensation, reimbursement, and expenses of attorneys 
     appointed to represent persons under the CJA, as amended.
       Criminal Justice Act Panel Attorney Rates.--In fiscal year 
     2002, the Committee provided a significant increase in CJA 
     panel attorney hourly rates from $75 to $90 in-court and from 
     $55 to $90 out-of-court. This large increase was funded and 
     approved by Congress because the hourly rates authorized in 
     1986 had not kept pace with inflation and many Federal judges 
     were reporting difficulty in finding qualified counsel 
     willing to accept CJA appointments at rates that were one-
     third to one-half the rates charged in private practice.
       This year, the request included an additional increase in 
     the CJA hourly rate to $113, a 25 percent increase over the 
     recently approved increased rate of $90 for fiscal year 2002. 
     The Committee believes this request is premature since the 
     current hourly rate of $90 was only implemented in May, 2002, 
     and it is too soon to determine whether the new $90 rate will 
     address the problem of obtaining adequate counsel.
       The Committee does not agree with the judiciary practice of 
     displaying significant increases in CJA panel attorney hourly 
     rates as an adjustment to base. Accordingly, in developing 
     future budget requests, the Committee directs the judiciary 
     to include any increase in CJA panel attorney hourly rates, 
     above the cost of living increase proposed in the budget for 
     Federal employees, as a program increase.

                    Fees Of Jurors and Commissioners

Appropriations, 2002........................................$48,131,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................57,826,000
Committee recommendation.....................................54,636,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,636,000. 
     The recommendation reflects the judiciary's reestimate of 
     fiscal year 2003 requirements.
       This account provides for the fees and allowances of grand 
     and petit jurors and for the compensation of land 
     commissioners and jury commissioners.

                             Court Security

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$220,677,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................298,235,000
Committee recommendation....................................276,342,000


[[Page 667]]

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $276,342,000. 
     The recommendation is $21,893,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment and various requested program increases. The 
     decrease from the request is largely due to a redistribution 
     of security responsibilities discussed below. The amount 
     provided includes the funds necessary for personnel from 
     Judicial Security Division/Judicial Security Systems to 
     conduct a courthouse security survey.
       Security accountability.--The Committee believes that the 
     current model for courthouse security has failed. The awkward 
     arrangement of providing court security funds to the 
     Judiciary but insisting that those funds be transferred to, 
     and managed by, the U.S. Marshals Service [USMS] has done 
     little to improve performance or accountability, but has 
     promoted a poisonous atmosphere of mutual hostility and 
     distrust between the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts 
     [AO], the USMS, and the Federal Protective Service [FPS]. The 
     Committee believes that a few simple actions can clarify 
     lines of command and improve resource utilization. First, the 
     Committee recommendation makes the AO solely responsible for 
     directing activities funded under this account. In effect, 
     control of Court Security Officers [CSOs], their equipment, 
     and their space will revert to the AO. Beyond coordination at 
     the operational (courthouse) level, the USMS shall have no 
     input into the number, training, deployment, or equipping of 
     CSOs. Conversely, the 106 reimbursable Deputy U.S. Marshals 
     [DUSMs] designated as security managers shall be funded by 
     the Marshals and redistributed as follows: (1) not less than 
     two and not more than five roving security teams, including 
     physical security specialists, shall regularly survey 
     courthouses and make recommendations regarding security, (2) 
     such number of DUSMs as are necessary shall be distributed to 
     the Southwest border to address the acute manpower shortage 
     being experienced by those courts, and (3) remaining DUSMs 
     will be distributed on a priority basis to the most 
     undermanned courthouses. Finally, the AO, USMS, and FPS shall 
     report to the Committees on Appropriations on the strengths 
     and weaknesses of the proposal to place FPS officers under 
     the operational control of Marshals under certain 
     circumstances. The report shall be delivered not later than 
     March 1, 2003.
       Growth in the Court Security Program.--The Committee notes 
     the substantial growth in funding experienced in the Court 
     Security Program. In the past 5 years, the program has nearly 
     doubled--increasing from $167,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 to 
     a total appropriation of almost $300,000,000 in fiscal year 
     2002. In light of this growth, the Committee wants to ensure 
     that these resources are being efficiently managed and spent 
     for the purposes for which they have been appropriated. 
     Therefore, the Committee requires the submission of a court 
     security program spending plan, in accordance with Section 
     605 of this Act, prior to the obligation of no more than 25 
     percent of the funds appropriated herein.
       Court Security Officers Revised Medical Standards.--In 
     January 2001, the USMS began implementing new CSO medical 
     examination procedures and revised medical standards based on 
     the results of a requirements study of CSO duties conducted 
     by the Public Health Service's Office of Federal Law 
     Enforcement Medical Programs. To ensure that CSOs are as 
     physically fit as necessary to perform their security 
     functions and respond in emergency situations, the Committee 
     fully supports the implementation of these new medical 
     procedures and standards.

                Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$64,543,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................... 66,912,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee does not recommend any funding for this 
     account. As part of the restructuring of the budget of the 
     Federal judiciary, described above, this account has been 
     folded into the new ``Court Support'' account.

                        Federal Judicial Center


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$19,735,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................21,885,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,156,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,156,000. 
     The recommendation is $1,729,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment.
       The Federal Judicial Center improves the management of 
     Federal judicial dockets and court administration through 
     education for judges and staff and research, evaluation, and 
     planning assistance for the courts and the judicial 
     conference.

                       Judicial Retirement Funds


                    Payment To Judiciary Trust Funds

Appropriations, 2002........................................$37,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................35,300,000
Committee recommendation.....................................35,300,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,300,000 
     for payments to the Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund and 
     the Claims Court Judges Retirement Fund. The recommendation 
     is identical to the budget request.
       These funds cover the estimated annuity payments to be made 
     to retired bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges, claims 
     court judges, and spouses and dependent children of deceased 
     judicial officers.

                       U.S. Sentencing Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$11,575,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................13,200,000
Committee recommendation.....................................11,835,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,835,000. 
     The recommendation is $1,365,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment.
       The purpose of the Commission is to establish, review, and 
     revise sentencing guidelines, policies, and practices for the 
     Federal criminal justice system. The Commission is also 
     required to monitor the operation of the guidelines and to 
     identify and report necessary changes to the Congress.

                   General Provisions--The Judiciary

       The Committee recommends the following general provisions 
     for the judiciary, all of which were included in previous 
     appropriations acts.
       Section 301 allows the Judiciary to expend funds for 
     employment of experts and consultant services.
       Section 302 allows the Judiciary, subject to the 
     Committee's reprogramming procedures, to transfer up to 5 
     percent between appropriations, but limits to 10 percent the 
     amount that can be transferred into any one appropriation.
       Section 303 limits official reception and representation 
     expenses incurred by the Judicial Conference of the United 
     States to no more than $45,000.
       Section 304 provides a pay raise for Justices and judges.

            TITLE IV--DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCY

                          DEPARTMENT OF STATE

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $7,210,936,000. The recommendation is $420,939,000 below the 
     budget request. Security, technology, and infrastructure 
     accounts have received the maximum funding deemed prudent.

                   Administration of Foreign Affairs


                    diplomatic and consular programs

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,630,012,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,937,179,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,621,182,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $3,621,182,000. The recommendation is $315,997,000 below the 
     budget request. The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 
     percent pay adjustment for Federal employees.
       This appropriation account provides for the formulation and 
     execution of U.S. foreign policy, including the conduct of 
     diplomatic and consular relations with foreign countries, 
     diplomatic relations with international organizations, and 
     related activities. This account primarily funds the overseas 
     programs and operations of the Department of State.
       Within the amount provided, the Committee recommendation 
     includes $175,000 to support the United States' membership in 
     the Arctic Council and $40,000 for the Bering Straits 
     Commission. The former includes funds for representation 
     expenses and travel for U.S. delegates.
       The Committee recommendations, by bureau or operation, are 
     displayed in the following table:

                     DIPLOMATIC & CONSULAR PROGRAMS
                         [Dollars in thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                                              Positions   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overseas Bureaus:
    African Affairs........................        1,241      $214,372
    Near Eastern Affairs...................          950       141,398
    South Asian Affairs....................          745        62,952
    East Asian & Pacific Affairs...........        1,517       226,301
    European Affairs.......................        2,713       496,656
    Western Hemispheric Affairs............        2,197       235,936
    International Organization Affairs.....          355        46,805
    International Conferences..............  ...........         4,813
    FSN Separation Liability Trust Fund....  ...........         7,677
                                            ----------------------------
      Subtotal.............................  ...........     1,436,910
                                            ============================
Functional Bureaus:
    Consular Affairs.......................          249        46,146
    Economic & Business Affairs............          202        23,353
    Intelligence & Research................          305        39,711
    International Information Programs.....          283        33,065
    Oceans/Int'l Environmental/Scientific            157        20,822
     Affs..................................
    Political-Military Affairs.............          182        25,808
    Non-Proliferation......................          177        23,612
    Arms Control...........................          106        22,258
    Verification & Compliance..............           76        13,629
    Diplomatic Security....................          893       224,911
    Information Resource Management........          529       161,489
    Democracy, Human Rights, & Labor.......           97        11,165
    Population, Refugees, & Migration......  ...........           477
    Legislative Affairs....................           69         7,151
    Legal Advisor..........................          233        35,201
    Bureau of Public Affairs...............          209        26,773
    Counterterrorism Research & Development  ...........         1,800
    Office of International Criminal                  10         1,039
     Justice...............................
    Trafficking in Persons.................           14         3,515
                                            ----------------------------

[[Page 668]]

 
      Subtotal.............................  ...........       721,925
                                            ============================
Management and Administration:
    Management Programs....................        1,840       421,799
        Continuing Overseas Language         ...........      [10,000]
         Training..........................
    Administrative Programs................        1,398       421,260
        Diplomatic Telecommunications        ...........      [47,657]
         Service...........................
    Federal Employee Pay Adjustment........  ...........        40,202
                                            ----------------------------
      Subtotal.............................  ...........       883,261
                                            ============================
Worldwide Security Upgrades:
    Guards--Worldwide Protection...........  ...........       142,046
    Physical Security Equipment............  ...........        18,912
    Domestic Equipment.....................  ...........       [3,500]
    Physical Security Technical Support....  ...........        68,932
    Armored Vehicles.......................  ...........        10,536
    Personnel/Training.....................  ...........       119,780
    Radio Replacements.....................  ...........         7,413
    Information/Systems Security...........  ...........        51,825
    Chemical/Biological Program............  ...........         9,857
    Perimeter Security Enhancements........  ...........        74,000
    Center for Antiterrorism Training......  ...........        52,000
    Frontline Security Readiness...........  ...........        22,197
    Federal Employee Pay Adjustment........  ...........         1,588
                                            ----------------------------
      Subtotal.............................  ...........       579,086
                                            ============================
      Total................................  ...........     3,621,182
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Some of the Committee recommendations displayed in the 
     table are described in more detail in the following 
     paragraphs.
       New post openings.--The Committee is aware that regional 
     bureaus have discovered a clever way to influence the process 
     by which Congress must consider and approve any request by 
     the Department of State to open a new post. The Committee is 
     aware of an instance in which a post, with the support of its 
     parent bureau, arranged for temporary and long term office 
     space and housing, hired local nationals onto the staff, and 
     began conducting relations with the local and national 
     government before the request was even transmitted to 
     Congress. By establishing this foothold presence, the embassy 
     and the bureau make it all but impossible for State and the 
     Committee to deny the request, even if it makes good policy 
     sense to do so. While posts should have input into decisions 
     about expanding the U.S. presence, they should not drive the 
     process. Decisions about post openings must be based on both 
     overall foreign policy objectives and resource limitations of 
     the Department. All future requests to establish new U.S. 
     posts must hereafter be accompanied by a full accounting of 
     an embassy's expenditures in the region in question, 
     including costs associated with local hires, operational 
     expenses, Temporary Duty Assignment [TDY] personnel, and 
     travel. Additionally, each regional bureau must, on an annual 
     basis, submit to the Committee a comprehensive accounting of 
     the cost of any Department activities that take place outside 
     of a geographic radius of 200 miles of an existing post. 
     These reports should be compiled and delivered to the 
     Committee at the time of the Department's yearly budget 
     submission.
       Diplomatic Security.--Explosive growth in personnel at the 
     Bureau of Diplomatic Security [DS] has created an imbalance 
     between seasoned and unseasoned agents that can only be 
     solved with time. The total number of DS agents now stands at 
     1,150, with just under half of these agents having been hired 
     in fiscal years 2001 and 2002. The best training available 
     does not compare to experience. The Committee therefore 
     directs that DS utilize at least one-quarter of the funding 
     provided to it under Frontline Security Readiness for the 
     training of new agents.
       Additionally, the Committee remains concerned about the 
     Department's decisions relating to the placement of DS 
     agents. This is a time of heightened threat to our overseas 
     posts, as demonstrated by recent attacks against U.S. 
     diplomatic and military installations around the world. Given 
     this security environment, the Committee is alarmed by DS' 
     continued stubbornness on the issue of placement of DS agents 
     overseas. There are currently 530 DS agents stationed in the 
     United States, not including agents in training. There are 
     490 DS agents posted abroad. DS is responsible for the 
     protection of only 100 domestic locations, whereas it is 
     responsible for 260 locations overseas. It is therefore 
     illogical to station 52 percent of trained DS agents in the 
     United States versus overseas. The Committee directs that, by 
     January 1, 2004, no fewer than 844 out of a projected 1,284 
     DS agents be stationed overseas at the Department's most 
     critical posts. Of the funds provided under Frontline 
     Security Readiness, $16,697,000 is for the hiring of 100 new 
     DS agents and $5,500,000 is for training.
       Diplomatic Readiness Initiative.--The Committee supports 
     the Department's Diplomatic Readiness Initiative [DRI], under 
     which the Department plans to hire 399 new foreign service 
     officers [FSOs] in fiscal year 2003. This will bring the 
     total number of FSOs hired to 799 out of a projected 1,158 
     total new positions. The initiative will allow the Department 
     to meet its full diplomatic human resources requirements and 
     to reform its recruitment and hiring processes. The 
     Department is directed to utilize funding available under 
     Diplomatic and Consular Programs for DRI, with the 
     expectation that the balance shall be provided in a 
     forthcoming supplemental.
       Worldwide security upgrades.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $579,086,000 for worldwide security upgrades, of 
     which $504,889,000 is for ongoing security activities and 
     $52,000,000 is for the Center for Anti-Terrorism Security 
     Training. Full funding is provided for procedural and 
     technical security enhancements as well as for training, 
     operational support, and infrastructure. Of the funding 
     provided for guards-worldwide protection, $5,000,000 is for 
     uniformed protection officers to provide additional perimeter 
     patrol, and continuous delivery vehicle inspections for an 
     additional 19 high-risk posts. None of the funds provided for 
     security may be obligated until a complete and thorough 
     accounting of prior year security funds has been submitted to 
     the Committee.
       Security enhancements.--At this time of heightened threat 
     to American posts abroad, the benefits of the security 
     enhancement funds the Committee has provided to the 
     Department since the Dar and Nairobi bombings in 1998 are 
     being realized. The most recent indicator of improved 
     physical security at U.S. posts overseas came on June 14, 
     2002, when a suicide bomber detonated a 500-pound fertilizer 
     bomb outside the U.S. Consulate General in Karachi. The 
     physical damage to the building was minimized due to recent 
     security upgrades to the embassy compound. The Consulate's 
     perimeter wall had recently been reinforced, and barriers 
     installed between the wall and the street prevented the 
     vehicle from reaching the building. Shatter resistant window 
     film also significantly mitigated damage from the blast. An 
     earlier reconfiguration of interior office space, undertaken 
     to provide additional blast separation, also proved helpful. 
     Continual security upgrades to existing properties are as 
     important as the Department's Capital Security Construction 
     program. Accordingly, the Committee recommendation includes 
     $26,086,000 above the request, a 19 percent increase over the 
     fiscal year 2002 funding level, for worldwide security 
     upgrades.
       Host country relations.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $2,000,000 out of available funds to continue the 
     Ambassador's Fund for Cultural Preservation. U.S. Ambassadors 
     serving in less developed countries may submit competitive 
     proposals for awards for one-time or recurring projects. 
     Awards will be based on the importance of the site, the 
     country's need, and the potential of the award to make a 
     meaningful contribution to the preservation of the site, 
     object, or form of expression. The Department is directed to 
     submit an annual report to the Committees on Appropriations 
     on winning projects.
       Public diplomacy.--Within the funds made available for 
     Diplomatic and Consular Programs, $200,000,000 is recommended 
     for public diplomacy activities. In fiscal year 2002, 
     $310,359,000 was provided for public diplomacy initiatives, 
     $30,100,000 above the requested level. The Committee has 
     still not received the Department's plan for how its public 
     diplomacy programs will support the war on terror. The 
     Committee acknowledges the critical role that public 
     diplomacy plays both in addressing the root causes of 
     terrorism and in U.S. foreign relations generally. However, 
     the Committee cannot make informed decisions about funding 
     levels for public diplomacy without this plan. The Committee 
     would consider a request for additional public diplomacy 
     funding in a fiscal year 2003 supplemental, contingent upon 
     the submission and approval of the Public Diplomacy Plan.
       International Center for Muslim-Western Dialogue.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 out of available 
     funds for the restoration of the original U.S. consular 
     facility in Istanbul, Turkey. The Committee directs that the 
     facility be used as an International Center for Muslim-
     Western Dialogue, henceforward referred to as ``the Center'', 
     the mission of which is to promote Democracy. The Committee 
     directs the Secretary to collaborate with existing non-profit 
     organizations that focus on Western-Muslim relations such as 
     the Asia Foundation, the National Endowment for Democracy 
     [NED], and other U.S.-based centers for Islamic studies in 
     developing a plan for the creation and administration of the 
     Center. The Committee encourages the non-profit organizations 
     involved in the planning of the Center to play a continuing 
     role both in the administration of the Center and in the 
     execution of its programs. The Department is directed to 
     submit this plan to the Committees on Appropriations no later 
     than May 15, 2003.
       Bureau of Consular Affairs.--The Bureau of Consular Affairs 
     is tasked with providing support to U.S. citizens abroad, 
     facilitating travel to and from and immigration to the United 
     States, and serving as the first firewall of our national 
     border security framework. Because of these responsibilities, 
     the Bureau of Consular Affairs has more daily interaction 
     with the public, both United States and foreign, than any 
     other branch of the State Department. The Committee is aware 
     that the overwhelming majority of Consular Affairs personnel 
     respond to inquiries, requests, and crises in a professional 
     and courteous manner. However, the Committee also is aware of 
     number of complaints by Americans and foreign nationals about 
     discourteous treatment at certain U.S. posts overseas. The 
     Committee recommendation

[[Page 669]]

     includes $500,000, to be transferred to the Office of the 
     Inspector General of the Department of State, with which it 
     shall undertake a thorough review of the quality of service 
     Consular Affairs provides to both the U.S. and non-U.S. 
     public it is intended to serve. This review should consider 
     the nature and quantity of the complaints received, to the 
     extent that such information is available. It should also 
     include an analysis of those policies and procedures 
     currently in place within the Bureau of Consular Affairs that 
     may cause the Bureau's service to be less than optimal, and 
     recommendations for how consular services can be improved. 
     The Inspector General's report should be submitted to the 
     Committees on Appropriations no later than September 31, 
     2003.
       The Committee is committed to building a first-rate 
     consular service. However, no agency or program can achieve 
     excellence unless its deficiencies are identified through 
     regular, independent assessments. It is hoped, therefore, 
     that Consular Affairs will view this Inspector General report 
     as an opportunity to identify and address its weaknesses in 
     the area of customer service, and not as an attempt to 
     derogate the work performed by dedicated consular officers 
     worldwide.
       Consular workspace improvement initiative.--The 
     Department's consular mission is critical to our national 
     security. Consular workspace must be adequately sized and 
     outfitted in order to ensure that the processing of visas and 
     visa applicants takes place in an organized and efficient 
     manner. To ensure this, and to improve the overall working 
     environment for Consular Affairs Officers, the Committee 
     directs the Office of Overseas Buildings Operations [OBO] to 
     undertake a 3-year Consular Workspace Improvement Initiative. 
     The Committee is aware that, traditionally, OBO considers 
     posts' facilities requirements in a holistic manner, and does 
     not single out specific bureaus for workspace improvements. 
     However, the Committee is also aware of the direct link 
     between the quality of consular workspace and the efficiency 
     and accuracy of consular work. There is a pressing need for 
     additional consular windows and interview space, enlarged 
     reception and waiting areas, office space, and document 
     storage space. The Initiative should identify posts for 
     consular workspace rehabilitation where errors in visa 
     issuance present the greatest threat to our national 
     security, as determined by OBO in consultation with the 
     Bureau of Consular Affairs. The Committee expects 
     construction to begin on priority projects no later than 60 
     days after the enactment of this Act. The Committee directs 
     that $10,000,000 within the funds made available under 
     Diplomatic and Consular Programs be used for this initiative.
       Language training.--Several reports have identified a 
     serious shortage within the Federal Government of personnel 
     who possess the language skills required for their positions. 
     This challenge appears particularly acute at the Department 
     of State where language skills are, in so many instances, 
     directly linked to the execution of the Core Missions. 
     Reliable aggregate data on the language capabilities of 
     Foreign Service Officers [FSOs] is, however, not generally 
     available or, when available, is seriously flawed. The 
     Department has indicated that the primary factor contributing 
     to its inability to meet its language staffing and 
     proficiency goals is an overall staffing shortfall of more 
     than 1,100 people, as identified in the Department's 
     Diplomatic Hiring Report. This report precipitated the 
     Diplomatic Readiness Initiative, a program under which 1,158 
     new Foreign Service Officers will be hired over a 3-year 
     period. However, the Diplomatic Readiness Initiative does 
     little to address the specific problem of language 
     proficiency at the Department. Funds available for salaries 
     should be leveraged to provide pay incentives to FSOs who 
     gain expertise in hard-to-learn languages, to provide an 
     attractive career path for linguists, to enhance the 
     retention of FSOs with desired language skills, and to 
     provide ample training opportunities to FSOs willing to learn 
     a difficult language mid-career. Funds provided for workforce 
     retention should also be utilized to recruit native speakers 
     of difficult and hard to fill languages, drawing upon the 
     vast human resources afforded by a demographically diverse 
     United States. Language proficiency must be a criterion in 
     the selection of FSOs. If our diplomats truly are our ``first 
     line of defense'' against foreign threats, then their ability 
     to converse fluently in the languages of the countries to 
     which they are posted is critical to national security. The 
     Committee therefore directs that not less than 20 percent of 
     the FSOs hired during fiscal year 2003 possess language 
     skills of at least level 3 (General Professional) or greater 
     on the foreign language proficiency scale. Further, the 
     Committee directs that not less than 2 percent of the foreign 
     service officers hired during fiscal year 2003 possess a 
     proficiency level of 2 (Limited Working) or greater in one or 
     more of the following difficult languages: Mandarin Chinese, 
     Arabic, Japanese, Korean, and Cantonese Chinese. Finally, the 
     Committee directs the Department to develop a proposal, to be 
     submitted to the Committees on Appropriations by September 
     31, 2003 for approval, for a pay incentive package 
     exclusively for current and future Foreign Service Officers 
     who have achieved level 4 (Advanced Professional) proficiency 
     or greater in at least one of the aforementioned difficult 
     languages.
       Continuing language education.--Language skills ensure that 
     dependents of Department of State personnel are not 
     overwhelmed by isolation and alienation, resulting in lowered 
     post morale. Within available funds, the Committee 
     recommendation directs that $10,000,000 shall be available 
     only for continuing language education programs for both 
     employees and dependents at posts worldwide. Language classes 
     should also be open to non-State Department (Federal) 
     employees on a space-available, reimbursable basis.
       Office of Foreign Missions.--The Committee directs that the 
     Office of Foreign Missions [OFM] be moved out of Bureau of 
     Diplomatic Security [DS] and placed under the Deputy 
     Secretary of State for Management and Resources [M]. The 
     Committee is aware that OFM has linkage to law enforcement 
     issues, however, the Office is more appropriately situated 
     under M. OFM and DS should continue to coordinate closely 
     after the transfer.
       International conservation of sea turtles.--The Committee 
     remains concerned with the increasing threat to sea turtles, 
     particularly those listed under the Convention on 
     International Trade on Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 
     Flora [CITES], from incidental capture by foreign fishing 
     fleets, particularly in the longline fishery. The Department 
     has ignored the Committee's direction for the past 2 years. 
     Specifically, the Department ignored direction stating that 
     the Secretary should, on an expedited basis, negotiate 
     strong, enforceable management, reporting, and data 
     collection measures (including economic measures) focused on 
     reducing incidental capture of sea turtles in commercial 
     fisheries under regional management agreements for living 
     marine resources. These agreements include the Inter-American 
     Sea Turtle Conservation Treaty, the Inter-American Tropical 
     Tuna Convention, the International Convention for the 
     Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, and the Convention on the 
     Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks 
     in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (the Multilateral 
     High Level Conference). The Committee is concerned that no 
     international agreements specifically addressing turtle by-
     catch from longline fishing have been negotiated, and the 
     Department has negotiated only voluntary initiatives rather 
     than binding agreements to this end.
       Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary, in 
     cooperation with the Secretary of Commerce, to use all 
     appropriate means available to broaden the participation of 
     other nations in the Convention on the Conservation and 
     Management of Highly Migratory Species in the Western and 
     Central Pacific Ocean. Of the funding provided for the Bureau 
     of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific 
     Affairs, $4,000,000 shall be available only for negotiating, 
     in consultation with the Department of Commerce, a binding 
     agreement providing for annual reductions in sea turtle 
     mortality in the longline fisheries of the Western and 
     Central Pacific, that shall, by 2008, result in at least a 30 
     percent reduction in takes, and thereafter result in such 
     fisheries meeting sea turtle take levels comparable to those 
     achieved by the U.S. longline fleet.
       Rule of law.--The Committee recognizes that there is a need 
     for a continuing global dialogue about the rule of law and 
     its importance for the stability and viability of all 
     nations. Within the amounts provided under Diplomatic and 
     Consular Programs, $1,800,000 is for the Rule of Law Forum 
     for foreign government and non-government officials to be 
     hosted by the Dedman School of Law.
       Globalization.--Globalization is a process through which 
     different cultures have an increasing impact on each other as 
     a result of trade, immigration, and the exchange of ideas and 
     information. Advances in communications and economic 
     interdependence have accelerated the rate of globalization 
     dramatically in recent decades. Because of globalization's 
     demonstrated impact on the cultures of the world, and because 
     of the impact globalization is certain to have in the future, 
     there is a great need to study this phenomenon. Within 
     available funding, $2,500,000 is therefore recommended for 
     the continuation of the Globalization Research Network [GRN]. 
     This is a research consortium comprised of George Washington 
     University, the University of South Florida, the University 
     of California at Los Angeles, and the University of Hawaii 
     [UH]. One of the GRN's core missions is to enhance the 
     public's understanding of globalization. The consortium 
     conducts interdisciplinary, international studies of pressing 
     problems faced by humanity. The consortium also investigates 
     causes, arguments, and alternatives to present trends 
     relating to globalization.
       International trade.--Every year, the State Department 
     attempts to pursue international trade activities that fall 
     under the jurisdiction of the Commerce Department's 
     International Trade Administration, and in particular under 
     the jurisdiction of the United States and Foreign Commercial 
     Service. The State Department's efforts to expand its 
     jurisdiction in this area counters

[[Page 670]]

     the intent of the Committee, which notes the expansive and 
     intractable foreign policy issues already confronting the 
     Department. No funding is recommended for this initiative.
       Secure Card Technology.--The Committee is aware that the 
     U.S. Embassy in Mexico City began issuing secure laser visa 
     border crossing cards to Mexican visitors in May, 2002. The 
     Committee directs the Department, in consultation with the 
     Immigration and Naturalization service, to report no later 
     than May 5, 2003 on the success of this secure visa issuance 
     program in Mexico City. The report should provide 
     recommendations to the Committee regarding the expansion of 
     this visa issuance process to all visa types and the 
     potential for application of the secure card technology at 
     U.S. foreign missions.
       Fingerprint services.--The Committee directs U.S. embassies 
     and consulates with fingerprinting capabilities to 
     fingerprint aliens seeking first-time flight training in 
     aircraft weighing 12,500 pounds or more and transmit those 
     fingerprints to the Department of Justice and other relevant 
     agencies for the purposes of checking fingerprints against 
     appropriate terrorist watch-lists.
       International Child Abductions.--The Committee remains 
     concerned about the adequacy of the Department's efforts to 
     counter the serious problem of international child 
     abductions. Within 90 days of enactment of this Act, the 
     Department is directed to submit a report to the Committees 
     on Appropriations which includes the following information: 
     the country and location and number of all known U.S. 
     citizens under the age of 18 who have been abducted by a 
     parent or relative as the result of a custody dispute and who 
     are being held abroad in contravention of U.S. laws or 
     judicial orders; a summary of actions taken by the Department 
     of State to secure the repatriation of abducted American 
     children; and a list of diplomatic measures, including 
     treaties and agreements, that can be used to facilitate the 
     repatriation of abducted American children.
       The Committee directs the Department to complete and 
     release the State Department's report on compliance with the 
     Hague Convention on the International Aspects of Child 
     Abduction (``the Hague''). The Hague Convention, which the 
     United States and many of our Allies have signed, is in place 
     to facilitate the return of internationally abducted children 
     to their countries of ``habitual residence'' for custody 
     determination. The Committee recognizes the importance of 
     compliance with the Hague and requests this report be sent to 
     the Committee on Appropriations no later than February 1, 
     2003.


                        Capital Investment Fund

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$203,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................177,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................210,000,000

       The Committee recommends $210,000,000. The recommendation 
     is $33,000,000 above the budget request. The account provides 
     resources for investments in new information and 
     communications systems. The Committee recommendations, by 
     initiative, are displayed in the following table:


                        Capital investment fund

                       [In thousands of dollars]

Technology Infrastructure:
  Modernization of world-wide IT infrastructure................164,790 
    OpenNet Plus...............................................[36,500]
    Classified Connectivity Program............................[94,235]
    Secure Voice Program........................................[3,960]
    Post High Frequency Communications..........................[5,057]
    Public Key Infrastructure...................................[7,345]
    Other IT Infrastructure....................................[17,693]
  Integrated Messaging...........................................9,802 
  Centrally Managed Infrastructure..............................35,408 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Capital Investment Fund.............................210,000 
                                                       ================


       The following table displays further information technology 
     initiatives funded through Expedited Passport Fees within the 
     Information Resource Management (IRM) Central Fund:


                Other Information Technology Initiatives

                       [In thousands of dollars]

Applications and Software Development:
  Ready Access to International Affairs and Information..........7,835 
  Leveraging IT.................................................48,278 
    Integrated Logistics Management System [ILMS]..............[18,878]
    Regional Financial Management System [RFMS].................[6,597]
    Integrated Personnel Management System [IPMS]..............[11,166]
    Other Applications and Software Development................[11,637]
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal, Applications and Software Development...........56,113 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Foreign Affairs Systems Integration [FASI]......................22,102 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Project Management and Training..................................7,785 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, Other Information Technology Initiatives..............86,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, IRM Central Fund.....................................296,000

       Some of the Committee recommendations displayed in the 
     table above are described in more detail in the following 
     paragraphs.
       Information Technology.--The Committee commends the 
     Department for its commitment to overhauling its Information 
     Technology [IT] infrastructure. Having received ample funding 
     in fiscal year 2002 for its IT priorities, the Department is 
     meeting the Committee's requirement to execute certain 
     priority programs more quickly than originally planned. Two 
     major initiatives, the deployment of OpenNet Plus and the 
     overhaul of the Department's classified network, are on-
     schedule and on-budget, with OpenNet Plus scheduled for 
     completion in April, 2003, and the Classified Connectivity 
     Program scheduled for completion in early fiscal year 2004. 
     Providing the Department with state-of-the-art 
     communications, data, and knowledge management systems is, 
     once again, one of the Committee's top priorities for the 
     Department. Full funding is therefore provided for the IRM 
     Central Fund, per the above chart. The Committee expects the 
     Department's next major IT initiative, replacement of the 
     cable system with a modern, integrated messaging system, to 
     proceed as expeditiously as have its other global-scale 
     projects.
       Enterprise architecture.--The Committee has invested 
     hundreds of millions of dollars to overhaul the State 
     Department's IT infrastructure, which had been allowed to 
     grow outmoded and obsolete, with a state-of-the-art IT 
     infrastructure. The Committee remains concerned, however, 
     that the next time the Department faces slowed budget growth 
     or even budget cutbacks, it will choose to hire more analysts 
     and open more posts at the expense of the necessary annual 
     investments in infrastructure. The Committee therefore 
     directs that the Chief Information Officer of the Department 
     develop an annex to the existing IT Strategic Plan which 
     outlines in detail the Department's 5-year strategy for 
     maintaining and upgrading its existing IT infrastructure. 
     This strategy will help ensure that the significant 
     investments the Committee has made in the last 2 years are 
     not lost, and that the Department's current IT infrastructure 
     is leveraged both to capitalize on these prior investments 
     and to meet the needs of the Department. The Department is 
     directed to submit this annex to the Committees on 
     Appropriations no later than July 1, 2003.
       IT human capital.--The success of OpenNet Plus and the 
     Classified Connectivity Program is due to the Department's 
     establishment of a permanent, professional IT planning staff 
     within the Bureau of Information Resource Management. This 
     staff has been tasked with developing an enterprise 
     architecture to address all of the Department's current and 
     future technology needs. It is crucial that the Department's 
     IT personnel be drawn from among the best in their fields. 
     The Committee therefore directs the Bureau of Human 
     resources, in consultation with the Chief Information Officer 
     of the Department, to report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations on how the Department plans to meet its short 
     and long-term human capital needs in the area of information 
     technology. The report should address such issues as pay 
     incentives, specialized recruitment strategies, and 
     preventing attrition to the private sector.
       Centralized management.--The Committee supports the trend 
     at the Department towards the central management of 
     information. The Committee is aware that, at a time of 
     increased threat to our overseas posts, the ability to store 
     and manage information, particularly classified information, 
     domestically can greatly enhance the security of that 
     information. The cost of centrally managing information is 
     higher due to the cost of acquiring bandwidth. However, the 
     benefits of a more robust security construct far outweigh the 
     additional cost. One technology that appears particularly 
     promising is the high-assurance virtual wide area network 
     [WAN]. This technology would allow the Department to minimize 
     the information stored at post and permit computer terminals 
     to be ``sanitized'' of sensitive information when not in use. 
     Of the funds made available under the IRM Central Fund for 
     Centrally Managed Infrastructure, $10,000,000 shall be for a 
     pilot project to develop a high- assurance virtual WAN 
     architecture and prototype in support of Department of State 
     activities. The Committee expects the Bureau of Information 
     Resource Management to collaborate closely with the Bureau of 
     Diplomatic Security and with other relevant agencies on this 
     pilot project. This will ensure that any technologies 
     employed by the Department to centrally manage its 
     information meet all of the security requirements set forth 
     by DS and by other relevant agencies. The Committee directs 
     the Department to present a preliminary plan for this project 
     within 60 days of enactment of this Act.
       IT Common Platform.--The events of September 11, 2001, have 
     caused Federal agencies

[[Page 671]]

     and departments to reexamine the way they communicate, 
     particularly on matters relating to national security. 
     Inadequate communication and coordination among the foreign 
     affairs agencies, including the Department of State, 
     increases our vulnerability to terrorism. Since September 11, 
     agencies have taken steps to close the loopholes that existed 
     with respect to information-sharing. However, the key to 
     better communication and coordination among these agencies 
     does not necessarily lie in their ability to interface, but 
     rather in the individual department cultures that compel them 
     to do so. Foreign affairs agencies have the capability to 
     share unclassified and classified information, but they are 
     not intrinsically inclined to do so. What is required to 
     change these cultures is a dynamic, user-friendly portal 
     through which these agencies can, on a daily basis, share 
     information and collaborate their efforts. The Committee 
     supports the continued development of the Foreign Affairs 
     System Integration [FASI] project, sometimes referred to as 
     the Collaboration Zone, which is currently in the pilot 
     phase. The Department should henceforth provide a written, 
     bimonthly status report on the progress of this initiative to 
     the Committees on Appropriations.


                      Office Of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$29,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................29,264,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,844,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,844,000. 
     The recommendation is $1,580,000 above the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes the 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees. The Committee does not 
     support the Office of Inspector General's [OIG] efforts to 
     reinstate the requirement that all posts be inspected every 5 
     years. The Committee notes that, if reinstated, this policy 
     would lead to a decrease in the quantity and quality of 
     reporting on posts of importance to U.S. national interests.


               Educational and Cultural Exchange Programs

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$237,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................245,306,000
Committee recommendation....................................237,881,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $237,881,000. 
     The recommendation is $7,425,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Committee recognizes that international education and 
     exchange programs are critical components of U.S. national 
     security and foreign policy. In light of the tragic events of 
     September 11, 2001 this type of engagement with the world is 
     more important than ever. International educational and 
     exchange programs enable the United States to augment the 
     foreign language and foreign area expertise of each 
     successive generation of rising leaders, prepare U.S. 
     students to function effectively in a global environment 
     through study abroad, and promote international understanding 
     through professional, scholarly, and citizen exchanges. The 
     Committee recommendations for the Educational and Cultural 
     Exchanges Account are displayed, by program, in the following 
     table:


                   Educational and Cultural Exchanges

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

Academic Programs:
  Fulbright Program:
    Students, Scholars, Teachers................................116,495
    Hubert H. Humphrey Fellowship Program.........................6,222
    Regional Scholars Program.....................................2,049
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal..................................................124,766
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Other Academic Programs:
    Educational Advising & Student Services.......................3,500
    English Language Programs.....................................3,000
    Edmund S. Muskie Fellowship Program.............................559
    North-South Center............................................1,200
    South Pacific Exchange..........................................500
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal....................................................8,759
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Other Special Academic Programs: American Overseas Research 
    Centers.......................................................2,465
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Academic Programs.................................135,990
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Professional & Cultural Programs:
  International Visitors Program.................................50,186
  Citizen Exchange Program.......................................16,572
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal...................................................66,758
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Other Professional & Cultural Programs:
  Mike Mansfield Fellowships Programs.............................2,200
  Irish Institute...................................................500
  Atlantic Corridor USA.............................................500
  George Mitchell Fellowship Program................................500
  Institute for Representative Government...........................540
  National Forensics League for High School Debates...............1,000
  PSC U.S.-Pakistan Educator Development Program..................1,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal......................................................6,240
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Subtotal, Professional & Cultural............................72,998
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Exchanges Support:
  Employee Compensation & Benefits...............................25,071
  Program Direction & Administration..............................3,051
  Federal Employee Pay Parity.......................................771
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal.....................................................28,893
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, Educational and Cultural Exchanges...................237,881

       Some of the Committee recommendations displayed in the 
     table above are described in more detail in the following 
     paragraphs.
       Of the funds made available for the Council of American 
     Overseas Research Centers, $33,000 is for a grant for 
     research to develop a diamond fingerprinting technology that 
     will facilitate the monitoring of the international trade in 
     conflict diamonds.


                       Representation Allowances

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,485,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,485,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,485,000. 
     The recommendation is $2,515,000 below the budget request.
       Representation allowances provide partial reimbursement to 
     Foreign Service officers for expenditures incurred in their 
     official capacities abroad in establishing and maintaining 
     relations with officials of foreign governments and 
     appropriate members of local communities.


              Protection Of Foreign Missions And Officials

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$9,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................11,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,400,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,400,000. 
     The recommendation is $1,600,000 below the budget request.
       This account reimburses local governments and communities 
     for the extraordinary costs incurred in providing protection 
     for international organizations, foreign missions and 
     officials, and foreign dignitaries under certain 
     circumstances.
       The Committee directs that local jurisdictions that incur 
     such costs submit a certified billing for such costs in 
     accordance with program regulations. The Committee also 
     recommends that in those circumstances where a local 
     jurisdiction will realize a financial benefit from a visit 
     from a foreign dignitary through increased tax revenues, that 
     such circumstances should be taken into account by the 
     Department in assessing the need for reimbursement under this 
     program. The Committee expects the Department to treat such 
     submissions diligently and provide reimbursement to local 
     jurisdictions on a timely basis if claims are fully 
     justified.


            embassy security, construction, and maintenance

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,273,960,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,305,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,255,700,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,255,700,000. The recommendation is $49,350,000 below the 
     budget request.
       This account allows the Department to manage U.S. 
     Government real property in over 200 countries worth an 
     estimated $12,500,000,000 and to maintain almost 14,000 
     residential, office, and functional properties, not only for 
     the Department of State, but for all U.S. employees overseas.
       The Committee recommendations by project or program are 
     displayed in the following table:


            Embassy security, construction, and maintenance

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Worldwide Security Upgrades:
  Capital Projects.............................................488,450 
    Astana, Kazakhstan New Office Building [NOB]...............[78,400]
    Athens, Greece New Office Annex Building...................[37,600]
    Bamako, Mali NOB...........................................[69,900]
    Beijing, China NOB........................................[178,800]
    Bridgetown, Barbados Fitout................................[31,900]
    Frankfurt, Germany Design and Fitout.......................[42,900]
    Moscow, Russia Annex Design Construction....................[4,300]
    Panama City, Panama Design.................................[22,950]
    Tirana, Albania Design/Build...............................[21,700]
  Other Site Acquisitions and Planning..........................93,800 

[[Page 672]]

  Compound Security............................................150,450 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Worldwide Security Upgrades......................732,700 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Additional Security Enhancements for U.S.-Affiliated Locales:
  Overseas Schools Attended by American Children................21,000 
  Post Housing..................................................20,000 
  Other Security Enhancements....................................3,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Enhancements for U.S.-Affiliated Locales..........44,000 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Operations:
  Planning and Development.......................................6,200 
  Real Estate and Property Management............................6,000 
  Project Execution.............................................91,000 
  Operations and Maintenance...................................336,300 
    Facility Management........................................[58,000]
    Facilities Rehabilitation and Support System Replacement...[40,000]
      Moscow, Russia Spoede Fitout..............................[2,000]
      Jakarta, Indonesia Chancery and GSO Rehabilitation........[1,736]
    Fire Protection.............................................[8,500]
    Leaseholds................................................[115,000]
    Buyout of Uneconomic Leases................................[35,000]
    Maintenance and Repair of Buildings........................[68,400]
    Post Communications.........................................[8,000]
    Safety, Health, and Environmental Management................[3,400]
  Information Management and Support............................20,000 
  Main State/Domestic Renovations...............................13,000 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Operations.......................................472,500 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Headquarters:
  Salaries and Training..........................................6,500 
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Headquarters.......................................6,500 
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance Total....1,255,700 

       Some of the Committee recommendations displayed in the 
     table above are described in more detail in the following 
     paragraphs.
       Vulnerability.--The 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and 
     Tanzania significantly changed the way we approach the 
     security of our facilities abroad. The June 14, 2002, attack 
     on a church in Islamabad, Pakistan, which U.S. citizens were 
     widely known to attend, brought into focus a new kind of 
     threat against our interests abroad, specifically, threats 
     against so-called ``soft targets''. The Committee directs the 
     State Department to formulate a strategy for addressing, both 
     in the long term and in the short term, threats to locales 
     that are either frequented by Americans or symbolic of the 
     United States. The Committee is particularly concerned about 
     the safety of American schools abroad, as well as 
     international schools attended by American children. The 
     recommendation therefore includes $44,000,000 for the 
     Department to provide both temporary and long term security 
     enhancements for locations that are affiliated with the 
     United States by virtue of the activities and individuals 
     they accommodate. Of this amount, $21,000,000 is for security 
     enhancements at schools attended by American children 
     overseas. The Committee expects to be consulted by the 
     Department prior to the release of these funds. The Committee 
     is aware that providing funds for security enhancements for 
     overseas schools deviates from Department policy. It is the 
     Committee's expectation that this and all other Department 
     policies pertaining to soft targets will be reexamined in the 
     aforementioned strategy.
       Buyout of uneconomic leases.--High lease costs deplete 
     Department resources. The Committee supports efforts by the 
     Department to selectively acquire properties in cities with 
     volatile rental markets, thus generating significant out-year 
     savings. The Committee recommendation provides $35,000,000 
     for opportunity purchases.
       Marine Security Guard housing.--Marine Security Guards are 
     essential to the Department's ability to carry out its 
     mission overseas. In fiscal year 2002, the Department 
     completed the final phase of a multi-year effort, undertaken 
     at the insistence of the Committee, to address the long-
     neglected capital needs of many Marine Security Guard [MSG] 
     housing facilities worldwide. The Committee supports the 
     Department's new policy of incorporating MSG housing costs 
     into the initial cost estimates, and thus the budget 
     requests, for overseas construction or rehabilitation 
     projects. The Committee notes that MSG housing costs for 
     fiscal year 2003 are embedded within the capital projects 
     account and will therefore not constitute a separate line 
     item in the above chart.
       The Department is directed, under the terms and conditions 
     that follow, to submit for the Committee's review and 
     approval within 60 days after enactment of this Act only 
     those projects or subaccounts funded under this account, 
     whether from direct appropriations or proceeds of sales, that 
     deviate from the above chart. Any deviation shall include 
     project-level detail and shall be treated as a reprogramming 
     under section 605 of this Act in the case of an addition 
     greater than $500,000, or as a notification in the case of a 
     deletion, a project cost overrun exceeding 25 percent, or a 
     project schedule delay exceeding 6 months. Notification 
     requirements also extend to the ``rebaselining'' of a given 
     project's cost estimate, schedule, or scope of work. By 
     focusing the financial plan only on deviations, the Committee 
     expects the Department to move projects toward contract 
     obligation promptly after funds are appropriated. Immediate 
     access to funds for the projects that are unchanged from the 
     above chart allows the Department to negotiate contracts and 
     obligate funds more efficiently over the entire fiscal year.


           Emergencies In The Diplomatic And Consular Service

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................15,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,500,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,500,000. 
     The recommendation is $8,500,000 below the budget request.
       This account provides resources for the Department of State 
     to meet emergency requirements while conducting foreign 
     affairs. The Committee recommendation provides funds for: (1) 
     travel and subsistence expenses for relocation of Americans, 
     U.S. Government employees, and their families from troubled 
     areas to the United States and/or safe-haven posts; (2) 
     allowances granted to State Department employees and their 
     dependents evacuated to the United States for the convenience 
     of the Government; (3) payment of rewards for information 
     concerning terrorists and war criminals; and (4) 
     representation expenses for senior Administration officials.


                   Repatriation Loans Program Account

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,219,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,219,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,219,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,219,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request.
       This account provides emergency loans to assist destitute 
     Americans abroad who have no other source of funds to return 
     to the United States.
       In the past, less than 20 percent of repatriation loans 
     have ever been repaid. The Committee strongly endorses 
     efforts by consular services to limit assistance only to 
     victims of unforeseen circumstances or travelers whose mental 
     instability presents a risk to themselves or others.


              Payment To The American Institute In Taiwan

Appropriations, 2002........................................$17,044,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................18,817,000
Committee recommendation.....................................17,044,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,044,000. 
     The recommendation is $1,773,000 below the budget request.
       The Taiwan Relations Act requires that programs concerning 
     Taiwan be carried out by the American Institute in Taiwan 
     [AIT]. The Institute administers programs in the areas of 
     economic and commercial services, cultural affairs, travel 
     services, and logistics. The Department of State contracts 
     with the AIT to carry out these activities.


     Payment To The Foreign Service Retirement And Disability Fund

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$135,629,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................138,200,000
Committee recommendation....................................138,200,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $138,200,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request.
       This appropriation is authorized by the Foreign Service Act 
     of 1980 which provides for an appropriation to the fund in 30 
     equal annual installments of the amount required for the 
     unfunded liability created by new benefits, new groups of 
     beneficiaries, or increased salaries on which benefits are 
     computed.

              International Organizations and Conferences


              Contributions To International Organizations

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$850,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................891,378,000
Committee recommendation....................................866,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $866,000,000. 
     The recommendation is $25,378,000 below the budget request.
       This account funds payment of the obligations of U.S. 
     membership in international organizations as authorized by 
     treaties or specific acts of Congress.
       The Committee recommendations, by organization, are 
     displayed in the following table:

[[Page 673]]

              Contributions to international organizations

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
United Nations and affiliated agencies:
  Food and Agriculture Organization..............................72,741
  International Atomic Energy Agency.............................52,230
  International Civil Aviation Organization......................12,011
  International Labor Organization...............................50,333
  International Maritime Organization.............................1,209
  International Telecommunications Union..........................5,800
  United Nations--Regular.......................................279,327
  United Nations--War Crimes Tribunals............................7,629
  Universal Postal Union..........................................1,295
  World Health Organization......................................93,616
  World Intellectual Property Organization..........................823
  World Meteorological Organization...............................8,332
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal....................................................585,346
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Inter-American organizations:
  Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture........16,560
  Organization of American States................................54,196
  Pan American Health Organization...............................55,340
  Pan American Institute of Geography and History...................324
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal....................................................126,420
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Regional organizations:
  Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation.................................601
  Colombo Plan Council for Technical Cooperation.................... 15
  North Atlantic Assembly...........................................563
  North Atlantic Treaty Organization.............................45,310
  Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development..........41,611
  South Pacific Commission........................................1,080
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal.....................................................89,180
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Other international organizations:
  Customs Cooperation Council.....................................2,703
  Hague Conference on Private International Law.....................102
  International Agency for Research on Cancer.....................1,649
  International Bureau/Permanent Court of Arbitration............... 18
  International Bureau/Publication of Customs Tariffs............... 84
  International Bureau of Weights and Measures......................764
  International Copper Study Group.................................. 54
  International Cotton Advisory Committee...........................226
  International Center for the Study of Preservation & Restoration 
    of Cultural Property............................................748
  International Hydrographic Organization........................... 77
  International Institute/Unification of Private Law................ 95
  International Lead & Zinc Study Group............................. 54
  International Office of Epizootics................................ 90
  International Organization of Legal Metrology..................... 89
  International Rubber Study Group..................................120
  International Seed Testing Association............................  7
  International Tropical Timber Organization........................159
  International Union/Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources..247
  International Grains Council......................................429
  International Union/Protection of New Varieties of Plants.........161
  Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons............13,769
  World Trade Organization/General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade12,826
                                                             __________
                                                             
      Subtotal...................................................34,471
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

  Potential Exchange Rate Losses.................................30,583
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, International Organizations..........................866,000

       The Committee recommendation includes several adjustments 
     to this account based on policy decisions. The Committee also 
     is aware that exchange rate margins are moving in a direction 
     that is disadvantageous to the U.S. dollar. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $14,583,000 to provide for any 
     potential exchange rate losses. Should use of the funds be 
     necessary, the Committee expects to be notified on an agency 
     by agency basis.
       Synchronization.--The Committee notes that in the early 
     1980's, the Office of Management and Budget devised a plan to 
     pay U.S. dues to international organizations in the last 
     quarter of the year in which they were due. This practice 
     allowed the United States to pay its annual dues to the 
     United Nations [U.N.], its affiliate agencies, and other 
     international organizations in each subsequent fiscal year's 
     budget, resulting in significantly reduced outlays for one 
     fiscal year. What was intended as a budget gimmick to realize 
     a one-time savings, however, has become standard practice. 
     The subsequent non-synchronization of budgets has resulted in 
     U.S. dues frequently being paid more than a year late, which 
     has further aggravated U.S. relations with the international 
     community. The United States has demanded that U.N. adopt 
     sound, fiscally responsible budgetary practices. However, the 
     United States' own late payment of its U.N. dues forces the 
     United Nations to engage in unsound budgeting practices.
       The Committee directs the Secretary of State to develop a 
     plan, to be presented to and approved by the Committees on 
     Appropriations, for the graduated synchronization of the 
     United States' and the United Nations' budget cycles. The 
     Committee directs that the Secretary of State's plan take a 
     graduated approach to synchronization to allow the Department 
     to designate budget authority and provide outlays necessary 
     to synchronize the U.S. payment over a maximum of 5 years. 
     The Committee expects this plan to include projected budget 
     requests for the Contributions to International Organizations 
     account for each of the fiscal years in which synchronization 
     shall take place.
       U.N. headquarters renovation project.--The Committee is 
     aware that the United Nations' [U.N.] planned renovation of 
     its New York City headquarters complex is projected to cost 
     between $1,688,000,000 and $1,771,000,000. The Committee 
     would not support any move by the U.N. to float a sovereign 
     bond to fund this project. The Committee urges that an 
     alternative plan be devised in lieu of borrowing commercially 
     through a bond issue. Additionally, the Committee is aware 
     that the U.N. is considering a plan under which it would 
     occupy a building constructed by the U.N. Development 
     Corporation [UNDC] during the construction phase of the 
     project on a lease-purchase arrangement. Under this plan, 
     U.N. personnel currently working in commercial office space 
     throughout New York City would be consolidated into the new 
     building once the renovation of the original U.N. building 
     was complete. The U.N. complex would therefore double in 
     size, to include a second building as large in size as the 
     original U.N. building. This plan therefore describes a 
     capital expansion, in addition to the planned renovation, and 
     the Committee directs the Department of State to represent it 
     as such.


        Contributions For International Peacekeeping Activities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$844,139,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................725,981,000
Committee recommendation....................................673,710,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $673,710,000. 
     The recommendation is $52,271,000 below the budget request.
       The Committee is aware of the availability of $38,515,000 
     in fiscal year 2002 funding under this account. This amount, 
     when combined with the fiscal year 2003 Committee 
     recommendation, fully funds the U.S. contribution to 
     international peacekeeping at the adjusted assessment rate.
       This account funds U.S. payments for contributions for 
     international peacekeeping activities. The Committee 
     recommendations by mission are displayed in the following 
     table:

        Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities

                       [In thousands of dollars]

U.N. Disengagement Observer Force [UNDOF].........................8,365
U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon [UNIFIL]...........................33,520
U.N. Iraq/Kuwait Observer Mission [UNIKOM]........................4,479
U.N. Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara [MINURSO]......11,792
U.N. Mission in Kosovo [UNMIK]...................................96,534
U.N. Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus [UNFICYP].......................5,219
U.N. Observer Mission in Georgia [UNOMIG].........................6,516
War Crimes Tribunal--YUGOSLAVIA...................................7,000
War Crimes Tribunal--RWANDA.......................................6,000
U.N. Mission in Sierra Leone [UNAMSIL]..........................145,803
U.N. Transitional Administration in East Timor [UNTAET]..........58,177
U.N. Operation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo [MONUC]..273,226
U.N. Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea [UNMEE].....................55,594
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal....................................................712,225

       The Committee expects to be consulted prior to any 
     deviation from the above plan for fiscal year 2003.
       Democratic Republic of Congo.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides the full authorized amount for the United Nations 
     Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo 
     [MONUC]. Prior to the release of these funds, the Department 
     of State

[[Page 674]]

     must certify to the Committees on Appropriations that the 
     following conditions have been met. First, firm benchmarks 
     for what constitutes a successful mission must be determined, 
     articulated, and followed. Second, the security of The 
     Democratic Republic of the Congo's [DROC] neighbors must be 
     factored in to all of MONUC's strategic and contingency 
     planning, and must be heavily considered in the negotiation 
     of a final political settlement. Third, the United Nations 
     must construct an arrangement for the withdrawal of foreign 
     forces from the DROC that, to the greatest degree possible, 
     does not destabilize DROC's neighbors. Fourth, contingency 
     plans must be developed and implemented for the safe 
     withdrawal of peacekeepers in the event of a resumption of 
     hostilities.
       Sierra Leone.--The Committee is encouraged by the May, 2002 
     national elections in Sierra Leone, which were conducted in a 
     credible and peaceful manner. The elections underscored that 
     the people of Sierra Leone do not wish the Revolutionary 
     United Front, a rebel group notorious for its use of forced 
     amputations to terrorize local populations, to have a role in 
     the future governance of their country. As previously 
     inaccessible areas of Sierra Leone become accessible due to 
     the completion of disarmament, demobilization, and 
     reintegration [DDR], it is expected that more evidence of 
     atrocities committed during the conflict will come to light. 
     The Committee strongly supports the work of the Special Court 
     for Sierra Leone, the purpose of which is to prosecute those 
     who bear the greatest responsibility for serious violations 
     of international humanitarian law, crimes against humanity, 
     and some Sierra Leonean criminal laws, perpetrated during the 
     course of the conflict in Sierra Leone since 1996. The 
     Committee notes that the Special Court will face the 
     momentous challenge of prosecuting a disproportionately high 
     number of crimes involving sexual violence and crimes against 
     children. The Committee directs the Department of State to 
     consider ways it can support, and encourage international and 
     private organizations to undertake, new efforts to prevent, 
     respond to, and document sexual violence in African 
     countries, including Sierra Leone, Guinea, Liberia, Ivory 
     Coast, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
       Three important goals remain for the U.N. Peacekeeping 
     Mission to Sierra Leone [UNAMSIL]: the extension of state 
     authority, the reintegration of ex-combatants, and full 
     restoration of the government's control over diamond mining. 
     It is imperative that the international community and the 
     U.N. safeguard the progress made in Sierra Leone by remaining 
     engaged until all of the objectives are met. The 
     recommendation therefore provides the full authorized amount 
     for UNAMSIL. The Committee supports the adjustments to the 
     current strength, composition, and deployment of UNAMSIL 
     troops based on recent changes and anticipated further 
     changes in the security situation in Sierra Leone.
       East Timor.--Despite progress towards a peaceful, 
     constructive relationship between the two nations, East Timor 
     is not yet ready to stand entirely on its own, as evidenced 
     by recent rioting in the capital city of Dili. The fledgling 
     nation is still in the beginning stages of establishing a 
     criminal justice system, basic social services, and 
     professional police and defense forces. The Committee 
     therefore supports the continued presence of the U.N. 
     Transitional Administration in East Timor [UNTAET] at the 
     levels required by the U.N. Secretary General.
       Peacekeeping reports.--The Committee recently received 
     notification that the Department would discontinue the 
     practice of transmitting U.N. Security Council reports on 
     peacekeeping to the Committee. These reports are a crucial 
     source of information on U.N. peacekeeping missions because 
     they are not influenced by State Department opinions. The 
     Department is directed to resume transmission of these 
     reports to the Committees on Appropriations.

                       International Commissions


 International Boundary And Water Commission, United States And Mexico


                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$24,705,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................27,404,000
Committee recommendation.....................................25,155,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,155,000. 
     The recommendation is $2,249,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes the fiscal year 2002 
     funding level, and a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for Federal 
     employees.
       The Committee recommendations are displayed in the 
     following table:


    International Boundary & Water Commission Salaries and Expenses

                       [In thousands of dollars]

Administration....................................................5,375
Engineering.......................................................2,131
Operations and maintenance.......................................17,199
Federal Employee Pay Adjustment.....................................450


                              Construction

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,450,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,401,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,488,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,488,000. 
     The recommendation is $3,913,000 below the budget request.
       The Committee recommendations, by project, are displayed in 
     the following table:


         International Boundary & Water Commission Construction

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Boundary-wide construction:
  Facilities renovation construction................................656
  Heavy equipment replacement.......................................500
  Land mobile radio systems replacement.............................594
  Hydrological data collection system rehabilitation................500
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, boundary-wide construction..........................2,250
Rio Grande construction:
  Rio Grande American Canal extension...............................250
  Rio Grande canalization continuation..............................800
  Rio Grande flood control system rehabilitation..................1,150
  Safety of dams rehabilitation...................................1,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Rio Grande construction.............................3,200
                                                             __________
                                                             
  Federal Employee Pay Adjustment................................... 38
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total.........................................................5,488

       The Committee expects to be consulted prior to any 
     deviation from the above plan for fiscal year 2003.


              American Sections, International Commissions

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$9,911,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,682,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,023,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,023,000. 
     The recommendation is $659,000 below the budget request.
       This account funds the U.S. share of expenses of the 
     International Boundary Commission [IBC], the International 
     Joint Commission [IJC], and the Border Environment 
     Cooperation Commission [BECC].
       The Committee recommendations, by commission, are displayed 
     in the following table:


              American Sections, International Commissions

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
International Boundary Commission:
  Commission operations.............................................514
  Maine-Quebec project..............................................118
  Washington-British Columbia.......................................234
  Montana-Alberta, British Columbia.................................143
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, IBC.................................................1,009
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

International Joint Commission [IJC]:
  United States Section...........................................6,440
  U.S. Geological Survey............................................534
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, IJC.................................................6,974
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Border Environment Cooperation Commission:
  Studies & investigations/solid waste projects.....................320
  All other operations............................................1,720
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, BECC................................................2,040
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    Total, American sections.....................................10,023

       The Committee expects to be consulted prior to any 
     deviation from the above plan for fiscal year 2003.


                  International Fisheries Commissions

Appropriations, 2002........................................$20,480,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................19,780,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,480,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,480,000. 
     The recommendation is $700,000 above the budget request.
       This account funds the U.S. share of the expenses of 
     international fisheries commissions; participation in the 
     International Council for the Exploration of the Sea; 
     participation in the North Pacific Marine Sciences 
     Organization; travel expenses of the U.S. commissioners and 
     their advisors; and salaries of non-Government employees of 
     the Pacific Salmon Commission for days actually worked as 
     commissioners and panel members and alternates.
       The Committee recommendations, by commission, organization, 
     or council, are displayed in the following table:


                  International Fisheries Commissions

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation
Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission...........................1,950
Great Lakes Fishery Commission...................................13,248
Pacific Salmon Commission.........................................2,193
International Pacific Halibut Commission..........................2,100

[[Page 675]]

International Whaling Commission.................................... 90
North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission............................ 99
Int'l Commission/Conservation of Atlantic Tunas.....................121
Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization...........................146
Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources 70
North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization..................... 27
Int'l Council for the Exploration of the Seas.......................120
North Pacific Marine Science Organization........................... 66
Inter-American Sea Turtle Convention Commission.....................150
Expenses of the U.S. Commissioners..................................100
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total........................................................20,480

       The Committee expects to be consulted prior to any 
     deviation from the above plan for fiscal year 2003.
       Of the amount provided for the Great Lakes Fishery 
     Commission [GLFC], not less than $300,000 shall be used to 
     treat Lake Champlain with lampricide and lampricide 
     alternative. The GLFC is directed to give priority to States 
     that have provided matching grants when distributing 
     lampricide funds.

                                 Other


                     Payment To The Asia Foundation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$9,250,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,444,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,250,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,250,000. 
     The recommendation is $806,000 above the budget request.
       The Asia Foundation plays a complementary role in advancing 
     U.S. foreign policy interests in Asia and the Pacific through 
     grants, services, and exchange programs. The Committee 
     supports the Foundation's efforts to reestablish its program 
     and presence in Afghanistan, which was in existence from 1954 
     until the Soviet invasion in 1979. The Committee encourages 
     the Foundation to use its expertise in developing programs to 
     encourage women's political participation in Central Asia, 
     and specifically Afghanistan.
       Within the funds provided, $1,000,000 is to support the 
     Asia Foundation's work in Nepal aimed at strengthening the 
     performance of district courts and building dispute 
     resolution mechanisms in the local communities. A 
     comprehensive research study carried out last year confirmed 
     that there are severe weaknesses in the Nepalese court 
     system. The additional funding will allow the Asia Foundation 
     to expand its current training to include judges, 
     prosecutors, and court personnel throughout Nepal. Also, the 
     additional funding will allow the Asia Foundation to provide 
     the technical support, training, awareness programs, and 
     assistance in building local capacity necessary to have 
     effective dispute resolution mechanisms at the local level.

                 Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Program


           Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Program Trust Fund

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$500,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................500,000
Committee recommendation........................................500,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $500,000 for 
     interest and earnings in the Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship 
     Program Trust Fund, authorized by the Eisenhower Exchange 
     Fellowship Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-454). The 
     recommendation is identical to the budget request.
       The Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Act of 1990 authorized a 
     permanent endowment for the Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship 
     Program. The act established the Eisenhower Exchange 
     Fellowship Program Trust Fund in the U.S. Treasury for these 
     purposes. A total of $7,500,000 has been provided to 
     establish a permanent endowment for the program, from which 
     interest and earnings in the fund are appropriated to 
     Eisenhower Exchange Fellowships, Inc.

                    Israeli-Arab Scholarship Program

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$375,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................375,000
Committee recommendation........................................375,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of interest and 
     earnings for the Israeli-Arab Scholarship Endowment Fund 
     estimated to be $375,000. The recommendation is identical to 
     the budget request.
       A permanent endowment of $4,978,500 was established in 
     fiscal year 1992 with funds made available under section 
     556(b) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and 
     Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1990, as amended. The 
     income from the endowment is to be used for a program of 
     scholarships for Israeli-Arabs to attend institutions of 
     higher education in the United States.

                            East-West Center

Appropriations, 2002........................................$14,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,280,000
Committee recommendation.....................................18,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,000,000. 
     The recommendation is $3,720,000 above the request.
       Of the funding provided, the Committee recommends 
     $2,500,000 for renovation of existing East-West Center 
     facilities which are more than 40 years old. The funding 
     provided will be used to upgrade the facilities to make them 
     compliant with current safety standards and to improve 
     telecommunications services.

                    National Endowment For Democracy

Appropriations, 2002........................................$33,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................36,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................46,500,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $46,500,000. 
     The recommendation is $10,500,000 above the budget request.
       The National Endowment for Democracy [NED] is a private, 
     non-profit organization created in 1983 to strengthen 
     democratic institutions around the world. NED's mission is to 
     support peaceful and stable transitions to more open 
     political and economic systems characterized by effective 
     governance and legal systems, engaged and responsible civil 
     societies, and open markets. Although NED was first created 
     to help the United States win the cold war, its mission of 
     promoting democracy is still relevant today particularly in 
     the new war against terrorism.
       This Committee recommendation responds to the immediate 
     threat of terrorism by taking steps to provide for the 
     security of the U.S. homeland. However, the threat of 
     terrorism also requires a long-term response which addresses 
     the root causes of terrorism. This can be accomplished by 
     helping to establish democracies throughout the Middle East, 
     Africa, South and Central Asia, and other regions where 
     terrorism has flourished over the last decade. Building 
     democracies helps sever the link between terror and tyranny 
     which, unfortunately, have become commonplace in these 
     regions.
       NED has already established a network of Muslim 
     organizations and professionals in these regions that work to 
     promote democracy from within the Islamic tradition. The 
     Committee believes that NED's existing networks in these 
     regions can be used to further the broader objectives of the 
     war against terror. The recommendation therefore includes 
     funding above the requested level for NED to expand its work 
     with political leaders, legislators, and political parties in 
     Muslim countries, and to capitalize on new opportunities to 
     expand outreach and develop and promote contacts.
       The Committee recommendation includes $7,000,000 above 
     current funding levels for programs that support the 
     development of effective ties with modernist Muslim groups, 
     programs that are developing pro-democracy networks, 
     independent journalists, and women's business organizations.
       The Muslim world consists of more than 1 billion people and 
     stretches some 10,000 miles from Morocco to Indonesia. Only 
     by establishing democracies in those countries in the Middle 
     East, Africa, South and Central Asia, and other regions that 
     support terrorists can we permanently stop terrorism. It is 
     here that terrorist recruits have been found among the 
     disadvantaged. Muslim countries face four challenges. The 
     first is to end repression, permit freedom of expression, and 
     introduce genuine political parties. The second is to 
     modernize their economies, with the goal of reducing poverty 
     and inequality so that young people can have hope and 
     opportunity. The third is to control corruption and establish 
     the genuine rule of law. And the fourth is to end the 
     political abuse of religion and reconcile Islam with modern 
     concepts of citizenship and individual rights. The Committee 
     therefore recommends increases for NED programs in Muslim-
     populated countries, as reflected in the following table:

                       [In thousands of dollars]

                                                              Committee
                                                         recommendation

Africa............................................................6,341
Asia..............................................................7,182
Middle East.......................................................8,605
Central Asia/Afghanistan..........................................2,000
Central and Eastern Europe........................................2,180
Newly Independent States..........................................5,540
Latin American/Caribbean..........................................5,737
Multiregional.....................................................3,280
Democratic Activities.............................................1,272
Administration....................................................4,363
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total........................................................46,500

       The Committee expects that these funding increases will be 
     distributed throughout NED's four core institutes in the same 
     manner as NED's core budget.
       Africa.--The Committee recognizes that funding constraints 
     have limited the success of NED in the Democratic Republic of 
     the Congo, Sierra Leone, Sudan, and Nigeria. Therefore, 
     $1,000,000 above current funding levels is provided for NED 
     to increase its support for independent women's cultural and 
     human rights organizations in these countries.
       Asia.--Of the funding provided for Asia, the Committee 
     recommendation includes $1,500,000 above the request for 
     enhanced programs in The Peoples Republic of China, including 
     Tibet, Burma, and North Korea.

[[Page 676]]

       Middle East.--Of the funding provided for NED programs in 
     the Middle East, the Committee recommendation includes an 
     increase of $1,000,000 above current funding levels to expand 
     a women's rights and democracy training program for Lebanon's 
     Shiite female educators, students, and mothers.
       Afghanistan.--The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for NED 
     to establish a program for women's rights in Afghanistan.
       None of the funds provided under this heading shall be 
     obligated until a detailed spend plan has been submitted to 
     and approved by the Committees on Appropriations, in keeping 
     with section 605 of this Act.

                             RELATED AGENCY

                    Broadcasting Board of Governors


                 International Broadcasting Operations

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$437,434,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................467,898,000
Committee recommendation....................................431,456,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $431,456,000. 
     The recommendation is $36,442,000 below the request. The 
     recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay adjustment for 
     Federal employees. This account funds the operating and 
     engineering costs of Voice of America [VOA], Radio Free 
     Europe/Radio Liberty [RFE/RL], Radio Free Asia [RFA], 
     Worldnet Television, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors 
     [BBG].
       Of the funds made available under this heading, not more 
     than $17,757,000 shall be used for Agency Direction. No 
     funding is recommended for the Office of General Counsel.
       Shifting requirements.--The Committee commends Radio Free 
     Europe/Radio Liberty [RFE/RL] for developing programming in 
     Avar, Chechen, and Circassian and for expanding broadcasting 
     to the Northern Causasus. The Committee recognizes the 
     continuing importance of reaching the isolated minorities of 
     the Northern Caucasus in their native languages. The Chechen 
     crisis is ongoing and there is still a great need in this 
     region for objective, uncensored information. Within the 
     funding provided for RFE/RL, not less than $2,400,000 shall 
     be for the North Caucasus Unit.
       The Committee recommendation includes $1,157,000 for Radio 
     Free Asia to continue daily Uyghur broadcasts. Radio Free 
     Asia's Uyghur broadcasts are proving successful in northwest 
     China in spite of top level officials efforts to erect a 
     steel wall against ``hostile radio stations from abroad''.
       Africa Broadcasting.--The problem of AIDS in Africa is 
     ubiquitous. Radio broadcasting is an underutilized tool in 
     the fight against the African AIDS epidemic. Its 
     accessibility to even the most impoverished communities make 
     it an ideal way to transmit information about the disease. 
     Radio broadcasts could be a major component of sustained 
     prevention efforts undertaken by the governments of many 
     African countries, humanitarian organizations, and U.S. 
     assistance programs. The recommendation includes $11,000,000 
     for Voice of America's Africa Division for broadcasting to 
     Africa. The Committee directs VOA to incorporate AIDS 
     education into its regular programming. VOA is directed to 
     report to the Committee on its progress no later than 90 days 
     after enactment of this Act.
       Of the funds made available for Voice of America, 
     $8,579,000 is for the Middle East Radio Network.
       Security of RFE/RL headquarters.--The Committee is aware 
     that RFE/RL and the government of the Czech Republic have 
     jointly developed a preliminary plan to relocate RFE/RL 
     headquarters from St. Wenceslas Square in Prague, the Czech 
     Republic, to a new and safer location. The Committee expects 
     to be consulted on all decisions concerning a future capital 
     project, particularly decisions that concern security. RFE/RL 
     is directed to report to the Committee on all aspects of the 
     relocation currently being considered. The report should 
     explain whether it would be desirable, from both a security 
     and from an economic perspective, to move RFE/RL headquarters 
     to a location outside of the Czech Republic. The BBG is 
     directed to consider Turkey as a possible host nation for the 
     new RFE/RL headquarters.
       Security of worldwide broadcasting facilities.--In the 
     post-September 11 environment, the broadcasting services no 
     longer have the luxury of ignoring the security of their 
     personnel and facilities. The Broadcasting Board of Governors 
     is therefore directed to develop, in consultation with the 
     Department of State and other relevant U.S. agencies, a 5-
     year capital worldwide security plan. The plan shall be 
     transmitted to the Committees on Appropriations no later than 
     July 1, 2003.
       Within the funding made available for Radio Free Asia, not 
     less than $2,898,000 is for the Korea Service.


                          Broadcasting To Cuba

Appropriations, 2002........................................$24,872,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................25,362,000
Committee recommendation.....................................24,996,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,996,000. 
     The recommendation is $366,000 below the budget request. The 
     recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay raise for Federal 
     employees. This account funds the operating and engineering 
     costs of Radio and Television Marti.


                   broadcasting capital improvements

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,900,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................13,740,000
Committee recommendation.....................................13,740,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,740,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request.
       This account funds necessary maintenance, improvements, 
     replacements, and repairs of broadcasting sites; satellite 
     and terrestrial program feeds; and engineering support 
     activities, broadcast facility leases, and land rentals.

      General Provisions--Department of State and Related Agencies

       The Committee recommends the following general provisions:
       Section 401 permits funds appropriated in this Act for the 
     Department of State to be available for allowances and 
     differentials, services, and hire of passenger 
     transportation.
       Section 402 permits up to 5 percent of any appropriation 
     made available in the bill for the Department of State and 
     the U.S. Information Agency to be transferred between their 
     respective appropriations. The language also provides that no 
     appropriation shall be decreased by more than 5 percent or 
     increased by more than 10 percent by any such transfer. In 
     addition, the language provides that any transfer pursuant to 
     this subsection shall be treated as a reprogramming of funds 
     under section 605 of the accompanying bill and shall not be 
     available for obligation or expenditure except in compliance 
     with the procedures set forth in that section.
       Section 403 prohibits the use of Department of State funds 
     to support the Palestinian Broadcasting Corp.
       Section 404 requires that a consulate or diplomatic 
     facility in Jerusalem be under the supervision of the U.S. 
     Ambassador to Israel.
       Section 405 requires government publications to list 
     Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
       Section 406 allows Israel to be recorded as the place of 
     birth on registrations of birth, certifications of 
     nationality, and passport applications for U.S. citizens born 
     in Jerusalem.
       Section 407 requires that property currently being occupied 
     by the Department of State be transferred to the Department 
     of State.

                       TITLE V--RELATED AGENCIES

                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        Maritime Administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$224,732,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................207,120,000
Committee recommendation....................................225,600,000

       The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
     $225,600,000, which is $18,480,000 above the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment for Federal employees.
       The Maritime Administration [MarAd] in the Department of 
     Transportation is responsible for administering several 
     programs for the maritime industry relating to U.S. foreign 
     and domestic commerce and for national defense purposes.
       The Committee's recommendations for specific accounts are 
     described below.


                       Maritime Security Program

Appropriations, 2002........................................$98,700,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................98,700,000
Committee recommendation.....................................98,700,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $98,700,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request.
       The Maritime Security program maintains a U.S.-flag 
     merchant fleet crewed by U.S. citizens who serve both the 
     commercial and national security needs of the United States. 
     The Committee's recommendation fully funds the 47 ships 
     authorized to participate in this program.


                        Operations And Training

Appropriations, 2002........................................$89,054,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................93,133,000
Committee recommendation.....................................89,904,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $89,904,000. 
     The recommendation is $3,229,000 below the budget request.
       This account funds operations of MarAd, the U.S. Merchant 
     Marine Academy, and provides grants to State maritime 
     academies.
       The recommendation includes $49,890,000 for the U.S. 
     Merchant Marine Academy and $7,563,000 for the State maritime 
     schools. Within the amounts provided for the U.S. Merchant 
     Marine Academy, $13,000,000 is included to reduce the 
     maintenance and repair backlog at the Academy, and to begin 
     to make needed capital improvements. Within the amounts for 
     State maritime schools, $1,200,000 is for student incentive 
     payments, $1,200,000 is for direct scholarship payments, and 
     $5,163,000 is for schoolship maintenance and repair. The 
     Committee notes that MarAd anticipates using $2,000,000 in 
     Ready Reserve funds to support the schoolship maintenance and 
     repair program.


                    Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program

Appropriations, 2002........................................$36,978,000

[[Page 677]]

Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,126,000
Committee recommendation.....................................36,996,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $36,996,000. 
     The recommendation includes $4,144,000 for administrative 
     expenses. The recommendation is $32,870,000 above the budget 
     request.
       The Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program (title XI) provides 
     subsidies for guaranteed loans for purchasers of vessels 
     built in U.S. shipyards and includes the guarantee for 
     facilities or equipment pertaining to marine operations 
     related to any of those vessels.
       The Committee is concerned that the Administration did not 
     request a title XI subsidy for fiscal year 2003. Projects 
     currently under consideration, and many future maritime 
     projects would be in jeopardy under this proposal. The 
     recommended subsidy amount, when combined with $10,000,000 in 
     anticipated carryover balances, should provide sufficient 
     funding to cover expected out-year requirements.


                         SHIP DISPOSAL PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$11,161,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee does not recommend an appropriation within 
     this title for the Ship Disposal Program. The recommendation 
     is $11,161,000 below the budget request.

      Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$489,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................499,000
Committee recommendation........................................659,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $659,000. This 
     amount is $160,000 above the budget request and includes a 
     4.1 pay adjustment. The recommendation will allow the 
     Commission to fund its administrative expenses through 
     appropriated funds while relying on privately donated funds 
     for the actual purchase and restoration of property.
       The purpose of the Commission is to encourage the 
     preservation of cemeteries, monuments, and historic buildings 
     associated with the foreign heritage of the American people.
       Revolutionary War heroes.--The Committee supports the 
     Commission's preliminary survey (phase I) of sites abroad 
     associated with the lives and deeds of foreign-born heroes of 
     the American Revolution. The Commission has identified at 
     least 31 Revolutionary period heroes that are, or should be, 
     commemorated abroad that qualify for site assessment (phase 
     II). Phase II will involve: (1) collection of first hand 
     information at foreign commemorative sites, (2) formulation 
     of recommendations regarding necessary repairs to, or 
     expansion of, existing monuments, rewriting of commemorative 
     inscriptions, and placement of new commemorative markers or 
     monuments, and (3) dissemination of information on 
     commemorative sites to American citizens and foreign 
     governments and organizations. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $160,000 to conduct phase II. The Committee looks 
     forward to receiving a report on the completion of phase II 
     at the earliest convenience of the Commission.

                       Commission on Civil Rights


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$9,096,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,096,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,096,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,096,000 for 
     the salaries and expenses of the Commission on Civil Rights. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment to the degree resources are available.

             Commission on International Religious Freedom

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment to the degree resources are available.

                       Commission on Ocean Policy

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation......................................3,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for 
     the Commission on Ocean Policy. The recommendation is 
     $3,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
     recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay adjustment to the 
     degree resources are available. Legislation directing the 
     President to establish a Commission on Ocean Policy, as the 
     successor to the objective, science-based 1966 Stratton 
     Commission passed during the 106th Congress. To date 
     $7,500,000 has been appropriated for the Commission.

            Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,499,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,607,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,550,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,550,000. 
     The recommendation is $57,000 below the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment to the degree resources are available.
       The Commission was established in 1976 to ensure compliance 
     with the final act of the Conference on Security and 
     Cooperation in Europe with particular regard to provisions 
     dealing with humanitarian affairs.

  Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,700,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000. 
     The recommendation is $700,000 below the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment to the degree resources are available.

                Equal Employment Opportunity Commission


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$310,406,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................320,436,000
Committee recommendation....................................320,436,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $320,436,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment to the degree resources are available.
       The Committee recommendation includes $33,000,000 to fund 
     fair employment practices agencies. This should permit the 
     EEOC to increase the contract rate for cases closed to $500. 
     In order to ensure the EEOC understands the importance the 
     Committee places on the work of State and local fair 
     employment practices agencies, bill language is included to 
     direct the agency to increase funding for the charge rate 
     paid to these agencies.
       The Committee expects the agency to use its anticipated 
     fiscal year 2002 carryover funds and the remainder not used 
     for the above purposes to modernize its computer systems.

                   Federal Communications Commission


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$245,071,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................268,327,000
Committee recommendation....................................275,400,000

       The Committee recommends a total of $275,400,000 for the 
     salaries and expenses of the Federal Communications 
     Commission [FCC], of which the entire amount is to be derived 
     from collection of existing fees. The recommendation is 
     $7,073,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
     recommendation includes the fiscal year 2002 funding level 
     and a 4.1 percent pay adjustment. The Committee supports an 
     increase for the FCC's Technology requirements and 
     initiatives to improve the agency's program performance. This 
     funding will provide for continued support and critical 
     improvements for existing systems, and will ensure compliance 
     with government-wide standards pertaining to system security, 
     accessibility and financial management. The funding will 
     impact on all five key FCC activities, which includes 
     licensing, competition, enforcement, consumer information, 
     and spectrum management.
       The FCC is an independent agency charged with regulating 
     interstate and foreign communications, including radio, 
     television, wire, wireless, cable, and satellite. The FCC's 
     primary mission is to promote competition, innovation, and 
     deregulation in the communications industry.
       Broadcast television standards.--The Committee is concerned 
     about the declining standards of broadcast television and the 
     impact this decline is having on America's children. An 
     analysis of all prime-time programming has found that overall 
     sexual content, foul language and violence have tripled over 
     the past decade. In December 1999, the FCC issued a notice of 
     inquiry regarding the public interest obligations of 
     broadcasters during and after the transition to digital 
     transmission. The Committee directs the FCC to continue to 
     report to Congress on the issues associated with resurrecting 
     a broadcast industry code of conduct for content of 
     programming that, if adhered to by the broadcast industry, 
     would protect against the further erosion of broadcasting 
     standards.

                      Federal Maritime Commission


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$16,458,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................17,440,000
Committee recommendation.....................................16,795,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,795,000. 
     The recommendation is $645,000 below the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment.

[[Page 678]]

       The Federal Maritime Commission is an independent 
     regulatory agency charged with administering several laws 
     relating to the waterborne domestic and foreign offshore 
     commerce of the United States.

                        Federal Trade Commission


                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$155,982,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................187,599,000
Committee recommendation....................................175,148,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $175,148,000. 
     The recommendation is $12,451,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment.
       The Federal Trade Commission [FTC] administers a variety of 
     Federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. Activities in 
     the antitrust area include detection and elimination of 
     illegal collusion, anticompetitive mergers, unlawful single-
     firm conduct, and injurious vertical agreements. The FTC 
     regulates advertising practices, service industry practices, 
     marketing practices, and credit practices as it addresses 
     fraud and other consumer concerns.
       The Committee recommendation for fiscal year 2003 provides 
     funding for a total of 1,074 full time equivalents. The 
     recommendation provides requested increases to pay non-
     personnel services, and space costs, and does not provide for 
     increased costs of the Consumer Response Center. The 
     recommended program level will be partially offset by fees 
     assessed on Hart-Scott-Rodino Act premerger notification 
     filings as authorized by section 605 of Public Law 101-162.
       Child Protection.--The FTC released a report 2 years ago 
     that was very critical of the entertainment industry and 
     their persistent and calculated marketing of violent games, 
     movies, and music to children. In response to this report the 
     entertainment industry has promised to place tougher 
     regulations on itself and voluntarily comply with the 
     report's recommendations. The Committee believes that the FTC 
     should continue and expand its efforts in this area and 
     directs the Commission to continue to engage in consumer 
     research and workshops, underage shopper-retail compliance 
     surveys, and marketing data collection.
       Internet.--The FTC is charged with monitoring compliance 
     with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. The 
     Committee's recommendation ensures the agency is adequately 
     prepared to meet the challenges of increased fraud on the 
     Internet and the agency's recognition that Internet fraud is 
     an international phenomenon since the Internet has no 
     borders.
       Do-Not-Call Initiative.--The Committee recommends an 
     additional $16,000,000 for the Federal Trade Commission and 
     authority to collect offsetting fees for the Commission's Do-
     Not-Call initiative under its Telemarketing Sales Rule. The 
     Do-Not-Call initiative will establish a national database of 
     telephone numbers of consumers who choose not to receive 
     telephone solicitations from telemarketers. The Committee 
     understands that the Commission plans to adopt, prior to 
     enactment of this legislation, the Do-Not-Call initiative as 
     an amendment to its Telemarketing Sales Rule. The Committee 
     further understands that the Commission has developed a 
     spending plan for the Do-Not-Call initiative. The Committee 
     recognizes that these additional funds and fee collection 
     authority are needed to implement the Do-Not-Call initiative, 
     which has received broad support from, and will provide 
     significant benefits to, consumers throughout the United 
     States.

                       Legal Services Corporation


               payment to the legal services corporation

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$329,300,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................329,300,000
Committee recommendation....................................329,397,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $329,397,000. 
     The recommendation is $97,000 above the budget request and 
     includes funds for a 4.1 pay adjustment. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $310,097,000 for basic field 
     programs, to be used for competitively awarded grants and 
     contracts, $13,300,000 for management and administration, 
     $3,400,000 is for client self-help and information 
     technology, and $2,600,000 for the Office of the Inspector 
     General.


                       administrative provisions

       The Committee recommendation continues the administrative 
     provisions contained in the fiscal year 1998 appropriations 
     act (Public Law 105-119) regarding operation of this program 
     to provide basic legal services to poor individuals and the 
     restrictions on the use of Legal Services Corporation [LSC] 
     funds.
       Grantees must agree not to engage in litigation and related 
     activities with respect to a variety of matters including (1) 
     redistricting; (2) class action suits; (3) representation of 
     illegal aliens; (4) political activities; (5) collection of 
     attorney fees; (6) abortion; (7) prisoner litigation; (8) 
     welfare reform; (9) representation of charged drug dealers 
     during eviction proceedings; and (10) solicitation of 
     clients. The exception to the restrictions in a case where 
     there is imminent threat of physical harm to the client or 
     prospective client remains in place.
       The manner in which LSC grantees are audited through 
     contracts with certified public accountants for financial and 
     compliance audits are continued along with the provisions on 
     recompetition and debarment.

                        Marine Mammal Commission


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,957,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,856,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,050,000

       The recommendation provides $2,050,000 for the Marine 
     Mammal Commission in fiscal year 2003. The recommendation is 
     $194,000 above the budget request and includes a 4.1 percent 
     pay adjustment.
       The Committee has long been aware that noise pollution in 
     the world's oceans has a deleterious effect on the health and 
     safety of marine mammals. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $4,000,000 to be transferred from the Small Business 
     Administration to the Marine Mammal Commission to conduct 
     original research or to fund grants designed to determine the 
     actual near-, medium-, and long-term effects of low, medium, 
     and high frequency sounds on the health and safety of marine 
     mammals, focusing on the most endangered species first. The 
     amount provided is also intended to fund an international 
     conference, or series of conferences, to share findings, 
     survey acoustic ``threats'' to marine mammals, and develop 
     means of reducing those threats while maintaining the oceans 
     as the global highway of international commerce.

          National Veterans' Business Development Corporation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000. 
     The recommendation is identical to the budget request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes funds for a 4.1 pay 
     adjustment.

                   Securities and Exchange Commission


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$489,505,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................566,900,000
Committee recommendation....................................656,700,000

       The Committee recommendation provides total budget 
     (obligational) authority of $656,700,000. This amount is 
     $89,800,000 above the budget request.
       The strength of the American economy is dependent upon 
     investors' confidence in the financial disclosures and 
     statements released by publicly traded companies. The public 
     must receive full and transparent information regarding the 
     financial status of publicly traded companies so that limited 
     dollars are efficiently invested, for the good of the private 
     investor, and the American economy. Recent accounting 
     scandals related to Enron and Worldcom have shaken the 
     public's faith in this country's financial markets. The 
     Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC], an independent 
     agency, was created to administer many of the Nation's laws 
     regulating the areas of securities and finance, and to act on 
     behalf of the public to prevent fraud and misrepresentation 
     in securities transactions.
       The recommendation supports the continuation of pay parity 
     for the SEC's staff, adds additional staff, and provides the 
     funds necessary to improve the agency's monitoring systems. 
     The Committee expects the SEC to provide quarterly reports to 
     the Committee on the status of the implementation of these 
     funds and the measures it is taking to restore the public's 
     confidence in the financial markets.
       The Commission is required, pursuant to the ``Investor and 
     Capital Markets Fee Relief Act'', to make annual adjustments 
     to the rates for fees paid under Section 6(b) of the 
     Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 13(e), 14(g), and 31 of 
     the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Effective October 1, 
     2002, or 5 days after the date on which the Commission 
     receives its fiscal 2003 regular appropriation, whichever 
     date comes later, the Section 6(b) fee rate applicable to the 
     registration of securities, the Section 13(e) fee rate 
     applicable to the repurchase of securities, and the Section 
     14(g) fee rates applicable to proxy solicitations and 
     statements in corporate control transactions will be reduced 
     to $80.90 per million from the current rate of $92.00 per 
     million. In addition, effective October 1, 2002, or 30 days 
     after the date on which the Commission receives its fiscal 
     2003 regular appropriation, whichever date comes later, the 
     Section 31 fee rate applicable to securities transactions on 
     the exchanges and Nasdaq will be reduced to $25.20 per 
     million from the current rate of $30.10 per million. These 
     fees are available to offset all funds recommended by the 
     Committee for the SEC.
       The Committee recommendation includes sufficient funding to 
     permit the Commission to continue implementation of the pay 
     parity program authorized in the ``Investor and Capital 
     Markets Fee Relief Act'', which was enacted in January 2002. 
     In March, the Committee approved the reprogramming of 
     $24,800,000 in available balances to permit the Commission to 
     implement this program to

[[Page 679]]

     bring the salaries for SEC employees in line with those of 
     other Federal financial regulatory agencies. The Committee 
     believes that the Commission's ability to retain and 
     adequately support staff up to its authorized staffing level 
     is critical to the success of its role in restoring 
     confidence in U.S. financial markets.
       The Committee recommends that the Commission continue to 
     emphasize the investigation and prosecution of financial 
     fraud and reporting cases. In the first quarter of calendar 
     year 2002 the SEC enforcement staff opened 64 cases 
     investigating financial fraud and reporting, compared to 31 
     cases opened in the same period last year. The Committee 
     commends the SEC for its heightened enforcement efforts and 
     recent initiatives to protect investors through strengthened 
     corporate disclosure, accounting, and reporting requirements.
       The Committee understands the Commission plans on receiving 
     700 new staff and that the majority of these new staff would 
     be allocated to the Divisions of Enforcement and Corporation 
     Finance and the agency's inspection and examination program. 
     The Committee requires a spending plan be provided and 
     approved before funds for this effort are obligated or 
     expended.
       The inability of Commission staff to conduct data-intensive 
     analyses and examinations has hampered the Commission's 
     investigative and enforcement efforts. In particular, the 
     Commission has continued to struggle with the massive inflows 
     of paper documents received in the course of its 
     investigations. For this reason, the Committee recommendation 
     specifically includes a $47,200,000 increase for information 
     technology. This funding increase will allow for the 
     development of a pilot document management system and the 
     deployment of substantially more robust analytical tools for 
     SEC examination staff. This increase also will allow the 
     Commission to undertake a requirements analysis to determine 
     how best to improve its corporate disclosure review 
     activities so that investors are provided with enhanced 
     protections and assurances of the validity of corporate 
     financial disclosures.
       The Committee's recommendation includes funds for the one-
     time advancement of not more than $10,000,000 to the new 
     Professional Company Accounting Oversight Board for start-up 
     costs associated with its first fiscal year. In the event 
     that start-up costs exceed $10,000,000, the Commission shall 
     request a reprogramming from the Committee that fully 
     describes the additional amounts required. The Committee 
     requires a spending plan be provided and approved before 
     these funds are obligated or expended.
       The recommendation provides $6,000,000 to cover the costs 
     of additional immediate security measures now required at the 
     Commission's new headquarters building as a result of the 
     September 11 attack and continuing threats to Federal 
     facilities. The Committee recommends bill language, similar 
     to that included in previous appropriations acts, which: (1) 
     allows for the rental of space; (2) makes up to $3,000 
     available for official reception and representation expenses; 
     (3) makes up to $10,000 available for a permanent secretariat 
     for the International Organization of Securities Commissions; 
     and (4) makes up to $100,000 available for governmental and 
     regulatory officials.
       Exercise of options.--The Committee is concerned that 
     corporate insiders are enriching themselves at the expense of 
     the corporations for which they work and the stockholders by 
     exercising stock options immediately prior to companies' 
     financial collapse. In fact, exercising stock options may 
     actually contribute to the bankruptcy of teetering 
     corporations. Therefore, the SEC is directed to provide the 
     Committees on Appropriations with a report listing every 
     corporate officer or director whose exercise of options under 
     section 12 of the Securities and Exchange Act exceeds 
     $100,000 during each 30 day reporting period. The report 
     shall be delivered monthly beginning 30 days after date of 
     enactment of this Act.

                     Small Business Administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$888,514,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................783,048,000
Committee recommendation....................................788,537,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $788,537,000. 
     The recommendation is $5,489,000 above the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     increase for Federal employees. The total funding is 
     distributed among the five SBA appropriation accounts as 
     described below.


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$308,476,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................352,968,000
Committee recommendation....................................364,357,000

       The Committee recommends a direct appropriation of 
     $364,357,000 for the salaries and expenses of the Small 
     Business Administration. The recommendation is $11,389,000 
     above the budget request. The Committee does not recommend 
     funding for gainsharing, workforce restructuring, program 
     evaluations, and an E-Government initiative.


                Non-Credit Business Assistance Programs

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $149,775,000 
     for SBA's non-credit business assistance programs. The 
     Committee recommends the following amounts for these 
     programs:

Small Business Development Centers..........................$88,000,000
USEAC Program.................................................3,100,000
Drug-free Workplace Grants....................................3,000,000
Regulatory Fairness Boards......................................500,000
SCORE.........................................................5,000,000
BICs............................................................475,000
Women's Business Centers.....................................12,000,000
Business LINC.................................................2,000,000
Women's Council.................................................750,000
7(j) Technical Assistance.....................................3,600,000
Native American Economic Development Initiative...............1,000,000
Advocacy Research/Database....................................1,100,000
Microloan Technical Assistance...............................17,500,000
Veteran's Business Development Assistance.......................750,000
PRO-Net.........................................................500,000
SBIR Technical Assistance.......................................500,000
Federal and State Technology Partnership Program..............3,000,000
HubZone Progam................................................2,000,000
PRIME Technical Assistance....................................5,000,000

       The Committee believes the Small Business Development 
     Centers [SBDCs] provide useful services to small businesses 
     nationwide. Federal funding of SBDC's constitutes the seed 
     funding for the program, which is leveraged one or two times 
     by State, local, and private funds.
       The Committee recommendation provides funding of 
     $17,500,000 for the Microloan Technical Assistance Program 
     and $5,000,000 for the PRIME technical assistance program. 
     The Committee believes the PRIME program has great promise 
     for providing assistance to the entrepreneurs who have no 
     access to capital and has a training component for assisting 
     these small businesses which is missing in some of the other 
     SBA assistance programs.
       The Committee recommends $500,000 for Small Business 
     Innovation Research [SBIR] technical assistance and 
     $3,000,000 for the Federal and State Technology Partnership 
     Program [FAST]. The FAST program encourages organizations in 
     States to assist in the development of small high-technology 
     businesses. The Committee believes that increasing the 
     overall participation in the SBIR program by high-technology 
     small businesses will ultimately lead to an overall increase 
     in the quality of SBIR proposals and completed projects.


                      Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$11,464,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,500,000
Committee recommendation.....................................11,600,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,600,000 
     for the Office of Inspector General of the Small Business 
     Administration. The recommendation is $2,900,000 below the 
     budget request. The Committee expects the office to report on 
     its progress in reviewing and auditing the agency's financial 
     management systems. The bill contains language making 
     $500,000 available to the Inspector General's office from 
     funds made available to the disaster loan program for its 
     activities.


                     Business Loans Program Account

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$283,860,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................218,086,000
Committee recommendation....................................218,086,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $218,086,000 
     for the business loans program account. The recommendation is 
     identical to the budget request. Of the amount provided, 
     $129,000,000 is for administrative expenses related to this 
     account. The administrative expenses may be transferred to 
     and merged with SBA salaries and expenses to cover the common 
     overhead expenses associated with the business loan programs.
       The Committee recommendation includes an appropriation of 
     $85,360,000 to support a $4,850,000,000 7(a) loan program. 
     This assumes a subsidy rate of 1.76 percent. The small 
     business community is dependent on the SBA 7(a) program to 
     obtain long-term financing at a competitive interest rate. 
     Each year, 40,000 or more small business concerns, who cannot 
     obtain comparable credit elsewhere, turn to the 7(a) program 
     for critical financing. Furthermore, the Committee believes 
     the SBA should achieve a goal of a zero subsidy rate for the 
     7(a) loan program. However, the same result can be achieved 
     by a comprehensive review of subsidy cost estimates for the 
     7(a) program. Previous reports from the GAO indicate that 
     subsidy costs have been inflated. OMB estimates of the 
     subsidy cost of the 7(a) program consistently show execution 
     rates are inflated. This could lead to the overcharging of 
     small business owners. The Committee believes that the 7(a) 
     program is already operating near a zero subsidy rate and 
     that the budget request should contain a one-time accurate 
     accounting change to reflect that reality. The Committee 
     recommends that this one-time accounting change be reflected 
     in future budget requests. The recommendation includes 
     $3,726,000 in subsidy budget authority for the Microloan 
     program, which will support a program level of approximately 
     $26,553,000 in fiscal year 2003, assuming a subsidy rate of 
     13.05 percent.

[[Page 680]]




                     Disaster Loans Program Account

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$284,714,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................197,494,000
Committee recommendation....................................194,494,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $194,494,000 
     for the disaster loan program. The recommendation does not 
     include $3,000,000 for gainsharing. The recommendation is 
     $3,000,000 below the budget request. Of the amount provided, 
     $76,140,000 is for direct loan subsidies. This amount, 
     combined with carryover and recoveries of $35,000,000 will 
     provide for a program level of $795,000,000. The remaining 
     $118,354,000 is made available for administrative expenses 
     for the program, and can be merged with the agency's salaries 
     and expenses account.


                       Administrative Provisions

       The Committee wishes to underscore the reprogramming 
     requirements outlined in section 605. This recommendation 
     includes an administrative provision in the bill language, as 
     in last year's bill, providing the authority to transfer 
     funds between the Small Business Administration's 
     appropriations accounts. The language provides that no 
     account may be decreased by more than 5 percent or increased 
     by more than 10 percent. The language also makes the 
     transfers subject to the Committee's standard reprogramming 
     procedures under section 605. In addition, a reprogramming 
     notification is required in any proposed organization, 
     whether or not funding transfers will be associated with the 
     proposed reorganization.

                        State Justice Institute


                         Salaries And Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................13,550,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,100,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,100,000. 
     The recommendation is $10,450,000 below the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendation includes a 4.1 percent pay 
     adjustment.
       The Institute was created in 1984 to further the 
     development and adoption of improved judicial administration 
     in State courts.

              United States-Canada Alaska Rail Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee does not recommend funding for the United 
     States-Canada Alaska Rail Commission. The recommendation is 
     identical to the budget request.

                      TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       The Committee recommends the following general provisions 
     for the departments and agencies funded in the accompanying 
     bill.
       Section 601 prohibits any appropriation act from being used 
     for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by law.
       Section 602 prohibits any appropriation contained in the 
     act from remaining available for obligation beyond the 
     current year unless expressly so provided.
       Section 603 provides that the expenditure for any 
     appropriation contained in the act for any consulting service 
     through procurement contracts shall be limited to those 
     contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public 
     record and available for public inspection except where 
     otherwise provided under existing law or under existing 
     Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.
       Section 604 limits the availability of funds for a 
     memorandum of agreement.
       Section 605 stipulates Committee policy concerning the 
     reprogramming of funds. Section 605(a) prohibits the 
     reprogramming of funds which: (1) creates new programs; (2) 
     eliminates a program, project, or activity; (3) increases 
     funds or personnel by any means for any project or activity 
     for which funds have been denied or restricted; (4) relocates 
     offices or employees; (5) reorganizes offices, programs, or 
     activities; (6) contracts out or privatizes any function or 
     activity presently performed by Federal employees--unless the 
     Appropriations Committees of the House and Senate are 
     notified 15 days in advance.
       Section 605(b) prohibits a reprogramming of funds in excess 
     of $500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, that (1) 
     augments existing programs, projects, or activities; (2) 
     reduces by 10 percent funding for any existing program, 
     project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent 
     as approved by Congress; or (3) results from any general 
     savings due to a reduction in personnel which would result in 
     a change in existing programs, activities, or projects as 
     approved by Congress unless the Appropriations Committees of 
     the House and Senate are notified 15 days in advance.
       Section 606 prohibits construction, repair, overhaul, 
     conversion, or modernization of NOAA ships outside of the 
     United States.
       Section 607 ties grant eligibility to retired law 
     enforcement disability benefits.
       Section 608 limits the availability of funds for tobacco 
     promotion.
       Section 609 prohibits funds from being used to issue a visa 
     to any alien involved in extrajudicial and political killings 
     in Haiti and establishes working conditions for plaintiffs in 
     a recently settled Federal lawsuit.
       Section 610 prohibits a user fee from being charged for 
     background checks conducted pursuant to the Brady Handgun 
     Control Act of 1993 and prohibits implementation of a 
     background check system that does not require and result in 
     the immediate destruction of certain information.
       Section 611 delays obligation of some receipts deposited 
     into the Crime Victim Fund.
       Section 612 ties visa issuance to cooperation on so-called 
     ``non-returnables''.
       Section 613 limits the placement of maximum or high 
     security prisoners to appropriately secure facilities.
       Section 614 restricts Federal prisoner access to certain 
     amenities.
       Section 615 makes appropriations for the Small Business 
     Administration.
       Section 616 clarifies section 626 of Public Law 107-77 that 
     allows a cause of action for the Iranian hostages.

                         TITLE VII--RESCISSIONS

                         DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

                         General Administration


                          working capital fund

                              (rescission)

       The Committee recommends a rescission of $36,230,000 from 
     the unobligated balances available in the ``Working Capital 
     Fund''.

                            Legal Activities


                         asset forfeiture fund

                              (rescission)

       The Committee recommends a rescission of $50,874,000 from 
     the unobligated balances available in the ``Asset Forfeiture 
     Fund''.

              DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND RELATED AGENCIES

                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

               United States Patent and Trademark Office


                         salaries and expenses

                              (rescission)

       The Committee recommends a rescission of $120,000,000 from 
     the unobligated balances available in the ``United States 
     Patent and Trademark Office, Salaries and Expenses'' account.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Rule XVI, paragraph 7 requires that every report on a 
     general appropriation bill filed by the Committee must 
     identify items of appropriation not made to carry out the 
     provisions of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an 
     act or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.
       The following appropriations have not been authorized 
     either in whole or in part and fall under this rule:
       Title II--Department of Commerce and related agencies: 
     Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, salaries and 
     expenses; International Trade Commission, salaries and 
     expenses; Export Administration, operations and 
     administration; International Trade Administration, 
     operations and administration; economic development 
     assistance programs; Patent and Trademark Office; National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology, scientific and 
     technical research and services; NIST industrial technology 
     services; NIST construction of research facilities; National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operations, research, 
     and facilities; NOAA construction; and Minority Business 
     Development Agency.
       Title V--Related agencies: Department of Transportation; 
     Maritime Administration, operations and training; Commission 
     on Civil Rights; Federal Communications Commission (except 
     offsetting fee collections); Legal Services Corporation; and 
     Securities and Exchange Commission.

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of the rule XXVI requires that Committee 
     reports on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending 
     any statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of 
     the statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; 
     and (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by this bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

[[Page 681]]



  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2004
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or ^)
                Item                        2003            Budget       House allowance     Committee    ---------------------------------------------------
                                       appropriation   estimate        deg.        recommendation        2003            Budget            House
                                                                                                            appropriation   estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
   TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
 
       General Administration
 
Salaries and expenses...............          91,668           114,579           99,696           +8,028          -14,883
    Emergency appropriations (Public           5,750   ................  ...............          -5,750   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Identification systems integration..  ...............           24,478   ...............  ...............         -24,478
    USA Patriot Act activities                 5,000   ................  ...............          -5,000   ...............
     (emergency)....................
Anti-terrorism task forces..........  ...............  ................          63,700          +63,700          +63,700
Joint terrorism task forces.........  ...............  ................         158,547         +158,547         +158,547
Foreign terrorist tracking task       ...............  ................          62,000          +62,000          +62,000
 force..............................
Joint automated booking system......           1,000   ................          15,973          +14,973          +15,973
Automated Biometric Identification    ...............  ................           9,000           +9,000           +9,000
 System-Integrated Identification
 system integration.................
Chimera.............................  ...............  ................          83,400          +83,400          +83,400
Legal activities office automation..          15,765            15,942           77,127          +61,362          +61,185
Narrowband communications...........          94,615           149,254          149,254          +54,639   ...............
Deputy Attorney General for                    1,000   ................  ...............          -1,000   ...............
 Combating Terrorism................
Counterterrorism fund...............           4,989   ................  ...............          -4,989   ...............
 
Administrative review and appeals:
    Direct appropriation............         173,647           193,535          180,466           +6,819          -13,069
    Emergency appropriations (Public           3,500   ................  ...............          -3,500   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................         177,147           193,535          180,466           +3,319          -13,069
 
Detention trustee...................           1,000         1,388,566        1,385,966       +1,384,966           -2,600
Office of Inspector General.........          50,735            63,937           54,825           +4,090           -9,112
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General administration.         448,669         1,950,291        2,339,954       +1,891,285         +389,663
                                     ===================================================================================================================
   United States Parole Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............           9,876            10,862           10,114             +238             -748
                                     ===================================================================================================================
          Legal Activities
 
General legal activities:
    Direct appropriation............         549,176           645,299          537,502          -11,674         -107,797
    Emergency appropriations (Public          12,500   ................  ...............         -12,500   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................         561,676           645,299          537,502          -24,174         -107,797
 
Vaccine injury compensation trust              4,028             4,028            4,028   ...............  ...............
 fund (permanent)...................
 
Antitrust Division..................         130,791           137,799          133,133           +2,342           -4,666
    Offsetting fee collections--            -130,791          -137,799         -133,133           -2,342           +4,666
     current year...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation..........  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
United States Attorneys:
    Direct appropriation............       1,353,968         1,506,373        1,320,160          -33,808         -186,213
    Emergency appropriations (Public          56,370   ................  ...............         -56,370   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).          -7,000   ................  ...............          +7,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................       1,403,338         1,506,373        1,320,160          -83,178         -186,213
 
United States Trustee System Fund...         147,000           167,510          150,381           +3,381          -17,129
    Offsetting fee collections......        -140,000          -161,510         -144,381           -4,381          +17,129
    Interest on U.S. securities.....          -7,000            -6,000           -6,000           +1,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation..........  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
 
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission           1,136             1,136            1,136   ...............  ...............
 
United States Marshals Service:
    Salaries and expenses (non-CSE).         619,429           691,343          661,085          +41,656          -30,258
        Emergency appropriations              10,200   ................  ...............         -10,200   ...............
         (Public Law 107-117).......
    Courthouse security equipment...          14,267   ................          12,061           -2,206          +12,061
    Construction....................          15,000            15,126           17,378           +2,378           +2,252
        Emergency appropriations               9,125   ................  ...............          -9,125   ...............
         (Public Law 107-117).......
    Justice Prisoner and Alien        ...............  ................          77,694          +77,694          +77,694
     Transportation system..........
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, United States Marshals          668,021           706,469          768,218         +100,197          +61,749
       Service......................
 
Federal prisoner detention..........         706,182   ................  ...............        -706,182   ...............
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).         -30,000   ................  ...............         +30,000   ...............
Fees and expenses of witnesses......         156,145           156,145          156,145   ...............  ...............
Community Relations Service.........           9,269             9,364            9,474             +205             +110
Assets forfeiture fund..............          22,949            22,949           22,949   ...............  ...............
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).          -5,000   ................  ...............          +5,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Legal activities.......       3,497,744         3,051,763        2,819,612         -678,132         -232,151
                                     ===================================================================================================================
   Radiation Exposure Compensation
 
Administrative expenses.............           1,996             1,996   ...............          -1,996           -1,996
 
     Interagency Law Enforcement
 
Interagency crime and drug                   338,577           362,131          400,102          +61,525          +37,971
 enforcement........................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
   Federal Bureau of Investigation
 
Salaries and expenses...............       3,031,830         3,729,838        3,452,287         +420,457         -277,551
    Emergency appropriations (Public         745,000   ................  ...............        -745,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public          10,000   ................  ...............         -10,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Counterintelligence and national             459,243           521,749          475,300          +16,057          -46,449
 security...........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Direct appropriation........       4,246,073         4,251,587        3,927,587         -318,486         -324,000
 
Construction........................          33,791             1,250            1,250          -32,541   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Bureau of             4,279,864         4,252,837        3,928,837         -351,027         -324,000
       Investigation................
                                     ===================================================================================================================

[[Page 682]]

 
   Drug Enforcement Administration
 
Salaries and expenses...............       1,567,804         1,659,564        1,566,491           -1,313          -93,073
    Diversion control fund..........         -86,021          -113,645          -89,021           -3,000          +24,624
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Drug Enforcement              1,481,783         1,545,919        1,477,470           -4,313          -68,449
       Administration...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
   Immigration and Naturalization
               Service
 
Salaries and expenses...............       3,371,440         3,241,787        3,076,509         -294,931         -165,278
    Emergency appropriations (Public         449,800   ................  ...............        -449,800   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public          35,000   ................  ...............         -35,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
    Enforcement and border affairs..      (2,739,695)       (3,153,183)  ...............     (-2,739,695)     (-3,153,183)
    Citizenship and benefits,               (631,745)          (88,604)  ...............       (-631,745)        (-88,604)
     immigration support and program
     direction......................
 
    Fee accounts:
        Immigration user fee........        (591,866)         (658,295)        (658,295)        (+66,429)  ...............
        Land border inspection fund.          (4,490)           (2,700)          (2,700)         (-1,790)  ...............
        Immigration examinations          (1,376,871)       (1,462,803)      (1,462,803)        (+85,932)  ...............
         fund.......................
        Breached bond fund..........        (120,763)         (171,275)        (171,275)        (+50,512)  ...............
        Immigration enforcement              (22,664)           (6,000)          (6,000)        (-16,664)  ...............
         fines......................
        H-1b Visa fees..............         (26,272)          (10,000)         (10,000)        (-16,272)  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Fee accounts....       2,142,926         2,311,073        2,311,073         +168,147   ...............
 
Construction........................         128,454   ................         267,138         +138,684         +267,138
    Emergency appropriations (Public          99,600   ................  ...............         -99,600   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
Support and administration..........  ...............          785,598   ...............  ...............        -785,598
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Immigration and              (6,227,220)       (6,338,458)      (5,654,720)       (-572,500)       (-683,738)
       Naturalization Service.......
          Appropriations............      (3,499,894)       (4,027,385)      (3,343,647)       (-156,247)       (-683,738)
          Emergency appropriations..        (584,400)  ................  ...............       (-584,400)  ...............
          (Fee accounts)............      (2,142,926)       (2,311,073)      (2,311,073)       (+168,147)  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
        Federal Prison System
 
Salaries and expenses...............       3,808,600         4,081,765        4,068,237         +259,637          -13,528
    Prior year carryover............  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Direct appropriation........       3,808,600         4,081,765        4,068,237         +259,637          -13,528
 
Buildings and facilities............         813,552           395,243          470,221         -343,331          +74,978
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).          -5,000   ................  ...............          +5,000   ...............
Federal Prison Industries,                     3,429             3,429            3,429   ...............  ...............
 Incorporated (limitation on
 administrative expenses)...........
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Prison System..       4,620,581         4,480,437        4,541,887          -78,694          +61,450
                                     ===================================================================================================================
     Office of Justice Programs
 
Justice assistance..................         437,008           214,024        2,232,057       +1,795,049       +2,018,033
    (By transfer)...................          (6,632)           (6,632)          (6,632)  ...............  ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public         400,000   ................  ...............        -400,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).            -600   ................  ...............            +600   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Justice               836,408           214,024        2,232,057       +1,395,649       +2,018,033
       Programs.....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
State and local law enforcement
 assistance:
    Local law enforcement block              400,000   ................         400,000   ...............        +400,000
     grant..........................
        Boys and Girls clubs                 (70,000)  ................         (90,000)        (+20,000)        (+90,000)
         (earmark)..................
        Grants, contracts, and other         (19,956)  ................         (20,000)            (+44)        (+20,000)
         assistance (earmark).......
    Indian assistance...............          48,162            12,971           48,000             -162          +35,029
        Tribal prison construction..         (35,191)  ................         (35,000)           (-191)        (+35,000)
        Indian tribal courts program          (7,982)           (7,982)          (8,000)            (+18)            (+18)
        Indian grants...............          (4,989)           (4,989)          (5,000)            (+11)            (+11)
    State criminal alien assistance          565,000   ................  ...............        -565,000   ...............
     program........................
    Cooperative agreement program...          20,000   ................          20,000   ...............         +20,000
    Byrne grants (formula)..........         500,000   ................  ...............        -500,000   ...............
    Byrne grants (discretionary)....          94,489   ................         134,700          +40,211         +134,700
    Juvenile crime block grant......         249,450           215,000          249,450   ...............         +34,450
    Drug courts.....................          50,000            52,000           50,000   ...............          -2,000
    Violence Against Women grants...         390,565           390,165          390,565   ...............            +400
    State prison drug treatment.....          70,000            77,000           70,000   ...............          -7,000
    Other crime control programs....           5,688             4,742            5,700              +12             +958
    Assistance for victims of                 10,000   ................  ...............         -10,000   ...............
     trafficking....................
    Emergency appropriations (Public         251,100   ................  ...............        -251,100   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, State and local law           2,654,454           751,878        1,368,415       -1,286,039         +616,537
       enforcement..................
 
Weed and seed program fund..........          58,925            58,925           58,925   ...............  ...............
 
Community oriented policing
 services:
    Public safety and community              496,014           126,106          492,000           -4,014         +365,894
     policing grants................
        Hiring......................        (330,000)  ................  ...............       (-330,000)  ...............
        Methamphetamine.............         (70,473)          (20,000)         (50,000)        (-20,473)        (+30,000)
    Management administration.......          32,812            25,685           35,000           +2,188           +9,315
    Crime fighting technologies.....         351,632           282,500          426,215          +74,583         +143,715
        Safe schools initiative.....         (17,000)          (17,000)         (17,000)  ...............  ...............
        Upgrade criminal history             (35,000)          (60,000)         (35,000)  ...............        (-25,000)
         records....................
        DNA identification/crime lab         (75,000)          (75,000)         (80,000)         (+5,000)         (+5,000)
        COPS technology.............        (154,345)          (50,000)        (158,815)         (+4,470)       (+108,815)
        COPS Interoperability.......  ...............  ................        (100,000)       (+100,000)       (+100,000)
    Community prosecutors...........          99,780            99,780          100,000             +220             +220
    Crime prevention................          70,202            46,963           67,013           -3,189          +20,050
    Justice assistance grants         ...............          800,000   ...............  ...............        -800,000
     program........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Community oriented            1,050,440         1,381,034        1,120,228          +69,788         -260,806
       policing services............
 
Juvenile justice programs...........         305,860           257,801          315,425           +9,565          +57,624
    (Transfer out)..................         (-6,632)          (-6,632)         (-6,632)  ...............  ...............
Election reform grants..............  ...............          400,000           50,000          +50,000         -350,000
 
Public safety officers benefits
 program:
    Death benefits..................          33,224            49,054           49,054          +15,830   ...............

[[Page 683]]

 
    Disability benefits.............           4,500             4,000            4,000             -500   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Public safety officers           37,724            53,054           53,054          +15,330   ...............
       benefits program.............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Justice             4,943,811         3,116,716        5,198,104         +254,293       +2,081,388
       Programs.....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of       23,707,195        22,800,337       24,059,727         +352,532       +1,259,390
       Justice......................
          (Transfer out)............         (-6,632)          (-6,632)         (-6,632)  ...............  ...............
          (By transfer).............          (6,632)           (6,632)          (6,632)  ...............  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND
          RELATED AGENCIES
 
TRADE AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
 
  Office of the United States Trade
           Representative
 
Salaries and expenses...............          30,097            32,299           33,000           +2,903             +701
 
   International Trade Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............          51,440            54,000           54,600           +3,160             +600
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Related agencies.......          81,537            86,299           87,600           +6,063           +1,301
                                     ===================================================================================================================
       DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
 
 International Trade Administration
 
Operations and administration.......         347,547           376,678          353,242           +5,695          -23,436
    Emergency appropriations (Public           1,000   ................  ...............          -1,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Offsetting fee collections......          -3,000           -13,000           -3,000   ...............         +10,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Direct appropriation........         345,547           363,678          350,242           +4,695          -13,436
 
   Bureau of Industry and Security
 
Operations and administration.......          61,643           100,198          100,198          +38,555   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public           1,756   ................  ...............          -1,756   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    CWC enforcement.................           7,250   ................  ...............          -7,250   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Export Administration..          70,649           100,198          100,198          +29,549   ...............
 
 Economic Development Administration
 
Economic development assistance              335,000           317,235          257,886          -77,114          -59,349
 programs...........................
Salaries and expenses...............          30,557            30,765           30,765             +208   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Economic Development            365,557           348,000          288,651          -76,906          -59,349
       Administration...............
 
Minority Business Development Agency
 
Minority business development.......          28,381            28,906           28,906             +525   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Trade and                       891,671           927,081          855,597          -36,074          -71,484
       Infrastructure Development...
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
      ECONOMIC AND INFORMATION
           INFRASTRUCTURE
 
  Economic and Statistical Analysis
 
Salaries and expenses...............          62,515            73,220           72,158           +9,643           -1,062
 
        Bureau of the Census
 
Salaries and expenses...............         169,424           204,996          173,223           +3,799          -31,773
Periodic censuses and programs......         321,376           500,320          385,696          +64,320         -114,624
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).         -11,300   ................  ...............         +11,300   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Bureau of the Census...         479,500           705,316          558,919          +79,419         -146,397
 
   National Telecommunications and
     Information Administration
 
Salaries and expenses...............          14,054            16,581           14,352             +298           -2,229
Public telecommunications                     43,466            43,556           43,616             +150              +60
 facilities: planning and
 construction.......................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           8,250   ................  ...............          -8,250   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Information infrastructure grants...          15,503               212           15,560              +57          +15,348
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National                         81,273            60,349           73,528           -7,745          +13,179
       Telecommunications and
       Information Administration...
 
 United States Patent and Trademark
               Office
 
Current year fee funding............         843,701         1,204,357        1,038,800         +195,099         -165,557
Emergency appropriations (Public Law           1,500   ................  ...............          -1,500   ...............
 107-117)...........................
Prior year carryover................         282,300           100,000          166,771         -115,529          +66,771
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Patent and Trademark          1,127,501         1,304,357        1,205,571          +78,070          -98,786
       Office.......................
 
      Offsetting fee collections....        -843,701        -1,204,357       -1,038,800         -195,099         +165,557
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Economic and                    907,088           938,885          871,376          -35,712          -67,509
       Information Infrastructure...
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
       SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
 
      Technology Administration
 
   Under Secretary for Technology/
     Office of Technology Policy
 
Salaries and expenses...............           8,238             7,886            7,886             -352   ...............
 
 National Institute of Standards and
             Technology
 
Scientific and technical research            321,111           384,809          363,433          +42,322          -21,376
 and services.......................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           5,000   ................  ...............          -5,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           4,000   ................  ...............          -4,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Industrial technology services......         291,022           119,607          291,976             +954         +172,369
Construction of research facilities.          62,393            54,212           65,460           +3,067          +11,248
    Emergency appropriations (Public           1,225   ................  ...............          -1,225   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................

[[Page 684]]

 
Working capital fund................  ...............            4,482              281             +281           -4,201
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Institute of           684,751           563,110          721,150          +36,399         +158,040
       Standards and Technology.....
 
  National Oceanic and Atmospheric
           Administration
 
Operations, research, and facilities       2,027,424         1,991,722        2,349,301         +321,877         +357,579
    Emergency appropriations (Public           2,750   ................  ...............          -2,750   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Regular appropriations (Public             2,000   ................  ...............          -2,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).          -8,100   ................  ...............          +8,100   ...............
    Conservation....................         223,273           219,360   ...............        -223,273         -219,360
    (By transfer from Promote and            (68,000)          (75,000)         (55,000)        (-13,000)        (-20,000)
     Develop Fund)..................
    (By transfer from Coastal zone             3,000             3,000            3,000   ...............  ...............
     management)....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Operations, research,         2,250,347         2,214,082        2,352,301         +101,954         +138,219
       and facilities...............
 
Procurement, acquisition and                 778,065           791,375          903,410         +125,345         +112,035
 construction.......................
    Conservation....................          58,487            20,012   ...............         -58,487          -20,012
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Procurement,                    836,552           811,387          903,410          +66,858          +92,023
       acquisition and construction.
 
Pacific coastal salmon recovery.....  ...............  ................          98,650          +98,650          +98,650
    Conservation....................         157,419           110,000   ...............        -157,419         -110,000
Coastal zone management fund........          -3,000            -3,000           -3,000   ...............  ...............
Fishermen's contingency fund........             952               954              954               +2   ...............
Foreign fishing observer fund.......             191               191              191   ...............  ...............
Fisheries finance program account...             287            -3,000           -3,000           -3,287   ...............
    Negative subsidy (Public Law 107-         -3,000   ................  ...............          +3,000   ...............
     206)...........................
 
Environmental improvement and                 10,000   ................  ...............         -10,000   ...............
 restoration fund...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Oceanic and          3,249,748         3,130,614        3,349,506          +99,758         +218,892
       Atmospheric Administration...
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Science and Technology.       3,942,737         3,701,610        4,078,542         +135,805         +376,932
          Appropriations............      (3,498,683)       (3,352,238)      (4,078,542)       (+579,859)       (+726,304)
          Conservation..............        (439,179)         (349,372)  ...............       (-439,179)       (-349,372)
          Emergency appropriations..         (12,975)  ................  ...............        (-12,975)  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
       Departmental Management
 
Salaries and expenses...............          37,652            48,254           41,494           +3,842           -6,760
    Emergency appropriations (Public           4,776   ................  ...............          -4,776   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public             400   ................  ...............            -400   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Office of Inspector General.........          20,176            22,670           20,635             +459           -2,035
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental management          63,004            70,924           62,129             -875           -8,795
                                     ===================================================================================================================
Sec. 210 Tourism promotion..........  ...............  ................          50,000          +50,000          +50,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Department of Commerce.       5,722,963         5,552,201        5,830,044         +107,081         +277,843
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department of       5,804,500         5,638,500        5,917,644         +113,144         +279,144
       Commerce and related agencies
          Appropriations............      (5,354,064)       (5,289,128)      (5,917,644)       (+563,580)       (+628,516)
          Conservation..............        (439,179)         (349,372)  ...............       (-439,179)       (-349,372)
          Emergency appropriations..         (30,657)  ................  ...............        (-30,657)  ...............
          (By transfer).............         (68,000)          (75,000)         (55,000)        (-13,000)        (-20,000)
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
      TITLE III--THE JUDICIARY
 
 Supreme Court of the United States
 
Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of justices............           1,808             1,872            1,872              +64   ...............
    Other salaries and expenses.....          38,180            44,452           42,527           +4,347           -1,925
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses..          39,988            46,324           44,399           +4,411           -1,925
 
Care of the building and grounds....          37,530            53,626           53,304          +15,774             -322
    Emergency appropriations (Public          30,000   ................  ...............         -30,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public          10,000   ................  ...............         -10,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Supreme Court of the            117,518            99,950           97,703          -19,815           -2,247
       United States................
 
 United States Court of Appeals for
         the Federal Circuit
 
Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges..............           2,079             2,225            2,225             +146   ...............
    Other salaries and expenses.....          17,208            19,668           17,911             +703           -1,757
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses..          19,287            21,893           20,136             +849           -1,757
 
United States Court of International
                Trade
 
Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges..............           1,633             1,678            1,678              +45   ...............
    Other salaries and expenses.....          11,431            12,099           11,851             +420             -248
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses..          13,064            13,777           13,529             +465             -248
 
 Courts of Appeals, District Courts,
     and Other Judicial Services
 
Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges and                   250,434           263,854   ...............        -250,434         -263,854
     bankruptcy judges..............
    Other salaries and expenses.....       3,340,682         3,750,253   ...............      -3,340,682       -3,750,253
    Emergency appropriations (Public           5,000   ................  ...............          -5,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           3,143   ................  ...............          -3,143   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation..........       3,599,259         4,014,107   ...............      -3,599,259       -4,014,107
 
    Courts of Appeals, District,
  Magistrate, and Bankruptcy Court
          Judges and Staff
 
Salaries and expenses:
    Salaries of judges and            ...............  ................         263,854         +263,854         +263,854
     bankruptcy judges..............
    Other salaries and expenses.....  ...............  ................         454,882         +454,882         +454,882
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 685]]

 
      Total, Salaries and expenses..  ...............  ................         718,736         +718,736         +718,736
 
            Court Support
 
Salaries and expenses...............  ...............  ................       1,048,877       +1,048,877       +1,048,877
 
Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust              2,692             2,784            2,784              +92   ...............
 Fund...............................
      Total, Court Support..........           2,692             2,784        1,051,661       +1,048,969       +1,048,877
 
           Court Services
 
Salaries and expenses...............  ...............  ................       1,394,039       +1,394,039       +1,394,039
 
   Probation and Pretrial Services
 
Salaries and expenses...............  ...............  ................         717,214         +717,214         +717,214
Defender services...................         500,671           588,741          531,792          +31,121          -56,949
Fees of jurors and commissioners....          48,131            57,826           54,636           +6,505           -3,190
Court security......................         220,677           298,235          276,342          +55,665          -21,893
    Emergency appropriations (Public          57,521   ................  ...............         -57,521   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Courts of Appeals,            4,428,951         4,961,693        4,744,420         +315,469         -217,273
       District Courts, and Other
       Judicial Services............
 
 Administrative Office of the United
            States Courts
 
Salaries and expenses...............          61,664            66,912   ...............         -61,664          -66,912
    Emergency appropriations (Public           2,879   ................  ...............          -2,879   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
 
       Federal Judicial Center
 
Salaries and expenses...............          19,735            21,885           20,156             +421           -1,729
 
      Judicial Retirement Funds
 
Payment to Judiciary Trust Funds....          37,000            35,300           35,300           -1,700   ...............
 
 United States Sentencing Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............          11,575            13,200           11,835             +260           -1,365
 
         General Provisions
 
Judges pay raise (sec. 304).........           8,625             7,000            7,972             -653             +972
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title III, the                4,720,298         5,241,610        4,951,051         +230,753         -290,559
       Judiciary....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
    TITLE IV--DEPARTMENT OF STATE
 
  Administration of Foreign Affairs
 
Diplomatic and consular programs....       3,142,277         3,384,179        3,042,096         -100,181         -342,083
    Emergency appropriations (Public          47,450   ................  ...............         -47,450   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
    (Transfer out)..................         (-4,000)          (-4,000)         (-4,000)  ...............  ...............
    Worldwide security upgrade......         487,735           553,000          579,086          +91,351          +26,086
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Diplomatic and consular       3,677,462         3,937,179        3,621,182          -56,280         -315,997
       programs.....................
 
Capital investment fund.............         203,000           177,000          210,000           +7,000          +33,000
Office of Inspector General.........          29,000            29,264           30,844           +1,844           +1,580
Educational and cultural exchange            237,000           245,306          237,881             +881           -7,425
 programs...........................
    Emergency appropriations (Public          10,000   ................  ...............         -10,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Representation allowances...........           6,485             9,000            6,485   ...............          -2,515
Protection of foreign missions and             9,400            11,000            9,400   ...............          -1,600
 officials..........................
Embassy security, construction and           458,000           550,000          523,000          +65,000          -27,000
 maintenance........................
    Worldwide security upgrade......         815,960           755,000          732,700          -83,260          -22,300
    Emergency appropriations (Public         200,516   ................  ...............        -200,516   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Emergencies in the diplomatic and              6,500            15,000            6,500   ...............          -8,500
 consular service...................
    (By transfer)...................          (4,000)           (4,000)          (4,000)  ...............  ...............
    (Transfer out)..................         (-1,000)          (-1,000)         (-1,000)  ...............  ...............
 
Repatriation Loans Program Account:
    Direct loans subsidy............             612               612              612   ...............  ...............
    Administrative expenses.........             607               607              607   ...............  ...............
    (By transfer)...................          (1,000)           (1,000)          (1,000)  ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Repatriation loans                1,219             1,219            1,219   ...............  ...............
       program account..............
 
Payment to the American Institute in          17,044            18,817           17,044   ...............          -1,773
 Taiwan.............................
Payment to the Foreign Service               135,629           138,200          138,200           +2,571   ...............
 Retirement and Disability Fund.....
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Administration of             5,807,215         5,886,985        5,534,455         -272,760         -352,530
       Foreign Affairs..............
 
   International Organizations and
             Conferences
 
Contributions to international               850,000           891,378          866,000          +16,000          -25,378
 organizations, current year
 assessment.........................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           7,000   ................  ...............          -7,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Contributions for international              844,139           725,981          673,710         -170,429          -52,271
 peacekeeping activities, current
 year...............................
    Emergency appropriations (Public          23,034   ................  ...............         -23,034   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, International                 1,724,173         1,617,359        1,539,710         -184,463          -77,649
       Organizations and Conferences
 
      International Commissions
 
International Boundary and Water
 Commission, United States and
 Mexico:
    Salaries and expenses...........          24,705            27,404           25,155             +450           -2,249
    Construction....................           5,450             9,401            5,488              +38           -3,913
American sections, international               9,911            10,682           10,023             +112             -659
 commissions........................
International fisheries commissions.          20,480            19,780           20,480   ...............            +700
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, International                    60,546            67,267           61,146             +600           -6,121
       commissions..................
 
                Other
 
Payment to the Asia Foundation......           9,250             9,444           10,250           +1,000             +806
Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship                   500               500              500   ...............  ...............
 program trust fund.................
Israeli Arab scholarship program....             375               375              375   ...............  ...............
East-West Center....................          14,000            14,280           18,000           +4,000           +3,720
National Endowment for Democracy....          33,500            36,000           46,500          +13,000          +10,500
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 686]]

 
      Total, Department of State....       7,649,559         7,632,210        7,210,936         -438,623         -421,274
                                     ===================================================================================================================
           RELATED AGENCY
 
   Broadcasting Board of Governors
 
International Broadcasting                   428,234           467,898          431,456           +3,222          -36,442
 Operations.........................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           9,200   ................  ...............          -9,200   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           7,400   ................  ...............          -7,400   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Broadcasting to Cuba................          24,872            25,362           24,996             +124             -366
Broadcasting capital improvements...          25,900            13,740           13,740          -12,160   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public          10,000   ................  ...............         -10,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           7,700   ................  ...............          -7,700   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Broadcasting Board of           513,306           507,000          470,192          -43,114          -36,808
       Governors....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title IV, Department of       8,162,865         8,139,210        7,681,128         -481,737         -458,082
       State........................
          (Transfer out)............         (-5,000)          (-5,000)         (-5,000)  ...............  ...............
          (By transfer).............          (5,000)           (5,000)          (5,000)  ...............  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
    TITLE V--RELATED AGENCIES and
        MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT
 
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
 
       Maritime Administration
 
Maritime security program...........          98,700            98,700           98,700   ...............  ...............
Operations and training.............          89,054            93,133           89,904             +850           -3,229
Ship disposal.......................  ...............           11,161   ...............  ...............         -11,161
 
Maritime Guaranteed Loan (Title XI)
 Program Account:
    Guaranteed loans subsidy........          33,000   ................          32,852             -148          +32,852
    Administrative expenses.........           3,978             4,126            4,144             +166              +18
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Maritime guaranteed              36,978             4,126           36,996              +18          +32,870
       loan program account.........
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Maritime Administration         224,732           207,120          225,600             +868          +18,480
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 Commission for the Preservation of
      America's Heritage Abroad
 
Salaries and expenses...............             489               499              659             +170             +160
 
     Commission on Civil Rights
 
Salaries and expenses...............           9,096             9,096            9,096   ...............  ...............
 
     Commission on International
          Religious Freedom
 
Salaries and expenses...............           3,000             3,000            3,000   ...............  ...............
 
     Commission on Ocean Policy
 
Salaries and expenses...............           3,000   ................           3,000   ...............          +3,000
 
     Commission on Security and
        Cooperation in Europe
 
Salaries and expenses...............           1,499             1,607            1,550              +51              -57
 
 Congressional-Executive Commission
  on the People's Republic of China
 
Salaries and expenses...............           1,000             1,700            1,000   ...............            -700
 
    Equal Employment Opportunity
             Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............         310,406           320,436          320,436          +10,030   ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public           1,301   ................  ...............          -1,301   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
 
  Federal Communications Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............         245,071           268,327          275,400          +30,329           +7,073
    Offsetting fee collections--            -218,757          -248,194         -275,400          -56,643          -27,206
     current year...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation..........          26,314            20,133   ...............         -26,314          -20,133
 
     Federal Maritime Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............          16,458            17,440           16,795             +337             -645
 
      Federal Trade Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............         155,982           187,599          175,148          +19,166          -12,451
    Offsetting fee collections--            -155,982          -150,000         -166,000          -10,018          -16,000
     current year...................
    Offsetting fee collections,       ...............           -3,000   ...............  ...............          +3,000
     telephone database.............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation..........  ...............           34,599            9,148           +9,148          -25,451
 
     Legal Services Corporation
 
Payment to the Legal Services                329,300           329,300          329,397              +97              +97
 Corporation........................
 
      Marine Mammal Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............           1,957             1,856            2,050              +93             +194
 
     National Veterans Business
       Development Corporation
 
Salaries and expenses...............           4,000             2,000            2,000           -2,000   ...............
 
     Pacific Charter Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............           1,500   ................  ...............          -1,500   ...............
 
 Securities and Exchange Commission
 
Current year fees...................         109,500           279,900          656,700         +547,200         +376,800
Emergency appropriations (Public Law          20,705   ................  ...............         -20,705   ...............
 107-117)...........................
Regular appropriations (Public Law            30,900   ................  ...............         -30,900   ...............
 107-206)...........................
2000 fees...........................         328,400           287,000   ...............        -328,400         -287,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Direct appropriation..........         489,505           566,900          656,700         +167,195          +89,800
 

[[Page 687]]

 
    Small Business Administration
 
Salaries and expenses...............         308,476           352,968          364,357          +55,881          +11,389
Office of Inspector General.........          11,464            14,500           11,600             +136           -2,900
Business Loans Program Account:
    Direct loans subsidy............           1,860             3,726            3,726           +1,866   ...............
    Guaranteed loans subsidy........          78,000            85,360           85,360           +7,360   ...............
    Administrative expenses.........         129,000           129,000          129,000   ...............  ...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public          75,000   ................  ...............         -75,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Business loans program          283,860           218,086          218,086          -65,774   ...............
       account......................
 
Disaster Loans Program Account:
    Direct loans subsidy............          87,360            76,140           76,140          -11,220   ...............
    Administrative expenses.........         122,354           118,354          118,354           -4,000   ...............
    Gainsharing.....................  ...............            3,000   ...............  ...............          -3,000
    Emergency appropriations (Public          75,000   ................  ...............         -75,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Disaster loans program          284,714           197,494          194,494          -90,220           -3,000
       account......................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Small Business                  888,514           783,048          788,537          -99,977           +5,489
       Administration...............
 
       State Justice Institute
 
Salaries and expenses\1\............           3,000            13,550            3,100             +100          -10,450
 
  United States--Canada Alaska Rail
             Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............           2,000   ................  ...............          -2,000   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title V, Related              2,317,071         2,312,284        2,372,068          +54,997          +59,784
       agencies.....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
       TITLE VII--RESCISSIONS
 
        DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
 
       General Administration
 
Working Capital fund (rescission)...  ...............  ................         -36,230          -36,230          -36,230
 
          Legal Activities
 
Assets forfeiture fund (rescission).         -40,000   ................         -50,874          -10,874          -50,874
 
       DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
 
 United States Patent and Trademark
               Office
 
Salaries and expenses (rescission)..  ...............  ................        -120,000         -120,000         -120,000
 
       Departmental Management
 
Emergency oil and gas guaranteed              -5,200              -920   ...............          +5,200             +920
 loan program account (rescission)..
Emergency steel guaranteed loan       ...............          -96,000   ...............  ...............         +96,000
 program account (rescission).......
 
          RELATED AGENCIES
 
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
 
       Maritime Administration
 
Rescission (Public Law 107-206).....          -5,000   ................  ...............          +5,000   ...............
Ship construction (rescission)......          -4,400   ................  ...............          +4,400   ...............
 
 Securities and Exchange Commission
 
Salaries and expenses (rescission)..         -50,000   ................  ...............         +50,000   ...............
 
    Small Business Administration
 
Business Loans Program Account:
    Guaranteed loans subsidy                  -5,500   ................  ...............          +5,500   ...............
     (rescission)...................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title VII, Rescissions.        -110,100           -96,920         -207,104          -97,004         -110,184
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Grand total:..................
          New budget (obligational)       44,601,829        44,035,021       44,774,514         +172,685         +739,493
           authority................
              Appropriations........     (41,613,299)      (43,782,569)     (44,981,618)     (+3,368,319)     (+1,199,049)
              Conservation..........        (439,179)         (349,372)  ...............       (-439,179)       (-349,372)
              Emergency                   (2,726,451)  ................  ...............     (-2,726,451)  ...............
               appropriations.......
              Rescissions...........       (-177,100)         (-96,920)       (-207,104)        (-30,004)       (-110,184)
          (Transfer out)............        (-11,632)         (-11,632)        (-11,632)  ...............  ...............
          (By transfer).............         (79,632)          (86,632)         (66,632)        (-13,000)        (-20,000)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The President's budget proposed nothing for State Justice Institute.

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

             DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

    Mr. DeWine, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for the government of the District of 
     Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part 
     against the revenues of said District for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2003, and for other purposes, reports 
     favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.

                            SUMMARY OF BILL

       The following discussion of the bill includes general 
     information on initiatives and concerns of the Committee and 
     an analysis of the total resources estimated to be available 
     to the District of Columbia in the coming fiscal year. The 
     Committee considered requests from the President for Federal

[[Page 688]]

     funds totaling $378,752,000 in budget authority for the 
     District of Columbia appropriation. This amount was contained 
     in the Budget of the U.S. Government--2003, transmitted to 
     the Congress on February 4, 2002. The President requested: 
     $154,707,000 for the D.C. Court Services and Offender 
     Supervision Agency; $159,045,000 for the D.C. Courts 
     operations and capital improvements; $32,000,000 for Defender 
     Services in the District of Columbia Courts; $17,000,000 for 
     payment for D.C. resident tuition support; $15,000,000 for 
     security costs related to the presence of the Federal 
     Government; and $1,000,000 for transportation systems 
     management. In addition, the Committee received requests from 
     the District of Columbia and related agencies for 
     $319,695,000 in Federal funds in excess of the President's 
     request. The Committee recommendation totals $512,000,000 in 
     Federal funds appropriated as follows: (1) $17,000,000 for a 
     program of District of Columbia resident tuition support; (2) 
     $10,000,000 for hospital bioterrorism preparedness; (3) 
     $166,193,000 for the District of Columbia Courts; (4) 
     $34,000,000 for Defender Services in the District of Columbia 
     Courts; (5) $154,707,000 for the Court Services and Offender 
     Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia; (6) 
     $15,000,000 for security costs related to the presence of the 
     Federal Government in the District of Columbia; (7) 
     $1,000,000 for transportation systems management; (8) 
     $15,000,000 for security, economic development, education and 
     health projects; (9) $55,000,000 for support of the Anacostia 
     Waterfront Initiative; (10) $20,000,000 for expansion of 
     charter schools; (11) $4,000,000 for expansion of a family 
     literacy program; (12) $7,000,000 for payments to the 
     Children's National Medical Center and St. Colleta's of 
     Greater Washington expansion; and (13) $13,100,000 for 
     capital infrastructure development. The Senate bill includes 
     a recommendation of $7,419,886,780 for the local budget. The 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $512,000,000 in 
     Federal funds for the operations itemized below.


                                                               COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Committee recommendation compared with (+ or -)
                                                                                                          ---------------------------------------------------
                                   Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003   House allowance      Committee                         Fiscal year
                                      enacted\1\      request        deg.         recommendation   Fiscal year 2002  2003 request       allowance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
          FEDERAL FUNDS
 
Federal payment for resident             17,000,000        17,000,000        17,000,000  ................  ................
 tuition support.................
Federal Payment for Emergency            16,058,000        15,000,000        15,000,000       (1,058,000)  ................
 Planning and Security Costs in
 the District of Columbia........
Federal payment for hospital       ................  ................        10,000,000        10,000,000        10,000,000
 bioterrorism preparedness.......
Federal payment to the Chief              8,300,000  ................        15,000,000         6,700,000        15,000,000
 Financial Officer of the
 District of Columbia............
Federal payment to the District         112,180,000       159,045,000       166,193,000        54,013,000         7,148,000
 of Columbia Courts..............
    Court of Appeals.............         8,003,000         8,352,000         8,551,000           548,000           199,000
    Superior Court...............        66,091,000        80,140,000        81,265,000        15,174,000         1,125,000
    Guardian ad Litem Program....  ................  ................         1,500,000         1,500,000         1,500,000
    Court System.................        31,594,000        38,902,000        39,676,000         8,082,000           774,000
    Capital Improvements.........         6,492,000        31,651,000        35,201,000        28,709,000         3,550,000
Defender Services in the District        34,311,000        32,000,000        34,000,000         (311,000)         2,000,000
 of Columbia Courts..............
Federal payment to the Court            147,300,000       154,707,000       154,707,000         7,407,000  ................
 Services and Offender
 Supervision Agency for the
 District of Columbia............
    Community Supervision........        94,112,000        95,682,000        95,682,000         1,570,000  ................
    Public Defender Service......        20,829,000        23,070,000        23,070,000         2,241,000  ................
    Pretrial Services Agency.....        32,359,000        35,955,000        35,955,000         3,596,000  ................
Federal payment for Family Court         24,016,000  ................  ................      (24,016,000)  ................
 Act.............................
Federal Payment for the                   5,500,000  ................         5,000,000         (500,000)         5,000,000
 Children's National Medical
 Center..........................
Federal Payment to St. Coletta of         2,000,000  ................         2,000,000  ................         2,000,000
 Greater Washington Expansion
 Project.........................
Federal Payment to the Department  ................         1,000,000         1,000,000         1,000,000  ................
 of Transportation...............
Federal Payment for Anacostia      ................  ................        55,000,000        55,000,000        55,000,000
 Waterfront Initiative...........
Federal Payment to D.C. for        ................  ................        13,100,000        13,100,000        13,100,000
 Capital Infrastructure Develmt..
Federal Payment to D.C. for        ................  ................         4,000,000         4,000,000         4,000,000
 Family Literacy.................
Federal Payment for D.C. Charter   ................  ................        20,000,000        20,000,000        20,000,000
 School Facilities...............
Federal payment to the District
 of Columbia:
    Corrections Trustee                  30,200,000  ................  ................      (30,200,000)  ................
     Operations..................
Federal Payment to the Court                250,000  ................  ................         (250,000)  ................
 Appointed Special Advocates of
 D.C.............................
Federal payment to the Thurgood           1,000,000  ................  ................       (1,000,000)  ................
 Marshall Academy Charter School.
Federal payment to the District           2,500,000  ................  ................       (2,500,000)  ................
 of Columbia Public Schools......
Federal Payment to The George               250,000  ................  ................         (250,000)  ................
 Washington University Center for
 Excellence in Municipal
 Management......................
Federal payment for District of           1,400,000  ................  ................       (1,400,000)  ................
 Columbia and Federal Law
 Enforcement Mobile Wireless
 Interoperability Project........
Federal Payment to Faith and                 50,000  ................  ................          (50,000)  ................
 Politics Institute..............
Federal contribution for                    100,000  ................  ................         (100,000)  ................
 enforcement of law banning
 possession of tobacco products
 by minors, Sec. 151.............
Federal Payment to the Capitol              500,000  ................  ................         (500,000)  ................
 City Career Development and Job
 Training Partnership............
Federal Payment to Capitol                  500,000  ................  ................         (500,000)  ................
 Education Fund..................
Federal Payment to Metropolitan             450,000  ................  ................         (450,000)  ................
 Kappa Youth Development
 Foundation, Inc.................
Federal payment to the Fire and             500,000  ................  ................         (500,000)  ................
 Emergency Medical Services
 Department......................
Federal Payment to the Chief                585,000  ................  ................         (585,000)  ................
 Medical Examiner................
Federal Payment to the Youth Life           250,000  ................  ................         (250,000)  ................
 Foundation......................
Federal Payment to Food and               2,000,000  ................  ................       (2,000,000)  ................
 Friends.........................
Federal Payment to the City                 300,000  ................  ................         (300,000)  ................
 Administrator...................
Federal Payment to Southeastern             500,000  ................  ................         (500,000)  ................
 University......................
Federal Emergency Supplemental          200,000,000  ................  ................  ................  ................
 (P.L. 107-117)..................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Funds.......       608,000,000       378,752,000       512,000,000      (96,000,000)       133,248,000
                                  ======================================================================================================================
Federal Employee Retirement Costs  ................         7,218,000  ................  ................  ................
      Total, Federal Funds         ................       385,970,000  ................  ................  ................
       including Retirements
       Costs.....................
 
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS
 
Operating Expenses--General Fund:
District of Columbia Financial     ................  ................  ................       (3,140,000)  ................
 Responsibility and Management
 Assistance Authority............
Governmental Direction and              322,714,000       280,136,000       295,136,000        94,215,000        15,000,000
 Support.........................
Economic Development and                231,895,000       258,539,000       258,539,000        51,216,000  ................
 Regulation......................
Public Safety and Justice........       637,993,000       639,892,000       639,892,000     (131,525,000)  ................
Public Education System..........     1,152,014,000     1,200,201,000     1,220,201,000       208,283,000        20,000,000
Human Support Services...........     1,816,470,000     2,496,297,000     2,500,297,000       936,643,000         4,000,000
Public Works.....................       314,093,000       324,828,000       324,828,000        46,455,000  ................
Workforce Investments............        42,896,000        54,186,000        54,186,000        13,686,000  ................
Reserve..........................       120,000,000        70,000,000        70,000,000      (80,000,000)  ................
Repayment of Loans and Interest..       247,902,000       267,451,000       267,451,000        24,213,000  ................
Repayment of General Fund                39,300,000        39,300,000        39,300,000  ................  ................
 Recovery Debt...................
Payment of Interest on Short-Term           500,000         1,000,000         1,000,000         (140,000)  ................
 Borrowing.......................
Wilson Building..................         8,859,000         4,194,000         4,194,000      (11,315,000)  ................
Non-Departmental Agency..........         5,799,000         5,799,000         5,799,000         5,799,000  ................
Certificates of Participation....  ................         7,950,000         7,950,000  ................  ................
Settlements and Judgements.......  ................        22,822,000        22,822,000        22,822,000  ................
Tobacco Settlement Trust Fund            33,254,000        10,000,000        10,000,000      (51,406,000)  ................
 Transfer Payment................
Emergency Planning and Security          16,058,000        15,000,000        15,000,000        15,000,000  ................
 Costs...........................
Pay-As-You-Go Capital............  ................        16,750,000        16,750,000        16,750,000  ................
Capital Infrastructure             ................  ................        13,100,000        13,100,000        15,100,000
 Development.....................
Receivership Programs............       416,460,000  ................  ................     (389,528,000)  ................
Reserve Relief...................        30,000,000  ................  ................  ................  ................
Presidential Inauguration........  ................  ................  ................       (5,961,000)  ................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, operating expenses,      5,436,207,000     5,714,345,000     5,768,445,000     5,766,445,000        52,100,000
       general fund..............
                                  ======================================================================================================================
Enterprise Fund:
    Water and Sewer Authority....       244,978,000       253,743,000       253,743,000         8,765,000  ................

[[Page 689]]

 
    Washington Aqueduct..........        46,510,000        57,847,000        57,847,000        11,337,000  ................
    Stormwater Permit Compliance          3,100,000         3,100,000         3,100,000  ................  ................
     Enterprise Fund.............
    Lottery and Charitable Games        229,688,000       232,881,000       232,881,000         3,193,000  ................
     Enterprise Fund.............
    Sport and Entertainment               9,627,000        15,510,000        20,510,000        10,883,000         5,000,000
     Commission..................
    D.C. Retirement Board........        13,388,000        13,388,000        13,388,000  ................  ................
    Washington Convention Center.        57,278,000        78,700,000        78,700,000        21,422,000  ................
    National Capital                      2,673,000         6,745,000         6,745,000         4,072,000  ................
     Revitalization Corporation..
    Public Benefit Corporation     ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
     (D.C. General)..............
    Correctional Industries Fund.  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Housing Finance Agency.......         4,711,000  ................  ................       (4,711,000)  ................
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, enterprise funds....       611,953,000       661,914,000       666,914,000        54,961,000         5,000,000
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total, operating expenses..     5,923,997,000     6,376,259,000     6,433,359,000       509,362,000        57,100,000
                                  ======================================================================================================================
Capital Outlay:
    General funds................     1,074,604,000       639,069,780       666,368,000     (408,237,000)        27,298,000
    Water and sewer funds........       152,114,000       292,458,000       342,458,000       190,344,000        50,000,000
                                  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, capital outlay......     1,226,718,000       931,527,780       981,527,780     (245,190,220)        50,000,000
                                  ======================================================================================================================
      Total, District of Columbia     7,306,616,000     7,307,787,780     7,447,185,000       135,569,000       134,398,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes amounts in Public Law 107-20, dated July 24, 2001.
\2\Includes $400,000 in Public Law 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763A-187 and $18,000,000 from Sec. 403, 114 Stat. 2763A-188.
\3\$250,000 transferred to Chief Financial Officer in Public Law 107-20.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.

                           GENERAL STATEMENT

       The Committee highly values the priorities of the Mayor and 
     the Council of the District of Columbia, and this bill 
     reflects those priorities. In testimony before the 
     Subcommittee, the Mayor conveyed his priorities for the city; 
     the first among them is investing in high quality education. 
     The city's budget increases funding for District Public 
     Schools and Charter Schools to renovate school buildings, and 
     creates initiatives to recruit and train highly talented 
     principals and teachers. A second major priority of the Mayor 
     is to enhance clean and safe neighborhoods through 
     environmental remediation and economic development. The 
     Committee supports the city's investments in public safety, 
     cleanup of the Anacostia River, and health care to the city's 
     most vulnerable citizens. Thirdly, the Committee commends the 
     Mayor and Council for continuing to make a priority the 
     financial responsibility and strength of the city. The 
     Committee shares the city's priorities in education, the 
     environment, and fiscal strength and joins with the District 
     of Columbia in a partnership for progress. The Committee 
     encourages the District to build upon the dramatic reform 
     created under the Control Board.
       The Committee has a three-part responsibility to the 
     Government and the citizens of the District of Columbia and 
     all United States citizens.
       The first is to carry out the responsibilities transferred 
     to Federal authority through the 1997 District of Columbia 
     Revitalization Act. Public safety and social services are 
     critical functions of government in any city. In the capital 
     city, the Federal Government shares in the responsibility to 
     the citizens of the District, the employees of the Government 
     seated here in the capital, and a more broad responsibility 
     to all people who visit the capital, to provide services that 
     ensure a safe city for all. These agencies play a key role in 
     promoting public safety and justice in the District. That 
     responsibility entails oversight of three quasi-Federal 
     agencies that provide services to the District: the Superior 
     Court and the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, 
     the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and the 
     Defender Services Agency.
       The second main responsibility the Congress has to the 
     District is to act as partner with the city in maintaining 
     the financial stability and strong management of the city 
     created by the federally-conceived Control Board, enacted in 
     the 1995 Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance 
     Act. In 2001, the District fulfilled the benchmarks set forth 
     in the Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Act 
     to end a control period and return to home rule: all 
     obligations arising from the Authority's issuance of bonds, 
     notes, or other obligations have been discharged; all 
     borrowing by the District from the United States Treasury has 
     been repaid; the District government has adequate access to 
     short- and long-term credit markets at reasonable rates to 
     meet its borrowing needs; and the District has achieved 
     balanced or surplus budgets for four consecutive fiscal 
     years.
       The Congress has a responsibility to engage with the city 
     in transitioning back to local control the financial and 
     budgetary oversight and management responsibility functions 
     that the Control Board provided. Part of that transition was 
     addressed in Public Law 106-522, the fiscal year 2001 
     District of Columbia Appropriations Act. The responsibility 
     for financial management duties, established by the Control 
     Board Act of 1995 and vested in the Control Board, were 
     transferred to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. 
     These duties include administering all debt and cash 
     management of the District government, preparing financial 
     reports and the District's annual budget. The Committee is 
     determined to ensure that the requirements set forth in the 
     Control Board Act continue to be adhered to in non-Control 
     years. Additionally, the Committee is specifically concerned 
     that the entity identified to ensure fiscal responsibility in 
     the District, the Chief Financial Officer, also has the 
     appropriate and sufficient tools to carry out that 
     responsibility. To that and, the Committee supported language 
     in the fiscal year 2002 Emergency Supplemental to clarify 
     that the Office of the Chief Financial Officer maintains 
     independence.
       The third responsibility that the Congress has to the 
     District of Columbia is to carry out the Constitutional 
     mandate to approve the local budget of the District.
       In addition to approving the local budget and Federal funds 
     for the three quasi-Federal public safety and justice 
     agencies, the Committee supports a partnership with the 
     District of Columbia to support infrastructure development in 
     select initiatives. The Committee recommendation supports 
     three specific goals in the District: a cleaner environment, 
     more school choice, and better public safety.
       To address the first goal, the Committee is including 
     $55,000,000 for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, which 
     will prevent further deterioration of the river, begin the 
     process of restoring the river to health, rebuild water and 
     sewer infrastructure, and invest in waterfront development. 
     To address the second goal, the Committee is including 
     $20,000,000 for school choice to support Charter School 
     facility loans and enhance the ability of charter schools to 
     provide improved educational opportunities in the District. 
     To address the third goal, the Committee is including 
     $39,100,000 for public safety, to invest in the 
     infrastructure necessary to support modern emergency response 
     capacity. Most notably, the Committee has included 
     $10,000,000 to begin to prepare the District's hospitals for 
     a possible attack that may include the use of biological, 
     chemical, radiological, and nuclear weapons, as well as high 
     yield explosives. In such a circumstance, decontamination and 
     quarantine become critical components of any response plan. 
     Patients must be decontaminated before they can be treated, 
     otherwise their contamination could potentially shut down 
     entire facilities. Of the funds provided, the Committee 
     recommendation includes $5,000,000 for Children's National 
     Medical

[[Page 690]]

     Center, and $5,000,000 for Washington Hospital Center.
       The Committee has also included funding for education, 
     public safety, the environment and economic development in 
     the District.


                District of Columbia Financial Condition

       In the past year, the District of Columbia has enjoyed some 
     notable successes, including the fifth consecutive 
     ``unqualified'' (or clean) opinion from the city's 
     independent auditors, with the fiscal year 2001 Comprehensive 
     Annual Financial Report (CAFR) completed ahead of time and 
     with a balanced budget. Overall, the city ended fiscal year 
     2001 with a surplus of $77,600,000 and a positive fund 
     balance of $562,200,000. In fiscal year 1996, there was a 
     negative fund balance of $518,000,000, reflecting a 
     turnaround of over a billion dollars. This result is another 
     milestone for the financial turnaround that began in fiscal 
     year 1997. It is a fitting beginning for the District's 
     return to Home Rule on October 1, 2001, with the end of the 
     Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Authority 
     (or Control Board). The Committee recognizes that the Control 
     Board initiated critical reforms that provided a framework 
     for the District's current financial stability. However, the 
     Committee notes several areas where the national economic 
     slowdown and reduced revenues have impacted the District's 
     financial stability, particularly in agencies still 
     struggling to improve financial management and 
     accountability.
     Use of Reserve Funds
       The Committee notes that the District has expended all but 
     $3,000,000 of the budgeted reserve fund in fiscal year 2002. 
     The Committee commends the District for fully funding the 
     emergency and contingency reserves, ahead of the 
     congressionally mandated schedule, totaling $275,000,000 in 
     local funds to ensure their availability for potential rainy 
     day requirements. The District was not immune to the overall 
     economic slow-down in fiscal year 2002, and the Committee is 
     pleased that the District was able to utilize reserves to 
     address spending pressures. However, the Committee is 
     concerned that spending from the reserve funds should not 
     replace accurate revenue estimating and budgeting for each 
     agency. District agencies should not depend on the reserves 
     to address spending pressures. Reductions in spending must 
     occur to maintain long-term economic security.


                            PUBLIC EDUCATION

       As with every city and state in America, the stability of 
     the economic future of the District depends, in great part, 
     on its ability to provide a quality education to its 
     children. Congress recently enacted one of the most sweeping 
     education reforms since 1965. The Committee urges the 
     Superintendent of the District Public Schools to begin to 
     implement programs that are consistent with the goals 
     espoused by the reform: accountability for results, increased 
     investments that get to the classrooms, smaller classes, 
     increased local control, increasing numbers of qualified 
     teachers, improved early childhood education, and research-
     based literacy programs. Several of these concepts are 
     reflected in both the Mayor's budget and the Superintendent's 
     Plan for Reform. The Committee recommendation includes 
     significant investments in charter school development to 
     support this important model in the District. The Committee 
     intends that the projects funded under this bill will 
     supplement, not supplant, the efforts of the District to 
     improve performance in their schools. In addition, the 
     Committee joins in the District's concern about the 
     increasing need for highly qualified teachers and commends 
     the Superintendent for continuing efforts in this regard.
     Special Education
       On October 2, 2001, the President appointed a Special 
     Commission to recommend reforms to improve America's special 
     education system and move it from a culture of compliance to 
     a culture of accountability for results. After almost a year 
     of study and public hearings, the Commission reported that 
     while IDEA has gone a long way toward bringing children with 
     disabilities out of the shadows and into our classrooms, 
     there is room for improvement. Specifically, the Commission 
     found that 80 percent of those identified with ``specific 
     learning disabilities'' are labeled this way simply because 
     they were never properly taught to read. What's more, they 
     found that minority--particularly low-income--children are 
     over represented in special education categories.
       The findings of the President's Special Commission provide 
     a solid foundation on which to build real reform. Armed with 
     the information gained from the public hearings, Members of 
     Congress can use the upcoming reauthorization to make 
     America's education system--special education or otherwise--
     into a system that aspires to excellence. District of 
     Columbia public schools (DCPS) certainly stand to benefit 
     from the reforms suggested by the findings of this report. 
     The Committee hopes that DCPS will take advantage of the 
     information gained, as well as the upcoming reauthorization 
     process to ensure that the special education system in the 
     District is first on the list of model programs.
       In 1999, a District Court assigned a special master to 
     monitor the District's performance in providing for its 
     special education students. Soon after Federal intervention, 
     the District of Columbia's Special Council Committee on 
     Special Education conducted a study of the District's 
     delivery of special education services. Among the 
     recommendations contained in an unreleased draft report by 
     the Special Council were the following: that DCPS strengthen 
     the commitment to provide adequate and qualified staff in the 
     delivery of special education services; that DCPS improve the 
     management of transportation costs and the dependability of 
     transportation services; and that DCPS improve the process to 
     assess and place students with special needs.
       The Committee continues to be concerned that a consensus 
     strategy to address the problems in the delivery of special 
     education services, particularly assessment and 
     transportation services, has not been developed.
       The District of Columbia operating budget for fiscal year 
     2003 includes a new initiative to reallocate $27,000,000 of 
     debt service savings during fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 
     2004 to the Special Education and Medicaid Reform Fund. The 
     Committee is encouraged that these funds are available to the 
     District of Columbia Public Schools once the Superintendent 
     submits a savings plan to the Mayor equaling $27,000,000 over 
     the next 5 years. The Committee supports this approach and is 
     pleased to see that the savings plan must be approved by the 
     Special Education Taskforce and certified by the Chief 
     Financial Officer to ensure that true savings will be 
     achieved. The Committee supports the effort of the Mayor and 
     Council to reform public education through achievement and 
     savings. The Committee encourages the Mayor and the Special 
     Education Taskforce to solicit outside reviews of the savings 
     plan from best practices experts in other jurisdictions.
       The Committee applauds the Mayor and Council for their 
     commitment to reform by requiring a multi-year financial plan 
     and performance goals for Special Education for fiscal years 
     2003 through 2006. The Committee encourages the Mayor and 
     Council to tie funding for Special Education reform to the 
     performance goals agreed upon by the locally elected leaders.
     Infrastructure Development
       The Mayor of the District of Columbia requested 
     $237,650,000 in Federal funding to invest in critical 
     infrastructure and supplement a few select city services. The 
     requested funding would support nineteen different projects, 
     of which ten projects are on-going and supported by local 
     funds in the District of Columbia operating budget. The other 
     nine projects are new initiatives in which the Mayor sees a 
     Federal role (i.e., a traditional Federal relationship or a 
     so-called ``state-level'' cost).
       The Committee recommends $92,100,000 above the President's 
     request for investments in infrastructure in the District of 
     Columbia, including charter school facility loans, creation 
     of an interoperable communications system, and revitalization 
     of the Anacostia Waterfront. The Committee recommendation is 
     $112,550,000 less than the Mayor of the District of Columbia 
     request.

                             FEDERAL FUNDS

       A total of $2,531,331,000 in Federal funds are estimated to 
     be available to the District government, the D.C. Courts, the 
     D.C. Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency, and 
     other District of Columbia entities. A total of $512,000,000 
     of Federal funds is included in this bill. A total of 
     $2,019,331,000 in Federal funds will be received by the 
     District government from the various Federal grant programs. 
     In addition, Federal reimbursements are received from such 
     programs as Medicaid and Medicare.
       The following table summarizes the various Federal funds 
     estimated to be available to the District government during 
     fiscal year 2003:


                             Federal Funds


        Item                                                           

Federal payment for resident tuition support................$17,000,000
Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the 
  District of Columbia.......................................15,000,000
Federal payment for hospital bioterrorism preparedness in the District 
  of Columbia................................................10,000,000
Federal Payment to the Chief Financial Officer of the District of 
  Columbia...................................................15,000,000
Federal payment to the District of Columbia Courts..........166,193,000
Defender Services in the District of Columbia Courts.........34,000,000
Federal payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency 
  for the District of Columbia..............................154,707,000
Federal Payment to Children's National Medical Center.........5,000,000
Federal Payment to St. Coletta School.........................2,000,000

[[Page 691]]

Federal Payment to the Department of Public Works Divison of 
  Transportation..............................................1,000,000
Federal Payment for Anacostia Waterfront Initiative..........55,000,000
Federal Payment to D.C. for Capital Infrastructure Developmen13,100,000
Federal Payment to D.C. for Family Literacy...................4,000,000
Federal Payment to D.C. Charter School Facilities............20,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total, Federal funds in bill............................512,000,000
                                                       ================

Federal Grants............................................2,019,331,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total, Federal funds..................................2,531,331,000

   Federal Payment for District of Columbia Resident Tuition Support

       The Committee recommends $17,000,000 in Federal funds for 
     the District of Columbia Tuition Assistance Program. Initial 
     funding of $17,000,000 for this program was included in the 
     Fiscal Year 2000 Appropriations Act. On November 12, 1999, 
     Public Law 106-98, the District of Columbia College Access 
     Act of 1999, was signed into law. The Act established the 
     Tuition Assistance Program, a scholarship fund under the 
     direction of the Mayor of the District of Columbia, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Education.
       Under the Act, scholarships are awarded to District 
     residents for undergraduate education within 3 years of 
     graduation or getting a graduate equivalent degree [GED]. The 
     applicant must be a District resident for 12 consecutive 
     months before the academic year of the award. Scholarships 
     pay the difference between in-State and out-of-State tuition, 
     with a cap of $10,000 per student per school year, at public 
     universities. Scholarships may also be used for tuition at 
     private colleges in the metropolitan area and at private 
     Historically Black Colleges and Universities anywhere in 
     Maryland or Virginia, with a cap of $2,500 per student per 
     year. In addition, the District of Columbia College Access 
     Improvement Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-157) expanded the 
     Tuition Assistance Program to individuals who enroll in an 
     institution of higher education more than 3 years after 
     graduating from a secondary school and to individuals who 
     attend private, historically black colleges and universities 
     nationwide.
       In addition to expanding the number of students served by 
     the D.C. Tuition Assistance grant program, the Committee 
     urges the Mayor and the City Council to look for ways to 
     further develop public/private partnerships, such as the 
     existing one with the D.C. College Access Program, as such 
     partnerships can dramatically increase access to college.

           Federal Payment to the District of Columbia Courts

       The Revitalization Act requires that, commencing in fiscal 
     year 1998, the Federal Government finance the D.C. courts, 
     including the operations of the D.C. Court of Appeals, 
     Superior Court, and the court system. Beginning with the 
     fiscal year 1999 appropriations act, the Federal Government 
     also provided funds for capital improvements. By law, the 
     annual budget includes estimates of the expenditures for the 
     operations of the courts prepared by the Joint Committee on 
     Judicial Administration and the President's recommendation 
     for funding the courts' operations.
       The President's recommended level for fiscal year 2003 is 
     $159,045,000, which includes $127,394,000 for the courts 
     operations; $31,651,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2004, for capital improvements for District courthouse 
     facilities.
     D.C. Courts Budget Request
       The D.C. Court system submitted a budget request totaling 
     $181,416,000 in Federal funds for fiscal year 2003. The 
     operations request of $131,064,000 exceeds the President's 
     proposed operations budget by $3,670,000 and would be used 
     for superior court staffing, equipment and program requests. 
     The capital request of $50,352,000 exceeds the President's 
     proposed capital budget by $18,701,000, of which $12,100,000 
     would be used for the restoration and renovation of the Old 
     Courthouse as the new D.C. Court of Appeals, $16,068,000 for 
     creation of Family Court space within the existing courthouse 
     facilities and the balance for ongoing capital projects.
     Committee Recommendation for Operations
       The President's budget proposal recommends $127,394,000 for 
     the courts' operations. The Courts requested $131,064,000 for 
     operations, which includes $13,596,000 for the Family Court 
     of the Superior Court. The Committee recommends $130,992,000 
     for the courts' operations, of which $15,096,000 is to 
     support reform of the Family Court through the hiring of 
     additional judges, magistrates, clerks and the necessary 
     support staff. The Committee has also included a new Guardian 
     ad litem program to improve the processing of child abuse and 
     neglect cases in the District of Columbia Superior Court.
     Committee Recommendation for Capital Budget
       The President's budget proposal recommends $31,651,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2004, for capital 
     improvements for District courthouse facilities. The Courts 
     requested $50,352,000 for infrastructure. The Committee 
     recommends $35,201,000 for capital improvements to District 
     courthouse facilities.
     Family Court
       The President's request supports the entire Family Court 
     budget for fiscal year 2003 and is included in the normal 
     operations and capital accounts for the Courts. The Court's 
     budget includes $13,596,000 for operating costs of the Family 
     Court, reflecting a $6,782,000 increase over fiscal year 2002 
     to implement the necessary increases in staffing. The 
     President's request supports $16,068,000 for Capital 
     improvements to be used for continued creation of a family-
     friendly court (including the continued installation and 
     operation of the Family Court module of the Integrated 
     Justice Information System). This amount is approximately the 
     same as was dedicated to Family Court capital improvements in 
     fiscal year 2002 ($16,673,000). The Committee notes that the 
     funding provided to the Family Court in fiscal year 2002 was 
     not available to the Courts until June 24, 2002, as required 
     by specific language in the fiscal year 2002 District of 
     Columbia Appropriations Act (Public Law 107-96 115; Stat. 
     929). The Committee supports the President's recommendation 
     for the Family Court and adds $1,500,000 for a Guardian ad 
     litem Program, described below. The total Committee 
     recommendation for the Family Court is $31,164,000 in fiscal 
     year 2003.
     Guardian ad Litem Program
       The Committee recommends an increase of $1,500,000 above 
     the President's request to establish the Guardian ad Litem 
     Program, to be administered by the District of Columbia 
     Superior Court, to provide guardians ad litem to abused and 
     neglected children. The Program will develop the capacity to 
     improve the quality, training and recruitment of guardians ad 
     litem to abused and neglected children. In establishing the 
     program, the Courts shall enter into a contract with a non-
     profit organization to improve the quality of guardian ad 
     litem representation to abused and neglected children. The 
     Courts shall use the funds provided to establish the 
     infrastructure to support a permanent guardian ad litem 
     program operating in close coordination with the D.C. Courts. 
     The Courts may use these funds in support of the necessary 
     recruitment and training programs, supervision, technology 
     and facilities to support the establishment of the program. 
     In addition, the Committee encourages the Courts and the non-
     profit organization to examine the program's ability to 
     represent foster parents and relative caregivers in child 
     welfare cases.
       The Committee is concerned that the Family Court of the 
     Superior Court of the District of Columbia is facing a 
     shortage of lawyers qualified to represent children in abuse 
     and neglect cases. The Committee also believes that the court 
     needs to improve the quality of representation and ensure 
     that a capable and qualified group of lawyers continue to 
     embark on careers representing children in abuse and neglect 
     cases.
       The current procedure involves paying individual 
     practitioners on an hourly basis to represent children. This 
     system has several shortcomings, including a lack of 
     supervision and accountability, lack of prestige, and lack of 
     professional support and training for attorneys.
       As the Superior Court implements the new Family Court, 
     works to improve compliance with the Adoptions and Safe 
     Families Act, and sets attorney practice standards in 
     compliance with the Family Court Act of 2001, it is 
     imperative that these problems be addressed quickly.
       The Committee understands that the Superior Court is 
     interested in implementing a mixed system of representation--
     one in which an organization provides representation to a 
     significant percentage of children and individual 
     practitioners represent the remaining children. An 
     organization that can provide supervision and training to its 
     own staff attorneys and that can provide training and 
     technical assistance to individual practitioners will raise 
     the standard of practice in the Family Court.
       The Committee understands that the cost of providing the 
     organizational support to a mixed system of representation 
     involves more than simply hiring lawyers to represent 
     children. In order for the court to achieve the necessary 
     accountability, high quality of representation and assistance 
     in supporting and recruiting sole practitioners, the court 
     needs to invest in the infrastructure that will allow for 
     long-lasting change. Therefore, the Committee has included 
     additional appropriations to ensure that the organization 
     builds the capacity to represent children in future years.
     Administration of Justice in Courtroom Operations
       The Court has requested $3,670,000 above the President's 
     request to enhance court-wide support staff, training and 
     support. The Committee recommends an increase of $2,098,000 
     and 28 FTE above the President's request to improve the 
     efficiency of the operations of the Court. The D.C. Courts 
     staffing

[[Page 692]]

     level per courtroom is considerably lower than best practice 
     standards, which affects the fair and expeditious 
     adjudication of cases. The Committee has received testimony 
     that the lack of support staff slows case processing and the 
     accessibility of information to District residents. 
     Investments made in the fiscal year 2001 District of Columbia 
     Appropriations Act to provide pay parity among the D.C. 
     Courts' non-judicial employees and the Federal non-judicial 
     employees has resulted in a significant reduction in 
     turnover, from 10.92 percent to 5.52 percent annually.
       The Committee recommendation builds upon this investment. 
     In addition, the Court has undertaken several new 
     responsibilities without additional resources. In particular, 
     the Committee recommendation supports the efforts of the 
     Domestic Violence Unit to improve services; the expansion of 
     the juvenile probation monitoring program; effective 
     maintenance of facilities; and improved financial management. 
     The Committee recommends the following allocation of the 
     increase of $2,098,000 above the President's budget:
       The Committee recommends an increase of $840,000 and 12 FTE 
     for courtroom operations and support of the Domestic Violence 
     Unit, Criminal Division, and Appeals Court. In particular, 
     the increases for the Domestic Violence Unit will operate the 
     Multi-Door Dispute Resolution Program and coordinate the 
     calendars for judges, attorneys, and social workers to 
     maintain the One Judge-One Family model.
       The Committee recommends an increase of $321,000 and 6 FTE 
     above the President's request to improve financial management 
     in the Court System and to oversee the management of timely 
     voucher payments to Defender Services court-appointed 
     attorneys. This function, previously managed by the Public 
     Defender Service, was taken over by the Courts in 2002 to 
     centralize the payment of court-appointed attorneys.
       The Committee recommends an increase of $382,000 and 6 FTE 
     above the President's request for the Court System to improve 
     the management of courthouse facilities. This increase 
     supports a project director for the Old Courthouse 
     restoration, a general project manager for all facilities 
     improvements, and four engineer/mechanics to improve 
     maintenance of the Courts.
       The Committee recommends an increase of $154,000 and 2 FTE 
     above the President's request to expand court wide technology 
     and ensure adequate support staff for information technology.
       The Committee recommends an increase of $401,000 and 2 FTE 
     above the President's request for the Social Services 
     Division of the Superior Court to continue a successful 
     grant-started Probation Monitoring program to monitor high-
     risk juveniles on probation. In addition, this increase will 
     provide for two initiatives to improve the operation and 
     standing of the court: accreditation with the American 
     Psychological Association; and technical assistance for 
     evaluation of Juvenile Probation Program.
     Committee Recommendation for Capital Improvements
       The Committee recommends an increase of $3,550,000 above 
     the President's budget to enhance capital improvements.
     Old Courthouse Rehabilitation
       Restoration of the Old Courthouse at 451 Indiana Avenue is 
     an 8-year, approximately $60,000,000 project that began in 
     1998. The project will enable the Courts to readapt this 
     historic structure to house the District of Columbia Court of 
     Appeals, thereby alleviating the critical space shortage for 
     the Superior Court in the Moultrie Courthouse, while 
     protecting the integrity of this historic structure. The Old 
     Courthouse, which was constructed from 1820 to 1849, is 
     listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It has 
     also been designated an Official Project of Save America's 
     Treasures, a partnership between the White House Millennium 
     Council and the National Trust for Historic Preservation 
     dedicated to celebration and preservation of the nation's 
     threatened cultural treasures.
       In addition, the National Law Enforcement Memorial has been 
     granted legislative authority to construct a museum on a 
     portion of the site. The Courts are working with the Memorial 
     to coordinate construction plans.
       The Committee provided funds in fiscal year 2002 to help 
     prevent further deterioration of the structure; permit 
     removal of asbestos and other hazardous materials; finance 
     historical significance and other studies; and fund the first 
     stage of detailed design work and project management costs.
       The Committee has included funds to continue to support the 
     restoration and re-adaptive use of the Old Courthouse. The 
     restoration of the Old Courthouse is integral to the 
     expansion of the Family Court, as services will move from the 
     Moultrie Building to the Old Courthouse as space becomes 
     available.
       This investment will improve efficiencies by co-locating 
     the offices that support the Court of Appeals and by 
     providing some 37,000 sq. ft. of critically needed space for 
     Superior Court functions in the existing Moultrie Courthouse. 
     Built in 1978 for 44 trial judges. The courthouse now houses 
     59 trial judges and 15 hearing commissioners in the Superior 
     Court, 9 judges in the D.C. Court of Appeals, additional 
     Senior Judges in both Courts, and additional administrative 
     support staff. Clearly, the main courthouse is filled beyond 
     capacity. In addition, the Committee recommends a net 
     increase of 18 new staff to strengthen the Family Court and 
     improve case processing. It is necessary for the Courts to 
     begin the process this year of creating a dedicated Family 
     Court space in or near the District court facilities, as 
     required in the Family Court Reform Act of 2001. The 
     Committee directs the Courts to report to the Congress on the 
     expenditure of this year's appropriation for Family Court 
     reforms and capital investments by June 1, 2003. In this 
     report, the Committee seeks an analysis of the expenditure of 
     funding to meet the requirements of the D.C. Family Court 
     Reform Act of 2001.
     Integrated Justice Information System
       The Committee recommends $4,220,000 for the Courts to 
     continue implementation of the Integrated Justice Information 
     System, which is $1,500,000 above the President's request. 
     The Committee is encouraged by the progress the Courts have 
     made in developing a detailed plan for integrating the 18 
     different computer systems necessary to track offender 
     information and swiftly adjudicate cases. The Committee 
     directs the Courts to coordinate information systems with 
     entities in the District of Columbia, especially the D.C. 
     Child and Family Services Agency and the Metropolitan Police 
     Department. The Committee is encouraged that the General 
     Accounting Office's evaluation of the IJIS Plan determined 
     IJIS would be effective in increasing the quality and 
     efficiency of court operations, once implemented. The 
     Committee intends to continue closely monitoring the 
     implementation of IJIS, as it is critical to efficient case 
     processing, and ensuring fair, swift, and accessible justice.
     Transfer Authority
       The Committee authorizes the Courts to transfer up to 
     $1,000,000 between entities within the Federal Payment to the 
     District of Columbia Courts account. This flexibility will be 
     especially important in implementing Family Court reforms.
     Reporting requirements
       The courts are directed to submit monthly reports, through 
     the General Services Administration, to the Senate and House 
     Committees on Appropriations, within 15 calendar days after 
     the end of each month, on the status of obligations by object 
     class and a monthly personnel summary by position, full-time 
     equivalent positions (FTE's), and program/function. The 
     obligation report should show, at a minimum, the original 
     operating plan, current operating plan, obligations year to 
     date, percent obligated, planned obligations year to date, 
     percentage deviation from plan year to date, projected total 
     obligations end of year, and projected surplus/deficit.
       In addition, the obligation report shall: (1) under the 
     Court System Spending Plan, include a breakdown of 
     expenditures for the Counsel for Child Abuse and Neglect 
     Program and the program of representation of indigents in 
     criminal cases under the Criminal Justice Act; (2) include a 
     monthly breakdown of expenditures for the District of 
     Columbia courts' capital improvements; and (3) where year-to-
     date obligations exceed or fall below the plan estimates by 1 
     percent or more, include an explanation of why a category is 
     over- or under-budgeted.
     D.C. courts capital expenditures
       The Committee requests OMB to report to the Committee 
     during fiscal year 2003 on any capital improvements to the 
     District's courthouse facilities. The report shall: (1) 
     identify the facility undergoing improvement; (2) include a 
     complete description of the project to be undertaken; (3) 
     itemize each improvement, renovation, or service and its 
     cost; (4) include the contracting date, contracting party, 
     and a timeline for the completion of each contracted 
     improvement, renovation, or service; and (5) identify any 
     design studies for which funding is sought.

            Defender Services in District of Columbia Courts

       The Committee recommends $34,000,000 for attorney programs 
     for indigent defendants, child abuse and guardianship cases 
     administered by the District of Columbia Courts. The 
     President's request of $32,000,000 maintains the current 
     rates for attorneys and investigators.
       The D.C. Court request of $45,014,000 consists of: (1) 
     $31,355,000 for the Criminal Justice Act [CJA] program; (2) 
     $12,661,000 for the Counsel for Child Abuse and Neglect 
     [CCAN] program; and (3) $988,000 for the Guardianship 
     program.
       The Office of Defender Services request includes an 
     additional $13,014,000 in Federal funds, not requested by the 
     President, for an increase in the hourly rate paid to 
     attorneys and investigators in the CJA and CCAN Programs from 
     $65 per hour to $90 per hour. The Committee requests that the 
     District of Columbia courts provide quarterly reports to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives on obligations from and remaining unobligated 
     balances of the Defender Services account.

[[Page 693]]


     Defender Services Rate Increase
       The Committee recommends an increase of $2,000,000 above 
     the President's request to increase the hourly rate of 
     Defender Services attorneys from $65 per hour to $75 per 
     hour. Court-appointed attorneys provide constitutionally 
     mandated assistance of legal counsel to the District's 
     indigent defendants. Promoting equity in the quality of legal 
     services provided to District of Columbia residents, 
     regardless of economic status, is vitally important to the 
     fair administration of justice. It is particularly 
     challenging to the D.C. Courts in light of the considerably 
     higher hourly rates paid in the nearby Federal court ($90 per 
     hour). The Federal hourly rate is currently 39 percent higher 
     for attorneys. Therefore, the Committee recommends an 
     increase to $75 per hour in fiscal year 2003. The recommended 
     increase would allow the D.C. Courts to provide a more 
     attractive rate for both attorneys and investigators, 
     especially needed considering local economic conditions.
       Court-appointed attorneys in the Counsel for Child Abuse 
     and Neglect [CCAN] serve in family proceedings in which child 
     abuse or neglect is alleged, or where the termination of the 
     parent-child relationship is under consideration and the 
     parent, guardian, or custodian of the child is indigent. The 
     assistance of these attorneys is essential to the Courts' 
     effort to ensure that vulnerable children are well 
     represented in Court and that they are placed in stable, 
     permanent homes expeditiously. The proposed rated increase 
     would help attract qualified attorneys to the program and 
     support reform of the Family Court.
     D.C. Courts Administrative Provisions
       The Committee recommends an Administrative Provision to 
     increase the hourly rate paid to court-appointed attorneys 
     representing indigent defendants in the District of Columbia 
     from $65 per hour to $75 per hour. In addition, the Committee 
     recommends an increase from $75 per hour to $90 per hour on 
     October 1, 2003, to match the rate currently paid to Federal 
     attorneys.
       The Committee recommends a provision to allow employees of 
     the District of Columbia Courts to enroll in the Federal 
     long-term care insurance program, consistent with other 
     Federal benefits provided to D.C. Courts employees. Long term 
     care insurance is available to other quasi-Federal agencies 
     and to other District agencies under Federal oversight 
     pursuant to the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
     Government Improvement Act of 1997, the Court Services and 
     Offender Supervision Agency.
       The Committee recommends a modification to the 
     administration of outreach activities under the District's 
     Crime Victims Compensation Fund. The Committee recommends 
     that funds designated for outreach activities shall be 
     deposited into the Crime Victims Assistance Fund, rather than 
     be paid to the Mayor. This provision will allow the District 
     of Columbia to immediately begin implementing programs 
     designated for victims outreach.
       The Committee recommends that fines collected by the 
     Superior Court of the District of Columbia in Driving Under 
     the Influence (``DUI'') and Driving While Impaired (``DWI'') 
     cases be transferred to the District of Columbia Office of 
     the Corporation Counsel to enhance the prosecution of these 
     cases. The Superior Court of the District of Columbia will 
     continue to collect fines in criminal cases under the 
     District's traffic alcohol laws and be deposited into the 
     Crime Victims Compensation Fund. The Committee does not 
     recommend making this provision retroactive, as requested by 
     the District, but does support increasing the District's 
     capacity to prosecute ``DUI'' and ``DWI'' cases effectively.
       Drunken driving offenses accounted for over 30 percent of 
     the approximately 12,000 criminal cases the General Crimes 
     Section papered in fiscal year 2001. This represents a 
     staggering caseload for each of the eight attorneys who 
     prosecute. Additionally, with the implementation of the 
     Community Court Project, the attorneys in the General Crimes 
     Section have been given more work than ever before. Meeting 
     these additional demands, while maintaining prosecutorial 
     intensity in drunken driving cases, necessitates the transfer 
     of funds.

 Federal Payment to the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency 
                      for the District of Columbia

       The Revitalization Act established the Court Services and 
     Offender Supervision Agency [CSOSA] for the District of 
     Columbia to assume the functions of the District's pretrial 
     services, adult probation, parole, and adult offender 
     supervision functions. CSOSA was certified as an independent 
     Executive Branch agency on August 4, 2000, ending a 3-year 
     period of trusteeship.
       The Revitalization Act relieved the District of Columbia of 
     ``state-level'' financial responsibilities and restructured a 
     number of criminal justice functions, including pretrial 
     services, parole, and adult probation. Following passage of 
     the Revitalization Act, under the direction of a Trustee 
     appointed by the U.S. Attorney General, three separate and 
     disparately functioning entities of the District of Columbia 
     government were reorganized into one Federal agency. CSOSA 
     assumed its probation function from the D.C. Superior Court 
     and its parole function from the D.C. Board of Parole. The 
     Revitalization Act transferred the parole supervision 
     functions to CSOSA and the parole decision-making functions 
     to the U.S. Parole Commission (USPC). On August 5, 1998, the 
     parole determination function was transferred to the USPC, 
     and on August 4, 2000, the USPC assumed responsibility for 
     parole revocation and modification with respect to felons. 
     The CSOSA appropriation is comprised of three components: The 
     Community Supervision Program (CSP), the District of Columbia 
     Pretrial Services Agency (PSA), and the Public Defender 
     Service (PDS) for the District of Columbia. PDS is a 
     federally funded independent D.C. agency responsible for the 
     defense of indigent individuals and receives funding by 
     transfer from the CSOSA appropriation. The CSP is responsible 
     for supervision of offenders (either on probation or parole), 
     and the PSA is responsible for supervising pretrial 
     defendants.
       The Committee recommends $154,707,000 for fiscal year 2003 
     for CSOSA. The Committee does not recommend the amount 
     associated with Federal employee retirement costs, 
     $7,218,000.
       The funding provided will enable CSOSA to enhance its 
     community-based and sanctions-based supervision strategy and 
     support the fair administration of justice by providing the 
     courts and the U.S. Parole Commission with timely, accurate 
     and complete information required in their decision-making 
     process. The Committee recommendation also includes transfers 
     to the D.C. Pretrial Services Agency for the D.C. Public 
     Defender Service.
       The mission of CSOSA for the District of Columbia is to 
     increase public safety, prevent crime, reduce recidivism, and 
     support the fair administration of justice in close 
     collaboration with the community.
       The Community Supervision Program's operations focus on 
     using proven best practices to improve offender supervision 
     and reduce recidivism. Caseloads have been reduced and 
     officers relocated to community field offices to facilitate 
     close supervision. Every offender is assessed to determine 
     both risk to public safety and need for treatment and other 
     interventions. Conditions of release are enforced through 
     drug testing, home and work monitoring visits, and other 
     means. A system of graduated sanctions is being put in place 
     to meet every violation with a swift and appropriate 
     response. There is some evidence that these initiatives are 
     beginning to work. For example, parolee re-arrests sustained 
     a 67 percent drop from May 1998 through the end of 2000.
       The Committee notes with concern that the 1997 District of 
     Columbia Revitalization Act shifted the responsibility for 
     D.C. parolees to the United States Parole Commission (USPC). 
     Subsequently, the 1998 Phase-Out Act terminates the USPC by 
     November of 2002. Additionally, the Committee notes that the 
     government of the District of Columbia has proposed several 
     modifications to the current structure of criminal justice 
     functions performed by Federal agencies as a result of the 
     1997 District of Columbia Revitalization Act. The Committee 
     requests that the District of Columbia, the Court Services 
     and Offender Supervision Agency, and the United States Parole 
     Commission submit a plan, to the President and Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     no later than March 1, 2003, for the continuation of the 
     parole determination, parole revocation, and parole 
     modification functions with respect to District of Columbia 
     resident adult sentenced felons, currently performed by the 
     United States Parole Commission, by the appropriate, 
     authorized, Federal entity. The intent of the Revitalization 
     Act was to relieve the District of the responsibility of 
     parole decision-making functions and vested parole 
     supervision functions in the Court Services and Offender 
     Supervision Agency. The continuation of these 
     responsibilities is imperative to effective criminal justice 
     in the District of Columbia. The USPC currently faces a 
     backlog to process cases efficiently with only 15 case 
     examiners to supervise 9,000 D.C. inmates and over 4,000 
     Federal inmates. The USPC and CSOSA estimate that the current 
     population of 3,300 active D.C. parolees will grow to 3,800 
     next year, and continue to expand, with no corresponding 
     expansion of Agency supervision or halfway house bed space.
       The fiscal year 2002 appropriation provided $147,300,000, 
     including $34,773,000 in program increases, for CSOSA. 
     Resources were provided to build agency infrastructure, 
     establish and improve mission critical programs, enhance drug 
     testing and sanctions-based treatment, improve supervision of 
     pre-trial defendants and post conviction offenders, expand 
     intermediate sanctions and offender reentry programs, to 
     continue planning and design proposals for a residential 
     sanctions center, and to make improvements in information 
     technology.
       Based on the results the Agency has achieved to date and 
     the anticipated outcomes expected in the future, the 
     Committee is recommending an increase of $7,407,000 over the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation for the purpose of funding 
     non-policy adjustments to base, improving supervision, drug 
     testing, intervention and treatment, including funds for 
     defender services program enhancements. The Committee 
     recommends the following program changes:

[[Page 694]]

       Supervision.--$7,070,000 and 102 positions to establish a 
     new field office east of the Anacostia River, to continue to 
     reduce general supervision case loads from 64 to 50, and to 
     establish new diagnostic teams.
       Drug Testing.--$2,238,000 and 22 positions to enhance drug 
     lab capacity and to establish drug testing collection 
     capabilities at the community supervision program's new field 
     offices.
       Treatment and Support Services.--$848,000 and 16 positions 
     to provide additional sanction-based substance abuse 
     treatment.
       Learning Lab and Support.--$464,000 and 8 positions for 
     learning labs to provide literacy training and job placement 
     assistance and for relocation of staff from Building B of the 
     D.C. Courts.
       Sanctions.--$13,015,000 for a re-entry and sanctions center 
     so that swift and appropriate sanctions can be imposed on 
     individuals under supervision at the first sign of relapse, 
     and to improve offender re-entry programs;
       D.C. Pretrial Services Agency.--$1,733,000 and 6 positions 
     to reduce supervision caseload ratios for high-risk felony 
     defendants, to complete enhancement of automated case 
     management systems, and to provide sanctions-based substance 
     abuse treatment for an additional 400 defendants; and
       Public Defender Service.--$874,000 and 6 positions to 
     provide effective legal and rehabilitative transition 
     services through the community re-entry program.
       The Committee strongly encourages the Director of the Court 
     Services and Offender Supervision Agency to immediately begin 
     renovation of the Re-entry and Sanctions Center (RSC). The 
     Center provides residential drug treatment and re-entry 
     counseling to the highest risk offenders returning to the 
     District. The Committee provided $13,015,000 in fiscal year 
     2002 for renovation of the RSC.
       The Committee understands that planning efforts with the 
     government of the District of Columbia have been underway 
     since 2001. However, the treatment and successful transition 
     of offenders and defendants is a principal concern. It is 
     estimated that 1,900 offenders and defendants require 
     residential treatment services annually and do not receive 
     those services because of limited resources. A fully 
     operational RSC will greatly prevent rearrest of offenders 
     and improve the safety of the greater community. The Director 
     of the CSOSA shall provide a status report to the Committee 
     on Appropriations on the renovation of the Center and 
     improvement of services no later than September 1, 2003.

Federal Payment to the District of Columbia for Security Costs Related 
               to the Presence of the Federal Government

       The Committee is aware that the District police, fire, and 
     emergency personnel have had to provide security for a number 
     of events due to the fact that the District of Columbia is 
     the seat of the Federal Government and headquarters of many 
     international organizations. Recently, the need for D.C. to 
     provide security has increased, thereby increasing over-time 
     costs for personnel and pulling police from neighborhood 
     patrols. The President has supported reimbursing the District 
     for these costs. The Committee recommends $15,000,000 to 
     support this fund, while ensuring accountability from the 
     city on how the funds are expended.
       The Committee is pleased that the District and the 
     Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) have 
     agreed upon a plan for ensuring interoperable communications 
     in and around Metro Rail tunnels. The Committee encourages 
     the District and WMATA to sign the Memorandum of Agreement 
     and implement the radio interface system expeditiously.
       The Committee is concerned that security measures taken by 
     Federal law enforcement agencies in the District of Columbia 
     since September 11, 2001 are unattractive and contribute to a 
     sense that the Nation's Capital is an armed fortress. 
     Certainly, security is a matter of the highest importance as 
     Washington, D.C. remains a prime target for future attacks. 
     Security does not have to be unsightly. The National Capital 
     Planning Commission (NCPC) Interagency Task Force issued a 
     report in October, 2001 entitled ``Designing for Security in 
     the Nation's Capital'' which sets forth recommendations for 
     developing coordinated urban security design that will 
     maintain the city's safety without detracting from its 
     historic beauty. The Committee directs the Office of 
     Management and Budget, in consultation with the United States 
     Park Police, the National Park Service, the Secret Service, 
     the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States 
     Protective Service, the Department of State, and the General 
     Services Administration to review the NCPC study and submit a 
     report to the Committees on Appropriations in the Senate and 
     the House, no later than February 5, 2003, on their plans to 
     improve the appearance of security in accordance with the 
     recommendations of the NCPC report.

Federal Payment for Hospital Bioterrorism Preparedness in the District 
                              of Columbia

       The Committee has included $10,000,000 to begin to prepare 
     the District's hospitals for a possible attack that may 
     include the use of biological, chemical, radiological, and 
     nuclear weapons, as well as high yield explosives. In such a 
     circumstance, decontamination and quarantine become critical 
     components of any response plan. Patients must be 
     decontaminated before they can be treated, otherwise their 
     contamination could potentially shut down entire facilities.
       Of the funds provided, the Committee recommendation 
     includes $5,000,000 for Children's National Medical Center 
     and $5,000,000 for Washington Hospital Center. The Committee 
     recognizes that, as the only children's hospital in this 
     region, Children's National Medical Center would likely be 
     the place that children would be treated in the event of a 
     terrorist attack. Similarly, the Committee understands that 
     Washington Hospital Center is the largest hospital by a 
     factor of three in the District of Columbia and that it 
     played a central role in responding to the effects of the 
     September 11 attack on the Pentagon. Having the city's 
     largest trauma center and its only burn center, Washington 
     Hospital Center would undoubtedly play a critical role in 
     treating the city's residents and tourists in the event of an 
     attack.
       If the District of Columbia were attacked by weapons of 
     mass destruction or a biological agent, decontamination of 
     patients would occur prior to transport to the emergency 
     department at Children's Hospital and Washington Hospital 
     Center to avoid endangering other patients and medical 
     personnel. To accomplish this, both Children's Hospital and 
     Washington Hospital Center plan to construct buildings 
     adjacent to their emergency departments which would have 
     separate air handling and filtration systems.
       In addition to containment facilities, the Committee is 
     providing funds for quarantine units which will need to 
     function independently of the hospitals. To enter the unit, 
     patients and staff would need to be decontaminated and fitted 
     with protective equipment. Space would be designed to allow 
     for this essential process. In a self-contained unit, air 
     filter and negative pressure systems are utilized to limit 
     the possibility of contagen, while supporting patients. These 
     units could be sealed off, protecting other patients from 
     infection, and would require sufficient supplies for 
     potentially prolonged periods, which is characteristic of 
     these diseases.

       Federal Payment to the Children's National Medical Center

       The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $5,000,000 to 
     the Children's National Medical Center for capital 
     improvements.

          Federal Payment to St. Colleta of Greater Washington

       The Committee recommends a Federal payment of $2,000,000 
     for St. Colleta of Greater Washington for costs associated 
     with establishing a school for mentally retarded and 
     multiple-handicapped adolescents and adults in the District 
     of Columbia.

Federal Payment to the Department of Transportation in the District of 
                                Columbia

       The Committee recommends $1,000,000 included in the 
     President's budget, to be used to implement Transportation 
     Systems Management initiatives recommended by the National 
     Capital Planning Commission (NCPC). The District of Columbia 
     and NCPC requested $16,000,000 to implement transportation 
     solutions, to alleviate pressure caused by the closure of 
     Pennsylvania Avenue.

   Federal Payment to the Chief Financial Officer of the District of 
                                Columbia

       For a Federal payment to the Chief Financial Officer of the 
     District of Columbia, $15,000,000 for education, security, 
     economic development, and health initiatives in the District 
     of Columbia.

    Federal Payment to the District of Columbia for Charter School 
                               Facilities

       The Committee recommends an increase of $20,000,000 for the 
     Charter School Credit Enhancement Fund to facilitate the 
     purchase, construction and/or renovation of facilities for 
     public charter schools in the District of Columbia. These 
     funds would add to Federal seed money ($5,000,000) provided 
     in 1996. The Mayor requested $5,000,000, however the 
     Committee is committed to providing a significant investment 
     in school choice in the District. D.C. public schools are 
     consistently not providing adequate services to students, 
     particularly in Special Education. The Mayor requested 
     $9,000,000 to construct Special Education facilities in the 
     District to alleviate some of the need for children with 
     special needs to go to schools outside of the city. The 
     Committee is supportive of providing alternative educational 
     opportunities for to children with special needs. The 
     Committee recommends that at least three of the loans 
     provided to charter schools contribute to schools that 
     educate children with special needs.
       The District of Columbia has over 40 charter schools, the 
     most of any public school system in the country. The 
     Committee commends the work that these schools are doing in 
     providing real choice to District school children and their 
     families. Many charter schools, however, are beginning to 
     outgrow their current facilities and need more space. Some 
     new charter schools have not been able to open because of 
     their inability to identify and acquire suitable and 
     affordable facilities. This situation is made more difficult 
     by the

[[Page 695]]

     high cost of real estate in the District of Columbia. Charter 
     schools face an additional challenge in that many have not 
     been operating long enough to establish a sufficient credit 
     history to qualify for commercial bank loans. To address this 
     problem, the Committee recommends enhancing three charter 
     school initiatives in the District of Columbia. The 
     cornerstone of the commitment of school choice in the 
     District is the Committee's recommendation of $20,000,000 for 
     critical investments in the development of charter schools. 
     The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for the 
     Credit Enhancement Fund for Public Charter Schools to assist 
     schools in securing financing for facilities improvements and 
     $10,000,000 to establish a Direct Loan Program for Public 
     Charter Schools. In addition, the Committee recommendation 
     includes $4,000,000 to supplement the Public Charter School 
     per pupil facility allocation in fiscal year 2003. These 
     funds will be used to set a floor of $1,500 per pupil for 
     facilities. Finally, the Committee recommendation provides 
     $1,000,000 for the District to establish an Office of Charter 
     School Financing to administer the programs described above.
       In addition to investments in financing and loans to 
     charter schools for the purchase or renovation of facilities, 
     as well as the cost of equipment, the Committee recommends 
     two initiatives to greatly increase the administration and 
     effectiveness of local funds provided to public charter 
     schools.
       The Committee recommendation of $4,000,000 to supplement 
     the funding available to Public Charter Schools in the 
     District of Columbia in fiscal year 2003, is to be used to 
     establish a floor of no less than $1,500 per pupil for 
     Charter Schools. The Committee is greatly concerned by the 
     continued decline in the rate of per pupil allotments given 
     to charter schools to assist them with facility maintenance 
     and repair. The Committee recognizes that charter schools' 
     ability to secure the private financing necessary to sustain 
     their daily operations are extremely dependent on their 
     ability to demonstrate a stable income and dependable sources 
     of ongoing revenue. The Committee encourages the Mayor and 
     Council of the District of Columbia to establish a permanent 
     minimum rate of allotment to charter schools of $1,500.
       The Committee recommendation of $1,000,000 to be used by 
     the District to establish an Office of Charter School 
     Financing will increase the efficiency of the administration 
     of charter school funds. Currently, the District of Columbia 
     does not designate one office to meet the specific needs of 
     charter schools seeking financing. The Committee recommends 
     that a new Office of Charter School Financing should provide 
     expert evaluation of charter schools' applications for 
     financing, as well as technical assistance to applicants.
       Charter schools may repay the loans with the facilities 
     allotment they receive as part of their per-pupil allocation. 
     To ensure that these funds are invested in successful charter 
     schools, the Committee directs that a charter school submit 
     an application demonstrating concrete achievements of the 
     school's educational mission and goals.

                       Administrative Provisions

     Report to Congress
       The Committee recommends various administrative provisions 
     to improve the administration of charter schools; oversight 
     of funding provided to promote adoption; and require more 
     strict accountability of special education expenditures.
       The Committee requires that the Comptroller General submit 
     a study no later than April 1, 2003 detailing the national 
     efforts to establish adequate charter school facilities and 
     include recommendations for establishing a charter school 
     incubator in the District of Columbia. A charter school 
     incubator would house a small number of charter schools for 
     up to 4 years of the school's first years in operation. The 
     incubator would provide the schools with stable facilities 
     for their students while giving school leaders the 
     opportunity to identify and acquire permanent facilities. 
     During their tenure in the incubator, charter school leaders 
     would receive technical assistance on real estate 
     development, equity development, fundraising, and guidance on 
     effective school management.
       The Committee recommends that GAO consult with the General 
     Services Administration and other experts with relevant 
     knowledge of the District of Columbia in the following areas: 
     real estate development, charter school management, equity 
     development and management, banking, municipal finance, and 
     education. These experts shall include the Mayor, members of 
     the Council, the Chief Financial Officer, the Superintendent 
     of the District of Columbia Public Schools, the President of 
     the District of Columbia Board of Education, the District of 
     Columbia Public Charter School Board, and the District of 
     Columbia Charter School Consortium. The report should 
     identify and examine any issues relating to charter school 
     incubators including, but not limited to: the availability of 
     surplus District, Federal, or private buildings that may be 
     suitable for incubators; options for private development 
     through existing tax incentives, special bonding authority, 
     and other programs to encourage private development of public 
     education facilities; financing strategies for ongoing 
     incubator operations; incubator administration; facility 
     design; legal issues; technical assistance needs of charter 
     school officials in real estate development and fundraising; 
     selection process for charter schools to participate in the 
     incubator; and any other issues the GAO identifies. Once the 
     GAO has completed its study and issued its report, the Mayor 
     of the District of Columbia and the Chairman of the Council 
     of the District of Columbia shall develop, in consultation 
     with the Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia, 
     the Superintendent of the District of Columbia Public 
     Schools, the President of the District of Columbia Board of 
     Education, the District of Columbia Public Charter School 
     Board, and the District of Columbia Charter School 
     Consortium, as well as representatives of parents, advocacy 
     groups and the private sector, a plan for establishing an 
     incubator for charter schools in the District of Columbia. 
     The Committee requests that this plan be submitted to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives no later than 6 months from the time the GAO 
     report is received by the Government of the District of 
     Columbia.
     Surplus Buildings
       The Committee recommends that the Mayor of the District of 
     Columbia and the Chairman of the Council of the District of 
     Columbia, in consultation with the General Services 
     Administration, shall conduct an assessment of all buildings 
     currently held in surplus and those that might be made 
     available within 1 year of the date of enactment of this Act. 
     The Committee requires that, within 180 days of enactment, 
     the Mayor submit a report to Congress on the findings of the 
     assessment along with a plan for occupying at least 50 
     percent of the space available at the time such report is 
     submitted. The Committee encourages the District of Columbia 
     to provide surplus space to charter schools, consistent with 
     the preferences as outlined in the D.C. School Reform Act.
     Closure of Low Performing Schools
       The Committee is concerned that several poor performing 
     charter schools have not been closed by the District 
     government. The Committee strongly supports charter schools, 
     especially because of the strict accountability required of 
     them. It is imperative that the District government close 
     charter schools that are not meeting the education needs of 
     students, either through mismanagement or a lack of 
     resources. The Committee understands the need for charter 
     school closures and encourages such action when necessary and 
     appropriate. However, the Mayor shall ensure that the closure 
     process allows for detained notice of failures and 
     opportunity to contest or remedy such failures. Therefore, 
     the Committee requires that the Mayor of the District of 
     Columbia and the Chairman of the Council of the District of 
     Columbia report to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives no later than August 
     26, 2002 on the status of charter school closure. The 
     Committee is seeking a detailed report on the actions taken 
     by the District of Columbia Board of Education, the District 
     of Columbia Public Charter School Board and the District 
     government to close poor performing charter schools in the 
     District of Columbia. The Committee is particularly concerned 
     by the delays in closure if the local government and 
     oversight boards have determined certain charter schools must 
     be closed.
     Incentives to Promote the Adoption of Children
       The Committee is concerned that funds provided in 1999 to 
     the District of Columbia government to promote the adoption 
     of children have yet to be expended. The Committee supported 
     the extension of the availability of funds in 2000 and the 
     expansion of the purpose for which the funds may be used in 
     2001. However, the funds have still not met their original 
     intent, to increase adoption of children in the foster care 
     system in the District of Columbia.
       Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Mayor 
     implement and fulfill the following performance measures to 
     ensure that the intended services have begun with the 
     ultimate goal of markedly improving the lives of the over 
     9,800 children served by the Child and Family Services 
     Agency. Within 9 months of the date of enactment of this Act 
     the Mayor must have established the following measures: (1) 
     the Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia shall 
     certify that not less than 50 percent of the funds provided 
     for attorney fees and home studies have been expended; (2) 
     the Mayor shall establish an outreach program to inform 
     adoptive families and children without parents about the 
     scholarship fund established with these funds; (3) the Mayor 
     shall establish the location, necessary personnel and mission 
     of the adoptive family resource center in the District of 
     Columbia; (4) the Mayor shall identify not less than 25 
     percent of the eligible children in the District of Columbia 
     foster care system with special needs and obligate not less 
     than 25 percent of the funds provided in Public Law 106-113 
     (113 Stat. 1501) for adoption incentives and support for 
     children with special needs; (5) the Mayor and District of 
     Columbia Child and Family Services Agency shall increase the 
     number of

[[Page 696]]

     waiting children listed in their adoption photo-listing by 75 
     percent. In addition, the Committee requires that quarterly 
     reports on the expenditure of these funds and reporting on 
     the performance of the District in implementing the required 
     measures is submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives.
     Special Education Accountability
       The Committee is concerned that a lack of oversight and 
     regulation in the District of Columbia has resulted in a 
     corruption of the process by which children are assessed for 
     special education needs, referred for services to meet those 
     educational needs, and represented in legal cases brought 
     against the District of Columbia Public Schools under the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The 
     Committee is concerned that individuals providing 
     representation to children and their parents are referring 
     clients to an affiliated diagnostic testing service and 
     affiliated special education school, further degrading the 
     special education services provide to children in the 
     District of Columbia.
       The Committee recommends that the Chief Financial Officer 
     of the District of Columbia require disclosure by attorneys 
     in IDEA cases of any financial, corporate, legal, board 
     memberships, or other relationships with special education 
     diagnostic services, schools, or other special education 
     service providers before paying any attorneys fees. The Chief 
     Financial Officer may also require attorneys in special 
     education cases to certify that all services billed in 
     special education were rendered. The Committee further 
     recommends that the Chief Financial Officer will prepare and 
     submit quarterly reports to the Committees on Appropriations 
     of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the 
     certifications and the amount paid by the government of the 
     District of Columbia, including the District of Columbia 
     Public Schools, to attorneys in cases brought under IDEA. The 
     Committee's intent is that these reports would encompass all 
     services for which attorneys receive awards, including those 
     received under a settlement agreement or as part of an 
     administrative proceeding, under the IDEA from the District 
     of Columbia. The Committee recommends that the Inspector 
     General of the District of Columbia conduct audits of the 
     certification to ensure attorney compliance. The Committee 
     highly recommends that the Council of the District of 
     Columbia, in cooperation with the Mayor of the District of 
     Columbia and the District of Columbia School Board, develop 
     legislation to address conflicts of interest in special 
     education cases.

Federal Payment for the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative in the District 
                              of Columbia

       The Committee recommends $55,000,000 to implement the 
     Anacostia Waterfront Initiative. Of this amount, the 
     Committee recommends $5,000,000 to be used for development of 
     parks and recreation facilities at Kenilworth Park on the 
     Anacostia River. The President requested no funds for this 
     activity. The Committee is dedicated to partnering with the 
     District to develop local and Federal lands for sports and 
     recreation in all areas of the city. The Committee intends 
     that funds provided under this heading will establish a long-
     term commitment to the creation of clean, safe parks in every 
     neighborhood. The Committee encourages the District to 
     promote public/private investments that will contribute to 
     parks of this kind.
       In addition, the Committee recommends $50,000,000, to be 
     matched 100 percent with local funds, for the Water and Sewer 
     Authority to implement the Combined Sewer Overflow Program. 
     The Authority will begin system upgrades and design work on a 
     new system to address combined sewer overflows (CSOs). The 
     combined sewer system, serving 33 percent of the District, 
     was constructed in 1890 by the Federal Government. The 
     District has developed a Long Term Control Plan (LTCP) to 
     deal with overflows of sanitary waste and storm-water into 
     the surrounding rivers that occur during heavy rains. The 
     overflows occur approximately 60-75 times per year.
       The Committee believes that funds provided in fiscal year 
     2003 for the Combined Sewer Overflow Program represent a 
     long-term commitment by the Federal Government to rebuild 
     this infrastructure. The Committee expects that D.C. rate 
     payers will bear half of the cost of this project. Twenty-
     four percent of the total cost can be attributed to EPA 
     requirements of the District; however, EPA will only 
     contribute approximately 13 percent of the cost to address 
     these requirements. The Federal Government represents 17 
     percent of the usage. The plan totals $1,200,000,000 over 15-
     20 years.
       The Committee recommends this significant investment 
     because of the Federal Government's role in building the 
     original system and its responsibility to maintain the 
     infrastructure that the government uses. This partnership 
     with the District is the cornerstone of the Anacostia 
     Waterfront Initiative. The Congress has made similar 
     commitments to other areas, such as Boston, San Diego, and 
     the United States-Mexico border. The scale and cost of this 
     project exemplifies how critical infrastructure, starved over 
     the years, is now nearly non-functional.

         Federal Payment for Capital Infrastructure Development

       The Committee recommends $13,100,000 to invest in capital 
     infrastructure development. Of this amount, $10,000,000 is 
     for the creation of an interoperable Unified Communications 
     Center to serve as the central communications and command 
     center for all D.C. first responders. The President requested 
     no funds. The fiscal year 2002 Department of Defense and 
     Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 107-
     117; 115 Stat. 2303) provided $9,000,000 to the District for 
     a portion of the technology to support this center. This 
     project is already up and running and any additional funds 
     will be implemented quickly and effectively to expand 
     technology, train staff, and renovate facilities.
       In addition, the Committee recommends $100,000 for 
     restoration of Eastern Market. The District requested 
     $150,000 for restoration of Eastern Market. The District is 
     undertaking a major renovation and restoration of the 
     historic Eastern Market near the Capitol Hill neighborhood. 
     This renovation would contribute to the economic development 
     of the Pennsylvania Avenue SE corridor and restore an 
     historic building.
       The Committee recommends $3,000,000 in fiscal year 2003 for 
     the design and construction of a state-of-the art forensic 
     laboratory in the District of Columbia. The President 
     requested no funds for this purpose. The Committee 
     understands that this laboratory will consolidate functions 
     that are critical to the investigation of crimes in the city, 
     while reducing the District's reliance on Federal entities. 
     Currently, local law enforcement personnel often rely on the 
     facilities of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Drug 
     Enforcement Agency (DEA), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 
     and Firearms (ATF) when investigating crimes. Aside from 
     diverting space and resources from Federal investigators, 
     this reliance on Federal facilities results in an increased 
     risk of contamination, poor communications, and possible 
     degradation of evidence.
       The Committee also understands that the District's own 
     forensics facilities are antiquated and do not meet national 
     standards. Ultimately, poor space and equipment impairs the 
     quality of evidence gathered by investigators and has been 
     one factor in the District's inability to prosecute many 
     violent crimes. The Committee expects that the city will 
     bolster this Federal contribution with additional local funds 
     so that this project will be on a pace for completion by 
     fiscal year 2005.

    Federal Payment to the District of Columbia for Family Literacy

       The Committee recommends $4,000,000 to expand the Family 
     Literacy Program in public schools in the District of 
     Columbia. The Family Literacy program will address the needs 
     of literacy-challenged parents while endowing their children 
     with an appreciation for literacy and strengthening familial 
     ties. The program will be targeted at the District's so-
     called T-9 public schools, identified in the District's 
     initiative to transform low-performing schools.

                             FEDERAL GRANTS

       The District of Columbia participates as a State, county, 
     and city in the various Federal grant programs. At the time 
     the fiscal year 2002 budget was submitted, the District 
     estimated that it would receive a total of $2,019,330,000 in 
     Federal grants during the coming fiscal year.
       The following table shows the amount of Federal grants the 
     District expects to receive and the office or agency that 
     expects to receive them:


    Summary of Federal grants assistance to the District of Columbia


        Agency                                            2003 estimate
Governmental Direction and Support:
  Office of the Mayor..........................................$849,000
  Office of the City Administrator...........................18,142,000
  Office of the Corporation Counsel..........................15,366,000
  Office of the Inspector General.............................1,265,000
  Office of the Chief Financial Officer.........................932,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Governmental Direction and Support................36,554,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Economic Development and Regulation:
  Office of Planning............................................556,000
  Department of Housing and Community Development............42,168,000
  Department of Employment Services..........................54,947,000
  Public Service Commission.....................................125,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Economic Development and Regulation...............97,796,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Public Safety and Justice:
  Metropolitan Police Department..............................9,605,000
  National Guard................................................506,000

[[Page 697]]

  Emergency Management Agency.................................1,218,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Public Safety and Justice.........................11,329,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Public Education System:
  Public Schools............................................147,800,000
  State Education Office.....................................26,917,000
  University of the District of Columbia.....................12,668,000
  Public Library................................................610,000
  Commission on the Arts and Humanities.........................475,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Public Education System..........................188,470,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Human Support Services:
  Department of Human Services..............................231,567,000
Child and Family Services....................................81,804,000
Department of Mental Health..................................67,100,000
  Department of Health......................................982,542,000
  Office on Aging.............................................5,760,000
  Office of Human Rights........................................106,000
  D. C. Energy Office.........................................4,801,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Human Support Services.........................1,373,680,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Public Works: Department of Transportation....................4,669,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Federal grants, operating expenses.............1,712,498,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
Capital Outlay, grants......................................306,833,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Grand Total, federal grants...........................2,019,331,000

SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS

                       District of Columbia Funds

       A total of $7,307,787,000 was requested in the budget from 
     the District of Columbia for fiscal year 2003 which was 
     received by the Congress on July 12, 2002 and printed as 
     House Document No. 107-242.
       Based on recommendations in the bill, a total of 
     $7,442,185,000 will be available to the District government 
     during the next fiscal year. Included in this figure are 
     appropriations from local funds, Federal grants, and private 
     and other funds. In addition, $156,121,000 from intra-
     District funds are available. The financing of the 
     appropriations from District funds is from Federal payments 
     and revenues from various local taxes, fees, charges and 
     other collections received by the District government.


                      Balanced Budget Recommended

       The Committee is recommending a balanced budget in 
     accordance with the District government's request. It is 
     estimated that sufficient resources will be available from 
     current revenue authority to finance operating expenses.


                               Personnel

       The Committee recommends a total of 32,799 continuing full-
     time equivalent positions to be financed from District of 
     Columbia funds, Federal grants, private and other, and intra-
     District funds during fiscal year 2003 consisting of 32,685 
     positions under the general operating expenses and 114 from 
     the enterprise funds.
       A summary of the total resources by appropriation title 
     follows:

                       DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

                   Governmental Direction and Support

       The Committee recommends a total of $295,136,000 and 2,655 
     full-time equivalent positions for the various departments, 
     agencies and activities funded through this appropriation. A 
     comparative summary by agency follows:

                                                                               GOVERNMENTAL DIRECTION AND SUPPORT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Fiscal year                                       Committee          Bill compared with--
                                                 Fiscal year     Fiscal year                     2003 request      Committee                     recommendation --------------------------------
               Agency/activity                  2002 approved   2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-   recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year      Fiscal year
                                                                                                   District                                         District      2002 approved    2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Council of the District of Columbia..........     $13,232,000     $13,604,000  ...............     $13,604,000     $13,604,000  ...............     $13,604,000         $372,000  ..............
District of Columbia Auditor.................       1,299,000       1,596,000  ...............       1,596,000       1,596,000  ...............       1,596,000          297,000  ..............
Advisory Neighborhood Commissions............         808,000         894,000  ...............         894,000         894,000  ...............         894,000           86,000  ..............
Office of the Mayor..........................       8,294,000       8,350,000       ($506,000)       7,844,000       8,350,000       ($506,000)       7,844,000           56,000  ..............
Office of the Secretary......................       2,516,000       2,609,000  ...............       2,609,000       2,609,000  ...............       2,609,000           93,000  ..............
City-Wide Call Center........................       1,898,000       2,238,000  ...............       2,238,000       2,238,000  ...............       2,238,000          340,000  ..............
Office of the City Administrator.............      28,275,000      30,147,000        (421,000)      29,726,000      30,147,000        (421,000)      29,726,000        1,872,000  ..............
Office of Personnel..........................      17,138,000      13,143,000      (1,681,000)      11,462,000      13,143,000      (1,681,000)      11,462,000      (3,995,000)  ..............
Human Resources Development Fund.............       3,766,000       3,553,000  ...............       3,553,000       3,553,000  ...............       3,553,000        (213,000)  ..............
Office of Finance and Resource Development...       2,373,000       2,285,000        (380,000)       1,905,000       2,285,000        (380,000)       1,905,000         (88,000)  ..............
Office of Contracting and Procurement........      13,066,000      13,748,000        (245,000)      13,503,000      13,748,000        (245,000)      13,503,000          682,000  ..............
Office of the Chief Technology Officer.......      15,441,000      17,622,000      (2,539,000)      15,083,000      17,622,000      (2,539,000)      15,083,000        2,181,000  ..............
Office of Property Management................      33,821,000      49,119,000     (36,496,000)      12,623,000      49,119,000     (36,496,000)      12,623,000       15,298,000  ..............
Contract Appeals Board.......................         746,000         746,000  ...............         746,000         746,000  ...............         746,000  ...............  ..............
Board of Elections and Ethics................       3,503,000       3,585,000  ...............       3,585,000       3,585,000  ...............       3,585,000           82,000  ..............
Office of Campaign Finance...................       1,388,000       1,360,000  ...............       1,360,000       1,360,000  ...............       1,360,000         (28,000)  ..............
Public Employee Relations Board..............         686,000         649,000  ...............         649,000         649,000  ...............         649,000         (37,000)  ..............
Office of Employee Appeals...................       1,540,000       1,625,000  ...............       1,625,000       1,625,000  ...............       1,625,000           85,000  ..............
Metropolitan Washington Council of                    367,000         397,000  ...............         397,000         397,000  ...............         397,000           30,000  ..............
 Governments.................................
Office of the Corporation Counsel............      52,505,000      54,462,000      (2,065,000)      52,397,000      54,462,000      (2,065,000)      52,397,000        1,957,000  ..............
Settlements and Judgments....................      23,450,000  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............     (23,450,000)  ..............
Office of the Inspector General..............      12,476,000      12,089,000  ...............      12,089,000      12,089,000  ...............      12,089,000        (387,000)  ..............
Office of the Chief Financial Officer........      84,126,000      95,726,000      (5,078,000)      90,648,000     110,726,000      (5,078,000)     105,648,000       26,600,000     $15,000,000
                                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Governmental Direction and           322,714,000     329,547,000     (49,411,000)     280,136,000     344,547,000     (49,411,000)     295,136,000       21,833,000      15,000,000
       Support...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Council of the District of Columbia

       The Committee recommends $13,604,000 and 163 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the elected 
     legislative branch of the District government.
       The Council of the District of Columbia is the elected 
     legislative branch of the District government. Its mission is 
     to enact laws, approve the operating budget and financial 
     plan, establish and oversee the programs and operations of 
     government agencies, and set policy for the government.


               Office of the District of Columbia Auditor

       The Committee recommends $1,596,000 and 17 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the operation of 
     the Office of the District of Columbia Auditor.
       The Office of the District of Columbia Auditor conducts 
     thorough audits of the accounts and operations of the 
     District government, with the goal of promoting economy, 
     efficiency, and accountability.


                   Advisory Neighborhood Commissions

       A total of $894,000 and 2 full-time equivalent positions 
     from local funds are included for the Advisory Neighborhood 
     Commissions.
       The mission of the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions is to 
     serve as a liaison between the District government and the 
     community.


                          Office of the Mayor

       The Committee recommends $7,844,000 and 77 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $6,995,000 and 73 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $849,000 and 4 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds) for the 
     Office of the Mayor for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of the Mayor serves the needs of the public 
     setting priorities, providing management direction and 
     support to agencies, and restoring one government, good 
     government, and self-government to the District of Columbia.


                        Office of the Secretary

       A total of $2,609,000 and 27 full-time equivalent positions 
     (including $2,516,000 and 25 full-time equivalent positions 
     from local funds and $93,000 and 2 full-time equivalent 
     positions from other funds) are included in the bill for the 
     operation of the Office of the Secretary.
       The mission of the Office of the Secretary of the District 
     of Columbia is to serve as the sole custodian of the Seal of 
     the District of Columbia and to authenticate its proper use 
     in accordance with the law.


                         City-Wide Call Center

       The Committee recommends $2,238,000 and 38 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the City-Wide Call 
     Center.
       The City-Wide Call Center serves as the District 
     government's primary point of entry for citizens and 
     customers attempting to access non-emergency services and 
     information. The Call Center connects callers to

[[Page 698]]

     agencies and individuals, and enters and tracks service 
     requests.


                    Office of the City Administrator

       The bill includes $29,726,000 and 114 full-time equivalent 
     positions (including $11,584,000 and 98 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds and $18,142,000 and 16 full-time 
     equivalent positions from Federal funds) for the Office of 
     the City Administrator for fiscal year 2003.

       The Office of the City Administrator provides District 
     agencies with direction and support to improve government 
     operations and enhance service delivery.

                          Office of Personnel

       The Committee recommends $11,462,000 and 124 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $10,652,000 and 113 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $812,000 and 11 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the 
     Office of Personnel for fiscal year 2003.

       The Office of Personnel provides comprehensive human 
     resource management services that strengthen individual and 
     organizational performance and enables the government to 
     attract, develop and retain a highly qualified, diverse 
     workforce.

                    Human Resources Development Fund

       A total of $3,553,000 and 10 full-time equivalent positions 
     from local funds are recommended for the Human Resources 
     Development fund for fiscal year 2003.

       The mission of the Human Resources Development Fund is to 
     improve the performance of the employees of the District of 
     Columbia by creating learning and development programs that 
     enhance productivity and improve the quality and delivery of 
     services for our citizens.

               Office of Finance and Resource Management

       The bill includes $1,905,000 and 25 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds for the Office of Finance and 
     Resource Management for fiscal year 2003.

       The Office of Finance and Resource Management provides 
     financial services and management for client agencies, 
     collect intra-District funds from District agencies to 
     provide a central payments system District-wide for all fixed 
     costs, and provides all financial management services to 
     agencies receiving capital funding.

                 Office of Contracting and Procurement

       The Committee recommends $13,503,000 and 166 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office of 
     Contracting and Procurement for fiscal year 2003.

       The Office of Contracting and Procurement provides every 
     city agency with procurement service to effectively perform 
     the functions of government in a customer-focused, timely, 
     and cost-effective manner.

                 Office of the Chief Technology Officer

       A total of $15,083,000 and 90 full-time equivalent 
     positions (including $15,069,000, 90 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds, $14,000 from other funds and $0 
     from Federal funds) is recommended for the Office of the 
     Chief Technology Officer for fiscal year 2003.

       The mission of the Office of the Chief Technology Officer 
     is to articulate the manner in which the government leverages 
     its investments in information technology to attain the 
     government's goal of being an efficient and effective service 
     provider.

                     Office of Property Management

       The Committee recommends $12,623,000 and 62 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $10,929,000 and 57 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $1,694,000 and 5 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the 
     Office of Property Management for fiscal year 2003.

       The mission of the Office of Property Management is to meet 
     the needs of our clients by providing a building and work 
     environment of the highest quality and services that meet 
     industry best standards of excellence.

                         Contract Appeals Board

       The total budget request of $746,000 and 6 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds is included in the bill 
     for the Contract Appeals Board for fiscal year 2003.

       The Contract Appeals Board provides an impartial 
     expeditious, inexpensive, and knowledgeable forum for 
     redressing and resolving contractual disputes between the 
     District and the contracting communities.

                     Board of Elections and Ethics

       The Committee recommends $3,585,000 and 50 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Board of 
     Elections and Ethics for fiscal year 2003.

       The mission of the Board of Elections and Ethics is to 
     administer and enforce the election law of the District of 
     Columbia by providing voter registration, qualifying 
     candidates and measures for ballot access, and conducting 
     elections in the District of Columbia.

                       Office of Campaign Finance

       The total budget request of $1,260,000 and 15 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds is included in the bill 
     for the Office of Campaign Finance for fiscal year 2003.

       The Office of Campaign Finance ensures public trust in the 
     integrity of the election process and government services by 
     regulating the financial disclosure process and conduct of 
     political campaigns and candidates, lobbyists, public 
     officials, and political committees, pursuant to the D.C. 
     Campaign Finance Reform and Conflict of Interest Act, the 
     D.C. Merit Personnel, and the Federal Ethics Reform Act.

                    Public Employee Relations Board

       The Committee recommends $649,000 and 4 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Public Employee 
     Relations Board for fiscal year 2003.

       The Public Employee Relations Board provides for the 
     impartial resolution of labor-management disputes in the 
     District government pursuant to the District of Columbia 
     Comprehensive Merit Personnel Act of 1978.

                       Office of Employee Appeals

       The bill includes $1,625,000 and 16 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds for the Office of Employee Appeals 
     for fiscal year 2003.

       The Office of Employee Appeals renders legally sufficient, 
     impartial, timely decisions on appeals in which District 
     government employees have challenged decisions regarding 
     adverse actions, reductions in force, performance 
     evaluations, and classifications of positions.

             Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

       The budget request of $397,000 from local funds is included 
     in the bill as the District's share of the Council of 
     Government's budget for fiscal year 2003.

       The mission of the Metropolitan Washington Council of 
     Governments is to enhance quality of life in the Washington 
     metropolitan region and to strengthen the region's 
     competitive advantage in the global economy by providing a 
     forum for consensus building and policy making; implementing 
     intergovernmental policies, plans, and programs; and 
     supporting the region as an expert information resource.

                   Office of the Corporation Counsel

       The Committee recommends $52,397,000 and 531 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $31,189,000 and 394 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $15,366,000 and 121 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds and 
     $5,842,000 and 16 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the Office of the Corporation Counsel for fiscal 
     year 2003.

       The Office of the Corporation Counsel achieves the best 
     outcome for its clients by (1) prosecuting crimes fairly and 
     aggressively, (2) defending or initiating actions, (3) 
     providing expert advice and counsel, and (4) executing 
     commercial-style transactions on behalf of the government of 
     the District of Columbia.

                    Office of the Inspector General

       The Committee recommends $12,089,000 and 108 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $10,824,000 and 92 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $1,265,000 and 16 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds) for the 
     Office of the Inspector General for fiscal year 2003.

       The mission of the Office of the Inspector General is to 
     independently conduct and supervise audits, investigations, 
     and inspections relating to the programs and operations of 
     District government departments and agencies.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

       The Committee recommends $90,648,000 and 968 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $79,823,000 and 919 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $932,000 and 3 full-
     time equivalent positions from Federal funds, and $9,893,000 
     and 46 full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for 
     the Office of the Chief Financial Officer for fiscal year 
     2003. The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the Office of 
     the Chief Financial Officer to make payments for various 
     economic development, health, security and education projects 
     in the District.

       The Office of the Chief Financial Officer administers the 
     financial management operations of the District of Columbia 
     to assure fiscal stability and integrity, supports public 
     services, and provides financial information to policy makers 
     necessary for making informed decisions while minimizing the 
     cost to the government.

                  Economic Development and Regulation

       The Committee recommends a total of $258,539,000 and 1,517 
     full-time equivalent positions for fiscal year 2003 for the 
     department and agencies funded through this appropriation.

[[Page 699]]



                                                                               ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Fiscal year                                       Committee         Bill compared with--
                                                  Fiscal year     Fiscal year                     2003 request      Committee                     recommendation -------------------------------
                Agency/activity                  2002 approved   2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-   recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year     Fiscal year
                                                                                                    District                                         District      2002 approved   2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Business Services and Economic Development....     $32,840,000     $31,065,000  ...............     $31,065,000     $31,065,000  ...............     $31,065,000    ($1,775,000)  ..............
Office of Planning............................  ..............       7,966,000  ...............       7,966,000       7,966,000  ...............       7,966,000  ..............  ..............
Office of Local Business Development..........  ..............       1,093,000  ...............       1,093,000       1,093,000  ...............       1,093,000  ..............  ..............
Office of Motion Pictures and Television......  ..............         574,000  ...............         574,000         574,000  ...............         574,000  ..............  ..............
Office of Zoning..............................       2,378,000       2,527,000  ...............       2,527,000       2,527,000  ...............       2,527,000         149,000  ..............
Department of Housing and Community                 57,890,000      65,032,000  ...............      65,032,000      65,032,000  ...............      65,032,000       7,142,000  ..............
 Development..................................
Department of Employment Services.............      80,477,000      97,584,000     ($7,809,000)      89,775,000      97,584,000     ($7,809,000)      89,775,000      17,107,000  ..............
Board of Appeals and Review...................         242,000         277,000  ...............         277,000         277,000  ...............         277,000          35,000  ..............
Board of Real Property Assessment and Appeals.         298,000         347,000  ...............         347,000         347,000  ...............         347,000          49,000  ..............
Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.      29,105,000      31,017,000        (500,000)      30,517,000      31,017,000        (500,000)      30,517,000       1,912,000  ..............
Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration..       2,607,000       3,016,000  ...............       3,016,000       3,016,000  ...............       3,016,000         409,000  ..............
Office of Banking and Financial Institutions..       2,694,000       2,637,000  ...............       2,637,000       2,637,000  ...............       2,637,000        (57,000)  ..............
Public Service Commission.....................       6,402,000       6,796,000  ...............       6,796,000       6,796,000  ...............       6,796,000         394,000  ..............
Office of People's Counsel....................       3,884,000       3,978,000  ...............       3,978,000       3,978,000       3,978,000           94,000  ..............
Department of Insurance and Securities               9,377,000       9,766,000  ...............       9,766,000       9,766,000  ...............       9,766,000         389,000  ..............
 Regulation...................................
Office of Cable Television and                       3,701,000       3,701,000        (528,000)       3,173,000       3,701,000        (528,000)       3,173,000  ..............  ..............
 Telecommunications...........................
                                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Economic Development and              231,895,000     267,376,000      (8,837,000)     258,539,000     267,376,000      (8,837,000)     258,539,000      25,848,000  ..............
       Regulation.............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 office of the deputy mayor of planning

       The Committee recommends $31,065,000 and 23 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $5,149,000 and 16 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, and $25,916,000 and 7 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the 
     Office of the Deputy Mayor of Planning for fiscal year 2003.


                           Office of Planning

       The Committee recommends $7,966,000 and 69 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $7,410,000 and 66 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, and $556,000 and 3 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds) for the 
     Office of Planning for fiscal year 2003.


                  Office of Local Business Development

       The Committee recommends $1,093,000 and 10 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office of Local 
     Business Development for fiscal year 2003.


                Office of Motion Pictures and Television

       The Committee recommends $574,000 and 5 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office of 
     Motion Pictures and Television for fiscal year 2003.


                            Office of Zoning

       The Committee recommends $2,527,000 and 17 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office of 
     Zoning for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Zoning provides administrative, professional, 
     and technical assistance to the Zoning Commission and the 
     Board of Zoning Adjustment in the maintenance and regulation 
     of zoning in the District of Columbia.


            Department of Housing and Community Development

       The bill includes $65,032,000 and 137 full-time equivalent 
     positions (including $7,002,000 and 12 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds, $42,168,000 and 125 full-time 
     equivalent positions from Federal funds, and $15,862,000 from 
     other funds) for the Department of Housing and Community 
     Development for fiscal year 2003.
       The Department of Housing and Community Development 
     facilitates the production and preservation of housing, and 
     community and economic development opportunities in 
     partnership with for-profit and nonprofit organizations by 
     leveraging Department dollars with other financing resources 
     in order to create and maintain stable neighborhoods and 
     retain and expand the District's tax base.


                   Department of Employment Services

       The Committee recommends $89,775,000 and 564 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $12,913,000 and 42 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $54,947,000 and 365 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds, and 
     $21,915,000 and 157 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the Department of Employment Services for fiscal 
     year 2003.
       The Department of Employment Services serves as the primary 
     vehicle for the District of Columbia to develop a world-class 
     work force and work environment that supports a sound, stable 
     economic foundation for families, individuals, and the 
     general community.


                      Board of Appeals and Review

       The Committee recommends $277,000 and 3 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Board of 
     Appeals and Review for fiscal year 2003.
       The Board of Appeals and Review hears citizen complaints 
     about adverse decisions on license revocations and civil 
     infractions from the Department of Consumer and Regulatory 
     Affairs; litter control violations from the Department of 
     Public Works; certificates of need, program reimbursements, 
     and providers agreements from the Department of Public 
     Health; and denials of security guard and private detective 
     agency licenses from the Metropolitan Police Department.


             Board of Real Property Assessments and Appeals

       The Committee recommends $347,000 and 3 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Board of Real 
     Property Assessments and Appeals for fiscal year 2003.
       The Board of Real Property Assessments and Appeals ensures 
     that properties in the District of Columbia are assessed at 
     100 percent of their estimated market value and equal to 
     properties similar in size and utility that share the same 
     tax burden.


             Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs

       The Committee recommends $30,517,000 and 397 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $27,061,000 and 364 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $3,456,000 and 33 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the 
     Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs for fiscal year 
     2003.
       The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs protects 
     the health, safety, and welfare of District residents through 
     the regulatory and compliance process of business activities, 
     occupational and professional services, land and building 
     use, and rental housing condominium conversion.


              Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration

       The bill includes $3,016,000 and 36 full-time equivalent 
     positions for the Alcoholic Beverage Regulation 
     Administration from other funds for fiscal year 2003.
       The Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration issues 
     beverage alcohol licenses to qualified applicants; educates 
     beverage alcohol establishments to prevent the sale of 
     beverage alcohol to minors; and investigates license 
     violations, adjudicates contested cases, and enforces 
     compliance with the District's beverage alcohol laws.


              Office of Banking and Financial Institutions

       The Committee recommends $2,637,000 and 27 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $200,000 from local funds and 
     $2,437,000 and 27 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the Office of Banking and Financial Institutions 
     for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Banking and Financial Institutions promotes a 
     climate in which financial institutions will organize to do 
     business in the District of Columbia and contribute to the 
     economic development of the District through the increased 
     availability of capital and credit, and expands advantageous 
     financial services to the public in a nondiscriminatory 
     manner.


                       Public Service Commission

       The Committee recommends $6,796,000 and 70 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $0 and 0 full-time equivalent 
     position from Federal funds and $125,000 and 2 full-time 
     equivalent positions from other funds) for the Public Service 
     Commission for fiscal year 2003.
       The Public Service Commission serves the public and the 
     District's interest by ensuring that natural gas, 
     electricity, and telecommunications services are safe, 
     reliable, and affordable for residential, business, and 
     government customers of the District of Columbia.


                       Office of People's Counsel

       The Committee recommends $3,978,000 and 33 full-time 
     equivalent positions from other funds for the Office of 
     People's Counsel for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of the People's Counsel seeks to advocate for 
     utility consumers of natural gas, electricity, and telephone 
     services in the District of Columbia before District and 
     Federal decision-making bodies.


           Department of Insurance and Securities Regulation

       The bill includes $9,766,000 and 103 full-time equivalent 
     positions from other funds for the Department of Insurance 
     and Securities Regulation for fiscal year 2003.
       The Department of Insurance and Securities Regulation 
     provides regulatory supervision of the insurance and 
     securities businesses for the protection of the people of the 
     District of Columbia.

[[Page 700]]




           Office of Cable Television and Telecommunications

       The Committee recommends $3,173,000 and 20 full-time 
     equivalent positions from other funds for the Office of Cable 
     Television and Telecommunications for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Cable Television and Telecommunications 
     regulates cable television services to District citizens, 
     provides citizen access to government hearings and 
     programming that addresses community issues, and coordinates 
     the city's telecommunications policy.

                       Public Safety and Justice

       The Committee recommends a total of $639,892,000 and 7,634 
     full-time equivalent positions for fiscal year 2003 for the 
     public safety activities funded through this appropriation.

                                                                                    PUBLIC SAFETY AND JUSTICE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                Fiscal year                                         Committee          Bill compared with--
                                               Fiscal year     Fiscal year                      2003 request      Committee                      recommendation --------------------------------
              Agency/activity                 2002 approved   2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-     recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year      Fiscal year
                                                                                                  District                                          District      2002 approved    2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metropolitan Police Department.............    $316,108,000    $322,995,000     ($3,973,000)    $319,022,000     $322,995,000      ($3,973,000)    $319,022,000       $6,887,000  ..............
Fire and Emergency Medical Services........     119,830,000     129,751,000  ...............     129,751,000      129,751,000   ...............     129,751,000        9,921,000  ..............
Police and Fire Retirement System..........      74,600,000      68,900,000  ...............      68,900,000       68,900,000   ...............      68,900,000      (5,700,000)  ..............
Office of the Corporation Counsel..........  ..............  ..............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Settlements and Judgments..................  ..............  ..............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Department of Corrections..................     111,532,000     105,914,000        (576,000)     105,338,000      105,914,000         (576,000)     105,338,000      (5,618,000)  ..............
National Guard.............................       2,823,000       2,896,000  ...............       2,896,000        2,896,000   ...............       2,896,000           73,000  ..............
Emergency Management Agency................       3,964,000       4,318,000  ...............       4,318,000        4,318,000   ...............       4,318,000          354,000  ..............
Commission on Judicial Disabilities and             172,000         190,000  ...............         190,000          190,000   ...............         190,000           18,000  ..............
 Tenure....................................
Judicial Nomination Commission.............          91,000         110,000  ...............         110,000          110,000   ...............         110,000           19,000  ..............
Office of Citizen Complaint Review.........       1,424,000       1,481,000  ...............       1,481,000        1,481,000   ...............       1,481,000           57,000  ..............
Advisory Commission on Sentencing..........         637,000         633,000  ...............         633,000          633,000   ...............         633,000          (4,000)  ..............
Office of the Chief Medical Examiner.......       6,812,000       6,544,000  ...............       6,544,000        6,544,000   ...............       6,544,000        (268,000)  ..............
Office of Administrative Hearings..........  ..............         300,000  ...............         300,000          300,000   ...............         300,000          300,000  ..............
Corrections Information Council............  ..............         240,000  ...............         240,000          240,000   ...............         240,000          240,000  ..............
Criminal Justice Coordinating Council......  ..............         169,000  ...............         169,000          169,000   ...............         169,000          169,000  ..............
                                            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Public Safety and Justice.....     637,993,000     644,441,000      (4,549,000)     639,892,000      644,441,000       (4,549,000)     639,892,000        6,448,000  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Metropolitan Police Department

       The Committee recommends $319,022,000 and 4,594 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $301,964,000 and 4,367 full-
     time equivalent positions from local funds, $9,605 and 202 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds, and 
     $7,453,000 and 25 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the Metropolitan Police Department for fiscal year 
     2003.
       The Metropolitan Police Department seeks to prevent crime 
     and the fear of crime, and to work with others to build safe 
     and healthy neighborhoods throughout the District of 
     Columbia.


                  Fire and Emergency Medical Services

       The Committee recommends $29,751,000 and 2,006 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Fire and 
     Emergency Medical Services for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the Fire and Emergency Medical Services 
     Department is to improve the quality of life for those who 
     live, work, visit, and conduct business in the District of 
     Columbia by preventing and extinguishing fires and providing 
     emergency medical, ambulance, and technical rescue.


                   Police and Fire Retirement System

       The bill includes $68,900,000 from local funds for the 
     Police and Fire Retirement System for fiscal year 2003.
       The Police and Fire Retirement System provides annuity 
     payments and other retirement and disability benefits for the 
     District Metropolitan Police and Fire Department retirees and 
     survivors.


                       Department of Corrections

       The Committee recommends $105,338,000 and 842 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $104,388,000 and 842 full-
     time equivalent positions from local funds and $950,000 and 0 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the 
     Department of Corrections for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the Department of Corrections is to ensure 
     public safety and uphold the public's trust by providing for 
     the safe and secure confinement of pretrial detainees and 
     sentenced inmates. The agency is completing the transition 
     from a State/county prison system to primarily a city/county 
     jail system in accordance with the National Capital 
     Revitalization Act.


                             National Guard

       The Committee recommends $2,896,000 and 43 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $2,390,000 and 30 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $506,000 and 13 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds) for the 
     National Guard for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the District of Columbia National Guard is 
     to protect life, property, and the interests of the District 
     of Columbia during civil emergencies and to serve as an 
     integral component of the Nation's military forces, when 
     activated.


                     Emergency Management Services

       The Committee recommends $4,318,000 and 39 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $3,100,000 and 26 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $1,218,000 and 13 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds for the 
     Emergency Management Services for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the District of Columbia Emergency 
     Management Services Agency is to reduce the loss of life and 
     property and protect citizens and institutions from all 
     hazards by administering a comprehensive community-based 
     emergency management program.


             Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure

       The Committee recommends $190,000 and 2 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Commission on 
     Judicial Disabilities and Tenure for fiscal year 2003.
       The Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure provides 
     for the preservation of an independent and fair judiciary by 
     making determinations concerning the discipline, involuntary 
     retirement, and reappointment of judges for the District of 
     Columbia Superior Court and the District of Columbia Court of 
     Appeals.


                     Judicial Nomination Commission

       The Committee recommends $110,000 and 1 full-time 
     equivalent position from local funds for the Judicial 
     Nomination Commission for fiscal year 2003.
       The Judicial Nomination Commission screens, selects, and 
     recommends nominees to the President of the United States to 
     fill judicial vacancies in the District of Columbia Superior 
     Court and the Court of Appeals.


                  Office of Civilian Complaint Review

       The Committee recommends $1,481,000 and 19 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office of 
     Citizens Complaint Review for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Citizens Complaint Review provides the public 
     with an independent and impartial forum for the review and 
     resolution of complaints against officers of the Metropolitan 
     Police Department and Special Police officers employed by the 
     District of Columbia government.


                   Advisory Commission on Sentencing

       The Committee recommends $633,000 and 6 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Advisory 
     Commission on Sentencing for fiscal year 2003.
       The Advisory Commission on Sentencing advises the District 
     of Columbia Council on issues relating to sentences imposed 
     for felonies committed within the District.


                  Office of the Chief Medical Examiner

       The Committee recommends $6,544,000 and 76 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $6,432,000 and 74 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $112,000 and 2 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the 
     Office of the Chief Medical Examiner for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner is 
     to investigate and certify all deaths in the District of 
     Columbia that occur by any means of violence (injury), and 
     those that occur unexpectedly, without medical attention, in 
     custody, or which pose a threat to the public health.


                   Office of Administrative Hearings

       The Committee recommends $300,000 and 2 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office of 
     Administrative Hearings for fiscal year 2003.


                    Corrections Information Council

       The Committee recommends $240,000 and 2 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Corrections 
     Information Council for fiscal year 2003.


                 Criminal Justice Coordinating Council

       The Committee recommends $169,000 and 2 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Criminal 
     Justice Coordinating Council for fiscal year 2003.

                        Public Education System

       A total of $1,220,201,000 and 11,900 full-time equivalent 
     positions is recommended for the

[[Page 701]]

     operation of the activities included within this 
     appropriation title.

                                                                                     PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Fiscal year                                       Committee          Bill compared with--
                                             Fiscal year 2002    Fiscal year                     2003 request      Committee                     recommendation --------------------------------
              Agency/activity                    approved       2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-   recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year      Fiscal year
                                                                                                   District                                         District      2002 approved    2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Schools.............................      $847,074,000    $938,422,000    ($35,265,000)    $903,157,000    $938,422,000    ($35,265,000)    $903,157,000      $91,348,000  ..............
Teachers' Retirement System................  ................  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
State Education Office.....................        47,850,000      50,171,000        (484,000)      49,687,000      50,171,000        (484,000)      49,687,000        2,321,000  ..............
D.C. Resident Tuition System...............  ................  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
District of Columbia Charter Schools.......       142,257,000     132,865,000  ...............     132,865,000     132,865,000  ...............     132,865,000      (9,392,000)  ..............
University of the District of Columbia.....        85,341,000      93,296,000      (9,306,000)      83,990,000      93,296,000      (9,306,000)      83,990,000        7,955,000  ..............
Public Library.............................        27,256,000      28,430,000        (280,000)      28,150,000      28,430,000        (280,000)      28,150,000        1,174,000  ..............
Commission on the Arts and Humanities......         2,236,000       2,390,000         (38,000)       2,352,000       2,390,000         (38,000)       2,352,000          154,000  ..............
Public Charter School Revolving Loan Fund..  ................  ..............  ...............  ..............      20,000,000  ...............      20,000,000       20,000,000     $20,000,000
                                            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Public Education System.......     1,152,014,000   1,245,574,000     (45,373,000)   1,200,201,000   1,265,574,000     (45,373,000)   1,220,201,000      113,560,000      20,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Public Schools

       The Committee recommends $903,157,000 and 10,466 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $743,715,000 and 9,821 full-
     time equivalent positions from local funds, $147,800,000 and 
     506 full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds and 
     $11,642,000 and 119 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the public school system for fiscal year 2003
       The District of Columbia Public Schools seeks to make 
     dramatic improvements in the achievement of all students 
     today in preparation for their world tomorrow.


                         State Education Office

       The Committee recommends $49,687,000 and 43 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $22,594,000 and 33 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $26,917,000 and 10 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds and 
     $176,000 and 0 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the State Education Office for fiscal year 2003.
       The District of Columbia State Education Office seeks to 
     enhance the administrative efficiency of State-level 
     education functions and ensure the equitable distribution of 
     educational resources.


                  District of Columbia Charter Schools

       The bill includes $132,865,000 from local funds for the 
     District of Columbia Charter Schools for fiscal year 2003.
       The District of Columbia Charter Schools provide an 
     alternative free education for students who reside in the 
     District of Columbia.


                 University of the District of Columbia

       The Committee recommends $83,990,000 and 972 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $52,272,000 and 541 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $12,688,000 and 171 
     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds, and 
     $19,050,000 and 260 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the University of the District of Columbia for 
     fiscal year 2003.
       The University of the District of Columbia is an urban land 
     grant institution of higher education with an open admissions 
     policy.


                             Public Library

       The Committee recommends $28,150,000 and 430 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $27,003,000 and 421 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $610,000 and 9 full-
     time equivalent positions from Federal funds, and $537,000 
     and 0 full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for 
     the Public Library for fiscal year 2003.
       The District of Columbia Public Library provides 
     environments that invite reading, learning, and community 
     discussion; trained staff and technology to help in finding, 
     evaluating, and using information; and opportunities for 
     children, teenagers, adults, and senior citizens to learn to 
     read and use information resources for personal growth and 
     development.


                 Commission on the Arts and Humanities

       The bill includes $2,352,000 and 9 full-time equivalent 
     positions (including $1,757,000 and 2 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds, $475,000 and 7 full-time 
     equivalent positions from Federal funds and $120,000 from 
     other funds) for the Commission on the Arts and Humanities 
     for fiscal year 2003.
       The Commission on the Arts and Humanities was created to 
     enrich the quality of life for the residents of the District 
     of Columbia through the arts and humanities.


                       Charter School Facilities

       The Committee recommends a Federal Payment of $20,000,000 
     to the District of Columbia for expansion of charter school 
     facilities in the District of Columbia and the reorganization 
     of the ``New Charter School Fund''.

                         Human Support Services

       A total of $2,500,297,000 and 7,378 full-time equivalent 
     positions is recommended for the departments and agencies 
     funded through this appropriation title.

                                                                                     HUMAN SUPPORT SERVICES
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Fiscal year                                       Committee          Bill compared with--
                                                Fiscal year      Fiscal year                     2003 request      Committee                     recommendation --------------------------------
               Agency/activity                 2002 approved    2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-   recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year      Fiscal year
                                                                                                   District                                         District      2002 approved    2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Human Services................     $419,314,000    $448,015,000     ($6,608,000)    $441,407,000    $448,015,000     ($6,608,000)    $441,407,000      $28,701,000  ..............
Child and Family Services Agency............  ...............     211,912,000      (9,778,000)     202,134,000     211,912,000      (9,778,000)     202,134,000      211,912,000  ..............
Department of Mental Health.................  ...............     227,663,000  ...............     227,663,000     227,663,000  ...............     227,663,000      227,663,000  ..............
Department of Health........................    1,295,196,000   1,474,909,000      (6,774,000)   1,468,135,000   1,474,909,000      (6,774,000)   1,468,135,000      179,713,000  ..............
Department of Parks and Recreation..........       35,615,000      42,770,000      (7,157,000)      35,613,000      42,770,000      (7,157,000)      35,613,000        7,155,000  ..............
Office on Aging.............................       19,915,000      20,787,000        (280,000)      20,507,000      20,787,000        (280,000)      20,507,000          872,000  ..............
Public Benefit Corporation Subsidy..........  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
PBC Transition..............................  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Unemployment Compensation Fund..............        8,200,000       6,199,000  ...............       6,199,000       6,199,000  ...............       6,199,000      (2,001,000)  ..............
Disability Compensation Fund................       28,086,000      27,959,000  ...............      27,959,000      27,959,000  ...............      27,959,000        (127,000)  ..............
Office of Human Rights......................        1,651,000       2,179,000  ...............       2,179,000       2,179,000  ...............       2,179,000          528,000  ..............
Office on Latino Affairs....................        2,879,000       4,069,000        (813,000)       3,256,000       4,069,000        (813,000)       3,256,000        1,190,000  ..............
D.C. Energy Office..........................        5,177,000       6,017,000         (92,000)       5,925,000       6,017,000         (92,000)       5,925,000          840,000  ..............
Children and Youth Investment Fund..........  ...............       5,000,000  ...............       5,000,000       5,000,000  ...............       5,000,000        5,000,000  ..............
Brownfield Remediation......................  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Section 103 Payment.........................  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Office on Asian and Pacific Affairs.........          207,000         213,000  ...............         213,000         213,000  ...............         213,000            6,000  ..............
Office of Veterans Affairs..................          230,000         240,000  ...............         240,000         240,000  ...............         240,000           10,000  ..............
Medicaid Reserve............................  ...............      49,867,000  ...............      49,867,000      49,867,000  ...............      49,867,000       49,867,000  ..............
Family Literacy Program.....................  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............       4,000,000  ...............       4,000,000        4,000,000      $4,000,000
                                             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Human Support Services.........    1,816,470,000   2,527,799,000     (31,502,000)   2,496,297,000   2,531,799,000     (31,502,000)   2,500,297,000      715,329,000       4,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Department of Human Services

       The Committee recommends $441,407,000 and 2,051 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $208,054,000 and 969 full-
     time equivalent positions from local funds, $231,567,000 and 
     1,082 full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds and 
     $1,786,000 from other funds) for the Department of Human 
     Services for fiscal year 2003.
       The Department of Human Services provides comprehensive 
     quality human services and develops social service policies 
     and programs to foster the rehabilitation and self-
     sufficiency of District residents.


                          Department of Health

       An appropriation of $1,468,135,000 and 1,396 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $457,419,000 and 472 full-
     time equivalent positions from local funds, $982,542,000 and 
     822 full-time equivalent positions from Federal

[[Page 702]]

     funds, and $28,174,000 and 102 full-time equivalent positions 
     from other funds) are recommended for the Department of 
     Health for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the Department of Health is to assure 
     equitable access to comprehensive high quality public health 
     services to all District of Columbia residents and visitors 
     and undertake activities that will support the highest 
     quality of life achievable for District residents and 
     visitors.


                    Child and Family Services Agency

       The Committee recommends $202,134,000 and 920 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $119,680,000 and 610 full-
     time equivalent positions from local funds, and $81,804,000 
     and 310 full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds) 
     for the Child and Family Services Agency for fiscal year 
     2003.
       The mission of the Child and Family Services Agency is to 
     protect and promote the health and well-being of the children 
     of the District of Columbia through public and private 
     partnerships focused on strengthening and preserving families 
     with services that ensure cultural competence, accountability 
     and professional integrity.


                      Department of Mental Health

       The Committee recommends $227,663,000 and 2,161 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $141,234,000 and 1,501 full-
     time equivalent positions from local funds, and $67,100,000 
     and 638 full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds, 
     and $19,329,000 and 22 full-time equivalent positions from 
     other funds) for the Department of Mental Health for fiscal 
     year 2003.
       The Department of Mental Health seeks to provide mental 
     health services to children, youth, adults and their families 
     and develop and retain a highly qualified workforce and to 
     facilitate organizational effectiveness.


                   Department of Parks and Recreation

       The Committee recommends $35,613,000 and 741 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $33,257,000 and 658 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $0 from Federal funds, 
     and $2,356,000 and 83 full-time equivalent positions from 
     other funds) for the Department of Parks and Recreation for 
     fiscal year 2003.
       The Department of Parks and Recreation seeks to enhance the 
     physical, mental, and social well-being of our children, 
     youth, families, and individuals by providing quality, 
     customer-focused leisure and recreation services in 
     environmentally protected parks and safe, attractive 
     facilities.


                            Office on Aging

       The Committee recommends $20,507,000 and 23 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $14,747,000 and 14 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, $5,760,000 and 9 full-
     time equivalent positions from Federal funds) for the Office 
     on Aging for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office on Aging advocates, plans, implements, and 
     monitors programs in health, education, employment, and 
     social services to promote longevity, independence, dignity, 
     and choice for the District's senior citizens.


                     Unemployment Compensation Fund

       A total of $6,199,000 from local funds is recommended for 
     the Unemployment Compensation Fund for fiscal year 2003.
       The Unemployment Compensation Fund seeks to provide 
     unemployment compensation benefits to former District 
     government employees during periods of unemployment that are 
     a result of separation through no fault of their own.


                      Disability Compensation Fund

       A total of $27,959,000 from local funds is recommended for 
     the Disability Compensation Fund for fiscal year 2003.
       The Disability Compensation Fund aims to proactively 
     integrate managed care principles with rehabilitation 
     expertise in order to safely return employees to work, as 
     soon as possible, reduce costs, and manage issues created by 
     employees' work related injuries and/or illnesses.


                         Office of Human Rights

       The Committee recommends $2,179,000 and 35 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $2,073,000 and 35 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $106,000 from 
     Federal funds) for the Office of Human Rights for fiscal year 
     2003.
       The mission of the Office of Human Rights is to mediate, 
     investigate, conciliate, prosecute, and address illegal 
     discriminatory practices in employment, housing and 
     commercial space, public accommodations, and educational 
     institutions.


                        Office on Latino Affairs

       The Committee recommends $3,256,000 and 12 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office on 
     Latino Affairs for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office on Latino Affairs ensures that a full range of 
     health, education, employment, and social services are 
     available to the Latino community in the District of 
     Columbia.


                             Energy Office

       The bill includes $5,925,000 and 33 full-time equivalent 
     positions (including $432,000 and 3 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds, $4,801,000 and 21 full-time 
     equivalent positions from Federal funds and $692,000 and 9 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the 
     Energy Office for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the Energy Office is to help improve the 
     District's quality of life and economic competitiveness by 
     making the District of Columbia energy efficient. The Energy 
     Office also helps low-income residents by providing energy 
     assistance and conservation services.


              Office on Asian and Pacific Islander Affairs

       The Committee recommends $213,000 and 3 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Office on Asian 
     and Pacific Islander Affairs for fiscal year 2002. The Office 
     of Asian and Pacific Islander Affairs seeks to ensure that a 
     full range of health, education, employment and social 
     services are available to the Asian and Pacific Island 
     community in the District of Columbia.


                      Office of Veterans' Affairs

       A total of $240,000 and 3 full-time equivalent positions 
     from local funds is recommended for the Office of Veterans' 
     Affairs for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Veterans' Affairs seeks to advocate for 
     veterans and their dependents in obtaining their rights, 
     privileges and benefits; provides mandatory counsel and 
     assistance to veterans and their dependents in acquiring 
     Veterans Administration benefits and privileges.


                     Children Youth Investment Fund

       The Committee recommends $5,000,000 and 0 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Children Youth 
     Investment Fund for fiscal year 2003.


                            Medicaid Reserve

       The Committee recommends $49,867,000 and 0 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds for the Children Youth 
     Investment Fund for fiscal year 2003.


                        Family Literacy Program

       The Committee recommends $4,000,000 from Federal funds, 
     appropriated earlier in this Act, to the District of Columbia 
     for the Family Literacy Program to address the needs of 
     literacy-challenged parents while endowing their children 
     with an appreciation for literacy and strengthening familial 
     ties.

                              Public Works

       A total of $324,828,000 and 1,601 full-time equivalent 
     positions is recommended for fiscal year 2002 for activities 
     funded through this appropriation.

                                                                                          PUBLIC WORKS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Fiscal year                                       Committee         Bill compared with--
                                                  Fiscal year     Fiscal year                     2003 request      Committee                     recommendation -------------------------------
                Agency/activity                  2002 approved   2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-   recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year     Fiscal year
                                                                                                    District                                         District      2002 approved   2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Public Works....................  ..............    $107,777,000    ($16,248,000)     $91,529,000    $107,777,000    ($16,248,000)     $91,529,000    $107,777,000  ..............
Department of Transportation..................    $127,266,000      34,687,000        (201,000)      34,486,000      34,687,000        (201,000)      34,486,000    (92,579,000)  ..............
Department of Motor Vehicles..................      33,580,000      39,558,000  ...............      39,558,000      39,558,000  ...............      39,558,000       5,978,000  ..............
D.C. Taxicab Commission.......................       1,442,000       1,534,000  ...............       1,534,000       1,534,000  ...............       1,534,000          92,000  ..............
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit                    83,000          90,000  ...............          90,000          90,000  ...............          90,000           7,000  ..............
 Commission...................................
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority     148,622,000     154,531,000  ...............     154,531,000     154,531,000  ...............     154,531,000       5,909,000  ..............
 (Metro)......................................
School Transit Subsidy........................       3,100,000       3,100,000  ...............       3,100,000       3,100,000  ...............       3,100,000  ..............  ..............
                                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Public Works.....................     314,093,000     341,277,000     (16,449,000)     324,828,000     341,277,000     (16,449,000)     324,828,000      27,184,000  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Department of Public Works

       The Committee recommends the appropriation of $91,529,000 
     and 1,099 full-time equivalent positions (including 
     $89,287,000 and 1,059 full-time equivalent positions from 
     local funds, $0 and 0 full-time equivalent positions from 
     Federal funds, and $2,242,000 and 40 full-time equivalent 
     positions from other funds) for the Department of Public 
     Works for fiscal year 2003.
       The Department of Public Works seeks to help improve the 
     quality of life in the District of Columbia and enhance the 
     District's ability to compete for residents, business, 
     tourism and trade.


                      Department of Transportation

       The Committee recommends $34,486,000 and 130 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $29,157,000 and 123 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds, and $4,669,000 and 0

[[Page 703]]

     full-time equivalent positions from Federal funds, and 
     $660,000 and 7 full-time equivalent positions from other 
     funds) for the Department of Transportation for fiscal year 
     2003.


                      Department of Motor Vehicles

       The bill includes $39,558,000 and 353 full-time equivalent 
     positions (including $32,852 and 256 full-time equivalent 
     positions from local funds and $6,706 and 97 full-time 
     equivalent positions from other funds) for the Department of 
     Motor Vehicles for fiscal year 2003.
       The Department of Motor Vehicles develops, administers, and 
     enforces the vehicular laws of the District of Columbia and 
     promotes a safe, environmentally clean, and economically 
     vibrant community.


                        D.C. Taxicab Commission

       The Committee recommends $1,534,000 and 19 full-time 
     equivalent positions (including $817,000 and 16 full-time 
     equivalent positions from local funds and $717,000 and 3 
     full-time equivalent positions from other funds) for the D.C. 
     Taxicab Commission for fiscal year 2003. The D.C. Taxicab 
     Commission ensures that the public receives safe and reliable 
     taxicab and other transportation services.


            Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission

       The Committee recommends $90,000 from local funds for the 
     Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission for fiscal 
     year 2003.
       The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission helps 
     to assure that the public is provided passenger 
     transportation services by licensing fit and financially 
     responsible, privately owned, for-hire carriers to serve the 
     region.


             Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

       The Committee recommends $154,531,000 from local funds for 
     the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority for fiscal 
     year 2003.
       The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority ensures 
     safe, convenient, and cost-effective transit service within 
     the District of Columbia and throughout the Washington 
     metropolitan region.


                         School Transit Subsidy

       The Committee recommends $3,100,000 from local funds for 
     the School Transit Subsidy for fiscal year 2003.
       The School Transit Subsidy ensures the safe passage of 
     school children by subsidizing Metrobus and Metrorail 
     ridership for eligible D.C. students.

                         Receivership Programs

       There are no agencies in receivership in the District of 
     Columbia in fiscal year 2003.

                                                                                      RECEIVERSHIP PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Fiscal year                                       Committee          Bill compared with--
                                                 Fiscal year     Fiscal year                     2003 request      Committee                     recommendation --------------------------------
               Agency/activity                  2002 approved   2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-   recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year      Fiscal year
                                                                                                   District                                         District      2002 approved    2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child and Family Services Agency.............    $188,891,000  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............   ($188,891,000)  ..............
Incentives for Adoption of Children..........  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Department of Mental Health..................     227,569,000  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............    (227,569,000)  ..............
Corrections Medical Receiver.................  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
                                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Receivership Programs...........     416,460,000  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............    (416,460,000)  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Financing and Other Uses

       The Committee recommends a total of $529,552,000 from local 
     funds for the following appropriation titles.

                                                                                    FINANCING AND OTHER USES
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                 Committee            Bill compared with--
                                       Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003     Intra-    Fiscal year 2003      Committee                       recommendation  ----------------------------------
           Agency/activity                 approved           request        District     request less     recommendation    Intra-District     less intra-    Fiscal year 2002    Fiscal year
                                                                                         intra-District                                          District          approved        2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserve..............................     $120,000,000       $70,000,000   ...........      $70,000,000       $70,000,000   ...............      $70,000,000      ($50,000,000)  ...............
Reserve Relief.......................       30,000,000   ................  ...........  ................  ................  ...............  ................      (30,000,000)  ...............
DC Financial Authority...............  ................  ................  ...........  ................  ................  ...............  ................  ................  ...............
Repayment of Loans and Interest......      247,902,000       267,451,000   ...........      267,451,000       267,451,000   ...............      267,451,000         19,549,000  ...............
Repayment of General Fund Recovery          39,300,000        39,300,000   ...........       39,300,000        39,300,000   ...............       39,300,000   ................  ...............
 Debt................................
Payment of Interest on Short-Term              500,000         1,000,000   ...........        1,000,000         1,000,000   ...............        1,000,000            500,000  ...............
 Borrowing...........................
Presidential Inauguration............  ................  ................  ...........  ................  ................  ...............  ................  ................  ...............
Certificates of Participation........  ................        7,950,000   ...........        7,950,000         7,950,000   ...............        7,950,000          7,950,000  ...............
Settlements and Judgements...........  ................       22,822,000   ...........       22,822,000        22,822,000   ...............       22,822,000         22,822,000  ...............
Wilson Building......................        8,859,000         4,194,000   ...........        4,194,000         4,194,000   ...............        4,194,000        (4,665,000)  ...............
Workforce Investments................       42,896,000        54,186,000   ...........       54,186,000        54,186,000   ...............       54,186,000         11,290,000  ...............
Tobacco Settlement Trust Fund               33,254,000        10,000,000   ...........       10,000,000        10,000,000   ...............       10,000,000       (23,254,000)  ...............
 Transfer Payment--Emergency Reserve
 Fund Transfer.......................
Non-Department Agency................        5,799,000         5,799,000   ...........        5,799,000         5,799,000   ...............        5,799,000   ................  ...............
Emergency Preparedness...............       16,058,000        15,000,000   ...........       15,000,000        15,000,000   ...............       15,000,000        (1,058,000)  ...............
Pay-As-You-Go Capital................  ................         16750000   ...........       16,750,000          16750000   ...............       16,750,000         16,750,000  ...............
Capital Infrastructure Development...  ................  ................  ...........  ................       15,100,000   ...............       15,100,000         15,100,000      $15,100,000
                                      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Financing and Other Uses      544,568,000       514,452,000   ...........      514,452,000       529,552,000   ...............      529,552,000       (15,016,000)       15,100,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Workforce Investments

       The Committee recommends $54,186,000 from local funds for 
     fiscal year 2003. The workforce investments include the 
     estimated fiscal impact of compensation increases for fiscal 
     year 2001 and fiscal year 2002 for all District employees, 
     union and nonunion.

                                Reserve

       The Committee recommends $70,000,000 from local funds for 
     replacement of funds expended, if any, during fiscal year 
     2001 from the Budgeted Reserve established by section 202(j) 
     of the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and 
     Management Assistance Act of 1995, Public Law 104-8.

                    Repayment of Loans and Interest

       The bill includes $267,451,000 from local funds for debt 
     service costs on long-term general obligation bonds, which 
     are associated with the District's borrowings to finance 
     capital project expenditures of general fund agencies.

                Repayment of General Fund Recovery Debt

       The Committee recommends $39,300,000 from local funds for 
     Repayment of General Fund Recovery Debt for fiscal year 2003. 
     The Repayment of General Fund Recovery Debt represents debt 
     service associated with financing the District's $331,589,000 
     accumulated general fund deficit, as of end of fiscal year 
     1990.

              Payment of Interest on Short-Term Borrowing

       The Committee recommends $1,000,000 from local funds for 
     the payment of interest and costs associated with borrowings 
     to meet short-term seasonal cash needs.

                            Wilson Building

       The bill includes $4,194,000 from local funds for rent and 
     security at the John A. Wilson Building.

                     Certificates of Participation

       The Committee recommends $7,950,000 from local funds to be 
     used for principal and interest payments on the District's 
     Certificates of Participation, issued to finance the ground 
     lease underlying the building located at One Judiciary 
     Square.

                       Settlements and Judgments

       The Committee recommends $22,822,000 from local funds to be 
     used for making refunds and for the payment of legal 
     settlements or judgments that have been entered against the 
     District of Columbia government.

             Tobacco Settlement Trust Fund Transfer Payment

       The Committee recommends $50,867,000 for the Tobacco 
     Settlement Trust Fund established pursuant to section 2302 of 
     the Tobacco Settlement Trust Fund Establishment Act of 1999 
     (D.C. Official Code, sec. 7-1811.01) and the Tobacco 
     Settlement Financing Act

[[Page 704]]

     of 2000, effective October 19, 2000 (D.C. Law 13-172; D.C. 
     Official Code, sec. 7-1831.03 et seq.). The Committee 
     recommends that no more than $27,000,000 is authorized to be 
     transferred to the Public Education System and that no more 
     than $23,867,000 is authorized to be transferred to Human 
     Support Services.

                         Emergency Preparedness

       The Committee recommends $15,000,000 from Federal funds 
     appropriated earlier in this Act under the heading ``Federal 
     Payment for Emergency Preparedness and Security Costs in the 
     District of Columbia,'' to reimburse the District of Columbia 
     for the costs of public safety expenses related to security 
     events in the District of Columbia. The further Committee 
     recommends that the Chief Financial Officer of the District 
     of Columbia shall provide a report, within 15 days of 
     expenditure, to the President and to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, detailing any expenditure of these funds for 
     public safety purposes.

                         Pay-As-You-Go Capital

       The Committee recommends $16,750,000 for Pay-As-You-Go 
     Capital funds in lieu of capital financing, to be transferred 
     to the Capital Fund, subject to the ``Criteria for Spending 
     Pay-as-You-Go Funding Amendment Act of 2002, approved by the 
     Council of the District of Columbia on 1st reading, May 7, 
     2002 (Title 34 of Bill 14-609).

                   Capital Infrastructure Development

       The Committee recommends $13,100,000 from Federal funds, 
     appropriated earlier in this Act, to the District of Columbia 
     for improvement of city-wide capital infrastructure. The 
     Committee recommends the following allocation of these funds: 
     $10,000,000 for construction of the Unified Communications 
     Center; $100,000 for capital improvements of Eastern Market; 
     and $3,000,000 for a state-of-the-art forensics laboratory.

                Emergency and Contingency Reserve Funds

       The Committee recommends that the Mayor deposit from local 
     funds the proceeds required pursuant to Section 159(a) of 
     Public Law 106-522 and Section 404(c) of Public Law 106-554 
     in the Emergency and Contingency Reserve Funds in fiscal year 
     2003 consistent with the requirements established in Section 
     450A(b) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (Public Law 
     93-198; D.C. Official Code. sec. 1-204.50a(b)).

                            Non-Departmental

       The Committee recommends $5,799,000 from local funds for 
     the non-departmental agency for fiscal year 2003. The non-
     departmental agency is a financial entity designed to account 
     for costs that cannot be allocated to specific agencies 
     during the development of the proposed budget.

                       Administrative Provisions

       The Committee recommends various administrative provisions 
     requested by the District of Columbia, as follows:
       The Committee recommends a modification to the 
     administration of the New Charter School Fund in the District 
     of Columbia. The New Charter School fund was established in 
     Public Law 106-100, the fiscal year 1998 District of Columbia 
     Appropriations Act, as a fund for new public charter schools, 
     comprised of unexpended and unobligated amounts appropriated 
     from local funds for public charter schools. The purpose of 
     the New Charter School Fund is to assist existing or new 
     charter schools meet start-up or operating costs. The 
     modifications recommended by the Committee will cap the fund 
     at $10,000,000, transfer $5,000,000 to the Charter School 
     Credit Enhancement Fund, and rename the fund the ``Charter 
     School Fund''. In addition, the purpose for these funds shall 
     be to supplement the operating costs of charter schools whose 
     total audited enrollment exceeds the student enrollment in 
     which the annual appropriation is based in that fiscal year.
       The Committee recommends a modification to the 
     administration of the New Charter School Fund in the District 
     of Columbia. The New Charter School Fund was established in 
     Public Law 106-100, the fiscal year 1998 District of Columbia 
     Appropriations Act, as a fund for new public charter schools, 
     comprised of unexpended and unobligated amounts appropriated 
     from local funds for public charter schools. The purpose of 
     the New Charter School Fund is to assist existing or new 
     charter schools meet start-up or operating costs. The 
     modifications recommended by the Committee will cap the fund 
     at $10,000,000, transfer $5,000,000 to the Charter School 
     Credit Enhancement Fund, and rename the fund the ``Charter 
     School Fund''. In addition, the purpose for these funds shall 
     be to supplement the operating costs of charter schools whose 
     total audited enrollment exceeds the student enrollment in 
     which the annual appropriation is based in that fiscal year.

                            ENTERPRISE FUNDS

       The Committee recommends a total of $669,914,000 from other 
     funds for the activities funded through these appropriation 
     titles.

                                                                                        ENTERPRISE FUNDS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Fiscal year                                       Committee          Bill compared with--
                                                 Fiscal year     Fiscal year                     2003 request      Committee                     recommendation --------------------------------
               Agency/activity                  2002 approved   2003 request    Intra-District    less intra-   recommendation   Intra-District    less intra-     Fiscal year      Fiscal year
                                                                                                   District                                         District      2002 approved    2003 request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water and Sewer Authority....................    $244,978,000    $253,743,000  ...............    $253,743,000    $253,743,000  ...............    $253,743,000       $8,765,000  ..............
Washington Aqueduct..........................      46,510,000      57,847,000  ...............      57,847,000      57,847,000  ...............      57,847,000       11,337,000  ..............
Stormwater Permit Compliance.................       3,100,000       3,100,000  ...............       3,100,000       3,100,000  ...............       3,100,000  ...............  ..............
Lottery and Charitable Games Control Board...     229,688,000     232,881,000  ...............     232,881,000     232,881,000  ...............     232,881,000        3,193,000  ..............
Sports and Entertainment Commission..........       9,627,000      15,510,000  ...............      15,510,000      20,510,000  ...............      20,510,000       10,883,000      $5,000,000
Public Benefit Corporation (D.C. General)....  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Retirement Board.............................      13,388,000      13,388,000  ...............      13,388,000      13,388,000  ...............      13,388,000  ...............  ..............
Correctional Industries......................  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............  ...............  ..............
Washington Convention Center.................      57,278,000      78,700,000  ...............      78,700,000      78,700,000  ...............      78,700,000       21,422,000  ..............
Housing Finance Agency.......................       4,711,000  ..............  ...............  ..............  ..............  ...............  ..............      (4,711,000)  ..............
National Capital Revitalization Corporation..       2,673,000       6,745,000  ...............       6,745,000       6,745,000  ...............       6,745,000        4,072,000  ..............
                                              --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Enterprise Funds................     611,953,000     661,914,000  ...............     661,914,000     669,914,000  ...............     669,914,000       57,961,000       8,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Water and Sewer Authority

       The Committee recommends $253,743,000 from other funds for 
     fiscal year 2003 for the Water and Sewer Authority.
       The Water and Sewer Authority delivers reliable potable 
     water and wastewater collection services to the residents of 
     the District of Columbia, and wastewater treatment services 
     that are essential for public health and safety for the 
     District.

Federal Payment for Anacostia Waterfront Initiative in the District of 
                                Columbia

       The Committee recommends $50,000,000 from Federal funds, 
     appropriated earlier in this Act as under the heading 
     ``Federal Payment for Anacostia Waterfront Initiative in the 
     District of Columbia'', to be for the District of Columbia 
     Water and Sewer Authority for the Combined Sewer Overflow 
     Long-Term Control Plan, to be used for system design and 
     upgrades. The District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority 
     will provide a 100 percent match for the fiscal year 2003 
     Federal contribution.

                          Washington Aqueduct

       The bill includes $57,847,000 from other funds for the 
     Washington Aqueduct for fiscal year 2003.
       The Washington Aqueduct collects, purifies, and pumps an 
     adequate supply of potable water to the District of Columbia, 
     Arlington County, and the City of Falls Church, Virginia.

                      Stormwater Permit Compliance

       The Committee recommends $3,100,000 from other funds for 
     Stormwater Permit Compliance for fiscal year 2003.
       The Stormwater Permit Compliance is responsible for 
     ensuring compliance with EPA requirements under the 
     District's storm water permit issued in April 2000.

                   Lottery and Charitable Games Board

       The Committee recommends $232,881,000 and 100 full-time 
     equivalent positions from other funds for the Lottery and 
     Charitable Games Board for fiscal year 2003.
       The Lottery and Charitable Games Board generates revenues 
     for the general fund and regulates charitable games in order 
     to support programs and services for the residents of the 
     District of Columbia.

                  Sports and Entertainment Commission

       The Committee recommends $20,510,000 from other funds for 
     the Sports and Entertainment Commission for fiscal year 2003.
       The Sports and Entertainment Commission improves the 
     quality of life and enhances economic development in the 
     District by operating RFK Stadium, managing the non-military 
     functions of the D.C. National Guard Armory, promoting the 
     District as venue for sports and entertainment activities, 
     and supporting youth recreational activities. The Committee 
     recommends $5,000,000 from Federal funds, appropriated 
     earlier in this Act as under the heading ``Federal Payment 
     for Anacostia Waterfront Initiative in the District of 
     Columbia'', to be used for environmental and infrastructure

[[Page 705]]

     costs related to the ongoing development of parks and 
     recreation on the Anacostia River.

                 District of Columbia Retirement Board

       The Committee recommends $13,388,000 and 14 full-time 
     equivalent positions from other funds for the District of 
     Columbia Retirement Board for fiscal year 2003.
       The mission of the District of Columbia Retirement Board is 
     to invest, control, and manage the assets of the D.C. 
     Teachers' Retirement System and the D.C. Police Officers' and 
     Fire Fighters' Retirement System.

                      Washington Convention Center

       The Committee recommends $78,700,000 from other funds for 
     the Washington Convention Center for fiscal year 2003.
       The Washington Convention Center plans to expand the 
     revenue base of the District by promoting and hosting large 
     national and international conventions and trade shows that 
     bring hundreds of thousands of out-of-town delegates, 
     exhibitors, and businesses to Washington, D.C.; and to 
     provide expanded employment and business opportunities for 
     residents of the District.

              National Capital Revitalization Corporation

       The Committee recommends $6,745,000 from other funds for 
     the National Capital Revitalization Corporation for fiscal 
     year 2003.
       The mission of the National Capital Revitalization 
     Corporation is to spur economic development throughout the 
     District of Columbia primarily in neighborhoods of need.

                             CAPITAL OUTLAY

       The Committee recommends a net increase of $981,527,780 for 
     fiscal years 2002-2007 of which, $639,069,780 is for general 
     capital projects in the District of Columbia and $342,458,000 
     is for the Water and Sewer Authority.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                                              Fiscal year 2002-  recommendation
                                                                                2007 estimate    for fiscal year
                                                                                                    2002-2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Property Management:
    D.C. Armory.............................................................       -$5,000,000       -$5,000,000
    Georgia Avenue Revitalization...........................................           800,000           800,000
    D.C. Warehouse--Electrical Upgrade......................................           960,000           960,000
    D.C. Warehouse--Fire Suppression........................................           480,000           480,000
    Asbestos Abatement @ Var District Bldgs.................................          -525,000          -525,000
    Condition Assessment of District Owned B................................          -159,080          -159,080
    Renov. Old Juvenile Ct Bldg.............................................        -3,700,000        -3,700,000
    Renovate Old Juvenile Court Building....................................          -300,103          -300,103
    Recorder of Deeds--Complete Modernization...............................           160,000           160,000
    Renovate Tivoli Theater.................................................           600,000           600,000
    DMV Facility............................................................        -1,100,000        -1,100,000
    Government Centers St Elizabeth Hospital................................          -506,000          -506,000
    Improve Property Mgt System (ITS).......................................        -4,897,000        -4,897,000
    Park Road Police Substation.............................................          -500,000          -500,000
    Government Centers--New DOES/DHS facility...............................        11,500,000        11,500,000
    Government Centers--Ancostia Gateway (FEMS).............................         2,500,000         2,500,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Office of Property Management..................................           312,817           312,817
                                                                             ===================================
Office of the Chief Financial Officer:
    Facility Consolidation--Site Acquisition................................        18,000,000        18,000,000
    CAPPS...................................................................        -7,408,000        -7,408,000
    Fin. Con. Sys. Imp.--Budget System Module...............................         6,365,000         6,365,000
    DW (ARTI/OAO) Implementation--Infrastructure Improvements...............         7,350,000         7,350,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Chief Financial Officer..........................        24,307,000        24,307,000
                                                                             ===================================
Office of Planning: Public Planning Funds--Initial Project Development Funds         3,650,000         3,650,000
                                                                             ===================================
Office of Zoning: Former Council Chambers Build-Out.........................           350,000           350,000
                                                                             ===================================
Commission on the Arts:
    Public Arts Fund--Downtown Initiatives..................................           165,000           165,000
    Public Arts Fund--Mt. Vernon Sq.........................................           276,691           276,691
    Public Arts Fund--East of the River Projects............................           151,000           151,000
    Public Arts Fund--Avalon Theater........................................            50,000            50,000
    Public Arts Fund--Takoma Theater........................................            50,000            50,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Commission on the Arts.........................................           692,691           692,691
                                                                             ===================================
Office of Aging:
    Ward 1 Senior Wellness Center...........................................        -1,000,000        -1,000,000
    Ward 2 Senior Wellness Center...........................................        -1,000,000        -1,000,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Office of Aging................................................        -2,000,000        -2,000,000
                                                                             ===================================
District of Columbia Public Library:
    Asbestos Abatement, Various Branch Libraries............................          -601,723          -601,723
    Rehabilitation of Elevators, Various Branches...........................        -1,500,000        -1,500,000
    Martin Luther King Memorial Library.....................................        -2,500,000        -2,500,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, District of Columbia Public Library............................        -4,601,723        -4,601,723
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Housing and Community Development:
    Ft Lincoln Utility......................................................        -2,500,000        -2,500,000
    Affordable Housing......................................................        -1,500,000        -1,500,000
    Affordable Housing......................................................        -7,676,000        -7,676,000
    Affordable Housing--Lincoln Theater.....................................           100,000           100,000
    Neigh. Revitalization--Columbia Heights.................................        -3,000,000        -3,000,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Housing and Community Development................       -14,576,000       -14,576,000
                                                                             ===================================
Metropolitan Police Department:
    Information Technology Initiative.......................................        -1,762,624        -1,762,624
    Gen Imprv Rehab Initiative MPD..........................................        -2,398,158        -2,398,158
    Property Streamlining--Fleet Facility...................................        -2,980,000        -2,980,000
    Property Streamlining--Sod Facility.....................................        -4,000,000        -4,000,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Metropolitan Police Department.................................       -11,140,782       -11,140,782
                                                                             ===================================
Fire and Emergency Medical Services:
    Underground Fuel Storage Tank Removal...................................           -57,707           -57,707
    Communications Systems Upgrade & Replacement............................         4,000,000         4,000,000
    Engine 25--Complete Renovation/Modernization............................         1,741,883         1,741,883
    Engine 28--Complete Renovation/Modernization............................         1,518,145         1,518,145
    Communications--Electrical Systems......................................        -1,475,000        -1,475,000
    Communications--Structural Work.........................................          -525,000          -525,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Fire and Emergency Medical Services............................         5,202,321         5,202,321
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Corrections:
    General Renovation of Cell Doors & Motors...............................        -3,000,000        -3,000,000

[[Page 706]]

 
    General Renovation Upgrade Central Security Comd Ct.....................          -400,000          -400,000
    Renovations at CDF--Emergency Power System Upgrades.....................           947,000           947,000
    Renovations at CDF--Staff and Visitors Entrance Reconfiguration.........         1,000,000         1,000,000
    Renovations at CDF--Elevator Replacement................................         1,184,000         1,184,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Corrections......................................          -269,000          -269,000
                                                                             ===================================
District of Columbia Courts:
    Central Recording System................................................        -1,098,763        -1,098,763
    Central Recording System................................................          -185,499          -185,499
    Central Recording System................................................        -2,333,000        -2,333,000
    General Improvements Varios D.C. Court Building.........................          -649,744          -649,744
    Rehabilitation of Building 25 DCGH Camp.................................        -2,337,000        -2,337,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, District of Columbia Courts....................................        -6,604,006        -6,604,006
                                                                             ===================================
Office of the Chief Medical Examiner........................................       -68,500,000       -68,500,000
                                                                             ===================================
District of Columbia Public Schools:
    Bell Lincoln High.......................................................         7,800,000         7,800,000
    McKinley Technical High.................................................         6,302,000         6,302,000
    Patterson Elementary....................................................         9,270,000         9,270,000
    Kelly Miller Middle.....................................................        14,494,000        14,494,000
    Maint. Improvements--Emergency Projects.................................           784,000           784,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, District of Columbia Public Schools............................        38,650,000        38,650,000
                                                                             ===================================
University of the District of Columbia:
    Vocational Education Skills Training Ctr................................           800,000           800,000
    UDC Van Ness II--U08 Phase D............................................          -223,349          -223,349
    Renovate Academic Laboratory............................................        -3,922,233        -3,922,233
    Architectural Barrier Removal Various Location UD.......................          -409,226          -409,226
    Roof Replacement/Water Damage Repair UDC Garage.........................           -51,418           -51,418
    Elevator And Control System Replacement.................................        -1,000,000        -1,000,000
    Renovate Water Heating System UDC.......................................          -945,092          -945,092
    Physical Plant Chiller/Heating Sys UDC..................................          -400,000          -400,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, University of the District of Columbia.........................        -6,151,318        -6,151,318
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Parks and Recreation:
    Riggs/Lasalle Recreation Center.........................................         4,803,000         4,803,000
    Lamond Recreation Center................................................         4,432,000         4,432,000
    Roper/Deanwood Recreation Center........................................         5,400,000         5,400,000
    Hillcrest Recreation Center.............................................         2,558,000         2,558,000
    General Improvement Playcourt/Ballfields................................           -43,003           -43,003
    Chevy Chase Recreation Rehabilitation...................................           -69,508           -69,508
    Southeast Tennis & Learning Center......................................            -5,057            -5,057
    Expansion of Hillcrest Center...........................................        -1,000,000        -1,000,000
    Ft Stanton..............................................................        -2,300,000        -2,300,000
    Joe Cole Recreation Center..............................................        -1,324,150        -1,324,150
    Anacostia Recreation Center.............................................        -1,297,840        -1,297,840
    Districtwide Property Improvements......................................        -1,200,000        -1,200,000
    Pool Replacements.......................................................        -2,000,000        -2,000,000
    Infrastructure Improvements.............................................          -600,000          -600,000
    General Improvements....................................................          -120,000          -120,000
    Renovation of Ball Fields and Lighting..................................        -2,000,000        -2,000,000
    Park Lighting...........................................................        -5,800,000        -5,800,000
    Watkins Recreation Center...............................................          -299,340          -299,340
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Parks and Recreation.............................          -865,898          -865,898
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Health:
    Gayle School--Child Advocacy Center Modernization.......................         7,298,000         7,298,000
    Elevator Renovation.....................................................          -400,000          -400,000
    Facility Renovat Step-Down Telemetry UN.................................           -13,000           -13,000
    Facility Renovation Telemetry...........................................          -300,000          -300,000
    Electrical Modernization................................................          -300,000          -300,000
    New Facility Construction Anacostia.....................................        -1,198,000        -1,198,000
    Mechanical Renovations..................................................          -312,000          -312,000
    Roof Replacement........................................................          -750,000          -750,000
    Boiler Plant Renovations................................................        -1,500,000        -1,500,000
    Tax System..............................................................        -1,800,000        -1,800,000
    Public Health Improvement...............................................       -10,000,000       -10,000,000
    Renovate DC Morgue......................................................          -154,789          -154,789
    Renovate Detoxication Clinic at D.C. General............................        -3,010,741        -3,010,741
    JB Johnson Facility--Modernization/Renovations..........................         2,600,000         2,600,000
    Information Technology Initiative--HIPAA Consortium.....................        25,000,000        25,000,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Health...........................................        15,159,470        15,159,470
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Human Services:
    General Renovate Unit 6, Oak Hill Youth Center..........................       -13,227,451       -13,227,451
    Bundy School Upgrade--Ceiling...........................................           500,000           500,000
    Bundy School Upgrade--Life Safety Code..................................           500,000           500,000
    Bundy School Upgrade--ADA Compliance....................................           500,000           500,000
    CCNV--Plumbing Fixtures.................................................           900,000           900,000
    Crummell School.........................................................         3,300,000         3,300,000
    Randall School..........................................................         2,230,000         2,230,000
    Information Technolgy--Replc of Automated Determination Sys (ACEDS).....         5,515,000         5,515,000
    Information Technology--Client eligibility Determination Sys(ACEDS).....         1,062,000         1,062,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Human Services...................................         1,279,549         1,279,549
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Transportation:
    Fiscal year 2002 Streetlight Maintenance and Replacement................          -700,000          -700,000
    Fiscal year 2002 Public Safety Traffic Signal Improvements..............          -650,000          -650,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Streetlight Series Circuit Conversion..................         8,000,000         8,000,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Citywide Streetlight Upgrade...........................         3,850,000         3,850,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Streetlight & Traffic Pole Painting....................         5,900,000         5,900,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Streetlight Replacement Contract.......................         3,310,775         3,310,775
    Fiscal year 2003 Streetlight Maintenance................................        18,200,000        18,200,000
    Fiscal year 2002 1st. CW Sidewalk/Curb & Alley Improvements.............          -500,000          -500,000
    Fiscal year 2002 2nd. CW Sidewalk/Curb & Alley Improvements.............          -500,000          -500,000
    Fiscal year 2002 3rd. CW Sidewalk/Curb & Alley Improvements.............          -500,000          -500,000
    Fiscal year 2002 4th. CW Sidewalk/Curb & Alley Improvements.............          -500,000          -500,000
    Fiscal year 2003 New/Repair Curbs, Sidewalks & Alleys...................         6,000,000         6,000,000

[[Page 707]]

 
    Fiscal year 2003 New/Repair Curbs, Sidewalks & Alleys...................         6,000,000         6,000,000
    Fiscal year 2003 New/Repair Curbs, Sidewalks & Alleys...................         6,000,000         6,000,000
    Fiscal year 2003 New/Repair Curbs, Sidewalks & Alleys...................         6,000,000         6,000,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Rehabilitation Scoping & Development...................         1,200,000         1,200,000
    Fiscal year 2003 2nd. Historic Alley Rehabilitation.....................         5,500,000         5,500,000
    Fiscal year 2003 3rd. Historic Alley Rehabilitation.....................         5,500,000         5,500,000
    Fiscal year 2002 Pavement Markings & Traffic Calming....................          -300,000          -300,000
    Fiscal year 2002 CW Slurry Seal & Pavement Res. ( In-Hse)...............          -300,000          -300,000
    Fiscal year 2002 Street Repair Equipment & Technology...................          -500,000          -500,000
    Pavement Marking & Traffic Calming......................................         6,000,000         6,000,000
    Street Maintenance Equipment/Technology.................................        10,000,000        10,000,000
    Fiscal year 2003 1st. Tree Trimming.....................................         3,750,000         3,750,000
    Fiscal year 2003 2nd. Tree Trimming.....................................         3,750,000         3,750,000
    Fiscal year 2003 3rd. Tree Trimming.....................................         3,750,000         3,750,000
    Fiscal year 2003 4th. Tree Trimming.....................................         3,750,000         3,750,000
    Fiscal year 2003 1st. Dead & Hazardous Tree Removal.....................         2,205,330         2,205,330
    Fiscal year 2003 2nd. Dead & Hazardous Tree Removal.....................         2,205,330         2,205,330
    Fiscal year 2003 Elm Injection with Alamo...............................           275,000           275,000
    Fiscal year 2003 1st. Tree Planting.....................................         4,000,000         4,000,000
    Fiscal year 2003 2nd. Tree Planting.....................................         2,520,000         2,520,000
    Fiscal year 2003 3rd. Tree Planting.....................................         2,520,000         2,520,000
    Fiscal year 2002 Advanced Design, Contract Dev. & Closeout..............          -750,000          -750,000
    Advances Design & Project Development...................................         6,000,000         6,000,000
    Roadway Reconstruction..................................................          -825,954          -825,954
    Roadway Reconstruction..................................................        -2,240,000        -2,240,000
    Fort Lincoln Streetscape................................................        -3,000,000        -3,000,000
    Mt Pleasant Retaining Wall..............................................            -5,000            -5,000
    Economic Development Initiatives........................................          -800,000          -800,000
    Roadway Reconstruction..................................................         1,546,250         1,546,250
    Roadway Improvements Hope VI............................................         7,231,250         7,231,250
    M SE Streetscape Improvements...........................................         3,047,500         3,047,500
    Local Parking Studies...................................................         2,110,000         2,110,000
    Make a Diff. Walk Commemorative Pavers CBD..............................           841,250           841,250
    Local Street Traffic Studies............................................         2,910,000         2,910,000
    Marshall Heights Streetscape Improvements...............................         3,110,000         3,110,000
    Neighborhood Streetscape Improvements...................................        12,733,462        12,733,462
    Neighborhood Streetscape Initiatives....................................        -3,021,040        -3,021,040
    Neighborhood Streetscape................................................        -3,459,040        -3,459,040
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         4,225,457         4,225,457
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         1,916,207         1,916,207
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         2,833,246         2,833,246
    Local Pavement Restoration..............................................         3,398,131         3,398,131
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         4,326,480         4,326,480
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         4,456,900         4,456,900
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         3,895,010         3,895,010
    Local Pavement Restoration..............................................         3,638,934         3,638,934
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         1,777,303         1,777,303
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         4,351,249         4,351,249
    Local Pavement Restoration..............................................         6,192,411         6,192,411
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         2,208,903         2,208,903
    Local Reconstruction, Resurfacing & Upgrading...........................         3,026,475         3,026,475
    Local Pavement Restoration..............................................         2,576,048         2,576,048
    Local Pavement Restoration..............................................         5,602,653         5,602,653
    Local Pavement Restoration..............................................         7,858,724         7,858,724
    Fiscal year 2003 Street Light System Upgrade............................         1,800,000         1,800,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Street Light System Upgrade............................         1,899,000         1,899,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Street Light System Upgrade............................        12,000,000        12,000,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Street Light Series Circuit Conversion.................         1,200,000         1,200,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Street Light Series Circuit Conversion.................         1,266,000         1,266,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Street Light Series Circuit Conversion.................         8,000,000         8,000,000
    Public Space Enhancements--Vest Pocket Park Improvements................           427,500           427,500
    Public Space Enhancements--Vest Pocket Park Improvements................           306,000           306,000
    Public Space Enhancements--Vest Pocket Park Improvements................         1,760,000         1,760,000
    Traffic Congestion Mitigation--Citywide.................................         4,110,000         4,110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Professional Capacity Building Strategy................           426,250           426,250
    Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program...............................           540,000           540,000
    Traffic Safety Studies..................................................        14,550,000        14,550,000
    Traffic Calming Measures................................................           355,000           355,000
    Traffic Calming Measures................................................           155,000           155,000
    Traffic Calming Measures................................................         2,530,000         2,530,000
    Fire Station Safety Project.............................................           755,000           755,000
    Fire Station Safety Project.............................................            77,500            77,500
    Fire Station Safety Project.............................................         3,850,000         3,850,000
    Continuous Shoulder Rumble Strips Interstate Frwy Sys...................           155,000           155,000
    Continuous Shoulder Rumble Strips Interstate Frwy Sys...................           155,000           155,000
    Continuous Shoulder Rumble Strips Interstate Frwy Sys...................           660,000           660,000
    Roadway Safety Training Certification...................................         1,395,000         1,395,000
    Update D.C. Work Zone Control Manual....................................           291,250           291,250
    Key Bridge Over Potomac River (Bridge No. 7)............................           866,250           866,250
    Key Bridge Over Potomac River (Bridge No. 7)............................           930,000           930,000
    Key Bridge Over Potomac River (Bridge No. 7)............................         4,400,000         4,400,000
    Repainting of Chain Bridge Over Potomac River (Bridge No.1).............           116,250           116,250
    Repainting of Chain Bridge Over Potomac River (Bridge No.1).............           775,000           775,000
    Repainting of Chain Bridge Over Potomac River (Bridge No.1).............         3,850,000         3,850,000
    Demolition of Abandoned RR Br Ov Kenil Av @ PEPCO Plant.................           905,000           905,000
    Demolition of Abandoned RR Br Ov Kenil Av @ PEPCO Plant.................           930,000           930,000
    Demo. of Abandoned RR Br Ov Kenil Av @ Pepco Plt (Bridge No. 506).......         4,400,000         4,400,000
    Kenilworth Avenue, N.E., Lane Place to DC/MD Line.......................         1,132,500         1,132,500
    Kenilworth Avenue, N.E., Lane Place to DC/MD Line.......................         2,232,000         2,232,000
    Kenilworth Avenue, N.E., Lane Place to DC/MD Line.......................        10,560,000        10,560,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................           110,000           110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................           110,000           110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................           110,000           110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Tree Improvement Plan.........................           110,000           110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Hot Thermoplastic Pavement Marking Contr...............            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Hot Thermoplastic Pavement Marking Contr...............            62,000            62,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Hot Thermoplastic Pavement Marking Contr...............           440,000           440,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Signing.......................................            77,500            77,500
    Fiscal year 2003 Corridor Signing.......................................           300,000           300,000

[[Page 708]]

 
    Integrated Traffic Management System (ITMS) NHS.........................         4,082,500         4,082,500
    Integrated Traffic Management System (ITMS) NHS.........................        23,000,000        23,000,000
    Integrated Traffic Management System (ITMS) STP.........................        14,200,000        14,200,000
    Integrated Traffic Management System (ITMS) STP.........................        80,000,000        80,000,000
    Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract (STP)...............................         4,166,131         4,166,131
    Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract (STP)...............................        23,471,160        23,471,160
    Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract (NHS)...............................         1,041,535         1,041,535
    Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract (NHS)...............................         5,867,790         5,867,790
    Recon of 4th Street, S.W. bet. Eye & M Sts (Waterside Mall).............         1,055,000         1,055,000
    Recon of 4th Street, S.W. bet. Eye & M Sts (Waterside Mall).............           573,750           573,750
    Recon of 4th Street, S.W. bet. Eye & M Sts (Waterside Mall).............         3,300,000         3,300,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 1 and 2.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 1 and 2.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 1 and 2.................           110,000           110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 3 and 4.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 3 and 4.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 3 and 4.................           110,000           110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 5 and 6.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 5 and 6.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 5 and 6.................           110,000           110,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 7 and 8.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 7 and 8.................            31,000            31,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Wheelchair/Bicycle Ramps Wards 7 and 8.................           110,000           110,000
    Bicycle Racks on Metrobus...............................................           700,000           700,000
    Fiscal year 2004 Integrated Rideshare...................................           392,997           392,997
    Fiscal year 2004 Telecommute Project....................................           310,261           310,261
    Fiscal year 2004 Commuter Operations Center.............................         1,145,012         1,145,012
    Fiscal year 2004 Employer Outreach......................................           722,126           722,126
    Fiscal year 2004 Guaranteed Ride Home...................................         1,239,937         1,239,937
    Mass Marketing Campaign.................................................           471,000           471,000
    Mt. Vernon Triangle Streetscape Improvements............................           855,000           855,000
    Mt. Vernon Triangle Streetscape Improvements............................           573,750           573,750
    Mt. Vernon Triangle Streetscape Improvements............................         3,300,000         3,300,000
    H Street, N.E., Streetscape Improvements................................           775,000           775,000
    H Street, N.E. Streetscape Improvements.................................           765,000           765,000
    H Street, N.E. Streetscape Improvements.................................         4,400,000         4,400,000
    Fiscal year 2003 State Planning and Research Program....................        15,269,613        15,269,613
    Fiscal year 2003 Research Development and Technology....................         4,750,000         4,750,000
    Fiscal year 2004 and Outyears Metropolitan Planning.....................         8,888,067         8,888,067
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 1..................           541,432           541,432
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 1..................           755,004           755,004
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 1..................         4,145,023         4,145,023
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 2 East.............           524,276           524,276
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 2 East.............           731,080           731,080
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 2 East.............         4,013,764         4,013,764
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 2 West.............           518,256           518,256
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 2 West.............           702,687           702,687
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 2 West.............         3,967,691         3,967,691
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wds 1&2...............           258,205           258,205
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wds 1&2...............           360,056           360,056
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wds 1&2...............         1,976,778         1,976,778
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd. Wds 1 &2 NHS.............            50,596            50,596
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd. Wds 1 &2 NHS.............            70,557            70,557
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd. Wds 1 &2 NHS.............           387,363           387,363
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading -Wd 3 East............           376,438           376,438
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading -Wd 3 East............           524,730           524,730
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading -Wd 3 East............         2,881,956         2,881,956
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading -Wd 3 West............           273,456           273,456
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading -Wd 3 West............           381,323           381,323
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading -Wd 3 West............         2,093,538         2,093,538
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurf/Upgrading -Wd 3 West NHS.............           106,294           106,294
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurf/Upgrading -Wd 3 West NHS.............           148,223           148,223
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurf/Upgrading -Wd 3 West NHS.............           813,771           813,771
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Ward 4...................           298,548           298,548
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Ward 4...................           416,312           416,312
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Ward 4...................         2,852,631         2,852,631
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 4 NHS.................           150,610           150,610
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 4 NHS.................           210,019           210,019
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 4 NHS.................         1,153,038         1,153,038
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wds 3&4..................           102,924           102,924
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wds 3&4..................           343,524           343,524
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wds 3&4..................           787,967           787,967
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wds 3&4 NHS..............            14,263            14,263
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wds 3&4 NHS..............            19,889            19,889
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wds 3&4 NHS..............           109,192           109,192
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 5 NHS.................           135,266           135,266
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 5 NHS.................           188,686           188,686
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 5 NHS.................         1,035,574         1,035,574
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 5.....................           663,384           663,384
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 5.....................           925,048           925,048
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrd.-Wd 5.....................         5,078,703         5,078,703
    Fiscal year 2003 Reconstr/Resurf/Upgd/Boundary Sts NHS Wd 6.............           290,842           290,842
    Fiscal year 2003 Reconstr/Resurf/Upgd/Boundary Sts NHS Wd 6.............           378,023           378,023
    Fiscal year 2003 Reconstr/Resurf/Upgd/Boundary Sts NHS Wd 6.............         2,226,631         2,226,631
    Fiscal year 2003 Reconstr/Resurf/Upgd/Boundary Sts Wd 6.................           416,304           416,304
    Fiscal year 2003 Reconstr/Resurf/Upgd/Boundary Sts Wd 6.................           580,508           580,508
    Fiscal year 2003 Reconstr/Resurf/Upgd/Boundary Sts Wd 6.................         3,187,107         3,187,107
    Fiscal year 2003 Pavement Restoration Wards 5 & 6 NHS...................            10,044            10,044
    Fiscal year 2003 Pavement Restoration Wards 5 & 6 NHS...................             9,532             9,532
    Fiscal year 2003 Pavement Restoration Wards 5 & 6 NHS...................            52,340            52,340
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavement Restoration/Boundary Wds 5 and 6...........           165,654           165,654
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavement Restoration/Boundary Wds 5 and 6...........           136,267           136,267
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavement Restoration/Boundary Wds 5 and 6...........           748,114           748,114
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavement Restoration Ward 7 NHS.....................            45,066            45,066
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavement Restoration Ward 7 NHS.....................            42,775            42,775
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavement Restoration Ward 7 NHS.....................           234,827           234,827
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Ward 7................            62,667            62,667
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Ward 7................            87,359            87,359
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Ward 7................           479,615           479,615
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading NHS Wd 7..............            17,808            17,808
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading NHS Wd 7..............            24,806            24,806
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading NHS Wd 7..............           136,177           136,177
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 8..................           208,088           208,088
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 8..................           290,171           290,171
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Reconst/Resurfacing/Upgrading Wd 8..................         1,593,095         1,593,095
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavem't Restoration Boundary Wards 7 & 8............           280,250           280,250
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavem't Restoration Boundary Wards 7 & 8............           265,978           265,978

[[Page 709]]

 
    Fiscal year 2003 FA Pavem't Restoration Boundary Wards 7 & 8............         1,460,354         1,460,354
    Fiscal year 2003 Scoping and Development STP............................           310,000           310,000
    Fiscal year 2003 Scoping and Development NHS............................           775,000           775,000
    Bike Station Feasibility Study..........................................            93,000            93,000
    Klingle Road Bicycle Facility...........................................           225,341           225,341
    Klingle Road Bicycle Facility...........................................           248,749           248,749
    Klingle Road Bicycle Facility...........................................         1,430,715         1,430,715
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Transportation...................................       558,413,155       558,413,155
                                                                             ===================================
Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority:
    Metrobus--Replacement...................................................        16,400,000        16,400,000
    Metrobus--System Access/Capacity Program (SAP)..........................        53,100,000        53,100,000
    Metrorail Rehabilitation................................................        39,600,000        39,600,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority......................       109,100,000       109,100,000
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Public Works:
    Rehab of Ft Totten Transfer Station.....................................        -4,090,000        -4,090,000
    Benning Road Solid Waste Transfer.......................................        -1,460,036        -1,460,036
    SWMA Roof Rehabilitation, 900 NJ Ave SE.................................           -65,282           -65,282
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Public Works.....................................        -5,615,318        -5,615,318
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Motor Vehicles:
    Motor Vehicle Information System, Municipal.............................          -373,962          -373,962
    Motor Vehicle Information System--Destiny Implementation................         3,150,000         3,150,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Motor Vehicles...................................        32,776,038         2,776,038
                                                                             ===================================
District of Columbia School of Law:.........................................
    DC School of Law--LS2 Phase B...........................................            -1,525            -1,525
    DC School of Law--LS2 Phase C...........................................          -335,305          -335,305
    DC School of Law--LS2 Phase D...........................................          -187,520          -187,520
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, District of Columbia School of Law.............................          -524,350          -524,350
                                                                             ===================================
Office of Contracts and Procurement:
    Material Management System..............................................          -140,000          -140,000
    Material Management System..............................................           -30,561           -30,561
    PMIS Enhancement........................................................           -95,999           -95,999
    IT Initiative...........................................................           -85,095           -85,095
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Office of Contracts and Procurement............................          -351,655          -351,655
                                                                             ===================================
Department of Mental Health Services:
    Roof Replacement........................................................           600,000           600,000
    New S.E.H. Inpatient Center.............................................        -1,650,000        -1,650,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Department of Mental Health Services...........................        -1,050,000        -1,050,000
                                                                             ===================================
Office of the Chief Technology Officer:
    Unified Communication Center............................................       -31,873,211       -31,873,211
    Citywide Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP).............................        33,300,000        33,300,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Chief Technology Officer.........................         1,426,789         1,426,789
                                                                             ===================================
      Total, General Fund...................................................       639,069,780       639,069,780
                                                                             ===================================
Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund:
    Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment........................................       213,669,000       213,669,000
    Sewer Collection System.................................................        24,539,000        24,539,000
    Combined Sewer System...................................................         6,561,000        56,561,000
    Stormwater..............................................................         5,635,000         5,635,000
    Water System............................................................        34,054,000        34,054,000
    Washington Aqueduct.....................................................  ................  ................
    Capital Equipment.......................................................         8,000,000         8,000,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Total, Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund................................       292,458,000       342,458,000
                                                                             ===================================
      Grand Total, Capital Outlay...........................................       931,528,000       981,528,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

       The Committee has carefully reviewed the 41 general 
     provisions that were included in the fiscal year 2002 
     District of Columbia Appropriations Act and has reduced the 
     number of provisions included in last year's act to 34. The 
     Committee recommendation deletes 7 general provisions because 
     they made a permanent change to law or were a one-time 
     provision.
       The Committee has modified Sec. 125 to allow the District 
     to use locally-generated revenues to support programs that 
     provide individuals with sterile needles and syringes. This 
     is consistent with a provision approved by the Senate and 
     included in the fiscal year 2002 Senate bill. The Committee 
     has included language that maintains a complete prohibition 
     on the use of Federal funds for this purpose.
       The Committee has modified Sec. 111 to strike paragraphs 
     (b) through (e), regarding the personnel requirements of the 
     Office of the Chief Technology Officer and the Office of the 
     Chief Financial Officer, because it made a permanent 
     provision of law.
       The Committee has deleted Sec. 130 regarding enforcement of 
     tobacco prohibitions, consistent with the President's fiscal 
     year 2003 budget request.
       The Committee has deleted Sec. 133 regarding the reserve 
     requirements because it made a permanent provision of law. 
     The District Government requested that the date of deposit of 
     funds into the Emergency and Contingency Reserve Funds be 
     changed from October 1 to February 15. The Committee 
     understands that the District of Columbia Appropriations bill 
     is not often enacted before December each year. This delay 
     prevents the District from taking any action to fulfill the 
     requirements of the reserve fund until February. The 
     Committee does not recommend this modification to the reserve 
     fund requirements.
       The Committee would like to clarify that the District of 
     Columbia is not required to make deposits into the budgeted 
     reserve fund, pursuant to Section 202(j) of Public Law 104-8 
     after the deposits made in fiscal year 2003. Instead, the 
     Committee recommends that the District establish a cumulative 
     cash reserve of $50,000,000 in fiscal years 2004 and 2005, as 
     mandated in the District of Columbia Appropriations Act of 
     2002, Public Law 107-96 (115 Stat. 956). The District of 
     Columbia must replenish only the amount necessary to maintain 
     the required balance in the following fiscal year. The 
     cumulative cash reserve would be maintained in addition to 
     cash reserve requirements under section 450A of the District 
     of Columbia Home Rule Act, Public Law 93-198, as amended. The 
     District of Columbia may expend funds from the reserves 
     consistent with the conditions associated with such reserve 
     funds.
       The Committee has deleted Sec. 134 regarding Integrated 
     Product Teams because it was a one-time provision requested 
     by the District of Columbia government.

[[Page 710]]

       The Committee has included a provision (Sec. 135) to limit 
     the amount paid to an attorney who brings a suit against the 
     District of Columbia Public Schools under the Individuals 
     with Disabilities Education Act. The provision caps 
     attorneys' fees at $3,000 per action.
       The Committee has deleted Sec. 136 regarding the salary of 
     the Council Chair because it made a permanent provision of 
     law.
       The Committee has deleted Sec. 138 regarding the 
     legislative review period of Council legislation regarding 
     the closing of 2nd and N Street, NE because it made a 
     permanent provision of law.
       The Committee has deleted Sec. 140 regarding the prior 
     year's attorney's fees because it made a permanent provision 
     of law.
       The Committee has deleted Sec. 141 regarding a General 
     Accounting Office report because it made a permanent 
     provision of law.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
     general appropriations bills identify each Committee 
     amendment to the House bill ``which proposes an item of 
     appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions 
     of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or 
     resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.''
       Items providing funding for fiscal year 2003 which lack 
     authorization are as follows:

Federal Payment for Emergency Planning and Security Costs in the 
  District of Columbia......................................$15,000,000
Federal Payment for Hospital Bioterrorism Preparedness.......10,000,000
Federal Payment to the Department of Transportation...........1,000,000
Federal Payment to the Chief Financial Officer of the District of 
  Columbia...................................................15,000,000
Federal Payment to Children's National Medical Center.........5,000,000
Federal Payment to St. Coletta School.........................2,000,000
Federal Payment for Anacostia Waterfront Initiative..........55,000,000
Federal Payment to D.C. Charter School Facilities............20,000,000
Federal Payment to D.C. for Capital Infrastructure Developmen13,100,000
Federal Payment to D.C. for Family Literacy...................4,000,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, Federal funds which lack authorization...........140,100,000

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or -)
                Item                        2002            Budget       House allowance     Committee    ---------------------------------------------------
                                       appropriation   estimate        deg.        recommendation        2002            Budget            House
                                                                                                            appropriation   estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
               TITLE I
 
            FEDERAL FUNDS
 
Federal payment for Resident Tuition          17,000            17,000           17,000   ...............  ...............
 Support............................
Federal payment for Emergency                 16,058            15,000           15,000           ^1,058   ...............
 Planning and Security Costs in the
 District of Columbia...............
Federal payment for Hospital          ...............  ................          10,000          +10,000          +10,000
 Bioterrorism Preparedness in the
 District of Columbia...............
Federal payment to the District of           112,180           159,045          166,193          +54,013           +7,148
 Columbia Courts....................
Defender Services in District of              34,311            32,000           34,000             ^311           +2,000
 Columbia Courts....................
Federal payment to the Court                 147,300           154,707          154,707           +7,407   ...............
 Services and Offender Supervision
 Agency for the District of Columbia
Federal payment to the Children's              5,500   ................           5,000             ^500           +5,000
 National Medical Center............
St. Coletta of Greater Washington              2,000   ................           2,000   ...............          +2,000
 Expansion Project..................
Transportation Management System....  ...............            1,000            1,000           +1,000   ...............
Federal Payment for Anacostia         ...............  ................          55,000          +55,000          +55,000
 Waterfront Initiative..............
Federal payment to the District of    ...............  ................          13,100          +13,100          +13,100
 Columbia for Capital Infrastructure
 Development........................
Federal payment to the District of    ...............  ................           4,000           +4,000           +4,000
 Columbia for Family Literacy.......
Federal payment to the Chief                   8,300   ................          15,000           +6,700          +15,000
 Financial Officer of the District
 of Columbia........................
Federal payment to the District Of             2,500   ................  ...............          ^2,500   ...............
 Columbia Public Schools............
Federal payment to the Capitol City              500   ................  ...............            ^500   ...............
 Career Development and Job Training
 Partnership........................
Federal payment to the Capitol                   500   ................  ...............            ^500   ...............
 Education Fund.....................
Federal payment to the Metropolitan              450   ................  ...............            ^450   ...............
 Kappa Youth Development Foundation,
 Inc................................
Federal payment to the Fire and                  500   ................  ...............            ^500   ...............
 Emergency Medical Services
 Department.........................
Federal payment to the Chief Medical             585   ................  ...............            ^585   ...............
 Examiner...........................
    Equipment, supplies and vehicles           1,780   ................  ...............          ^1,780   ...............
     (emergency supplemental).......
Federal payment to the Youth Life                250   ................  ...............            ^250   ...............
 Foundation.........................
Pharmaceuticals for responders                 2,100   ................  ...............          ^2,100   ...............
 (emergency supplemental)...........
Federal payment to Food and Friends.           2,000   ................  ...............          ^2,000   ...............
Federal payment to the City                      300   ................  ...............            ^300   ...............
 Administrator......................
Response and communications                   14,960   ................  ...............         ^14,960   ...............
 capability (emergency supplemental)
Federal payment to Southeastern                  500   ................  ...............            ^500   ...............
 University.........................
Search, rescue and other emergency             8,850   ................  ...............          ^8,850   ...............
 equipment and support (emergency
 supplemental)......................
Hospital containment facilities for            8,000   ................  ...............          ^8,000   ...............
 the Department of Health (emergency
 supplemental)......................
Emergency traffic management                  20,700   ................  ...............         ^20,700   ...............
 (emergency supplemental)...........
Training and planning (emergency               9,949   ................  ...............          ^9,949   ...............
 supplemental)......................
Fed payment to the Office of the              45,494   ................  ...............         ^45,494   ...............
 Chief Tech Officer Emergency
 supplemental.......................
Federal payments for District of               1,400   ................  ...............          ^1,400   ...............
 Columbia and Federal Law
 Enforcement Mobile Wireless
 Interoperability ProPject..........
Increased facility security                   25,536   ................  ...............         ^25,536   ...............
 (emergency supplemental)...........
Federal payment to the Washington             39,100   ................  ...............         ^39,100   ...............
 Metropolitan Transit Authority
 (emergency supplemental)...........
Federal payment to the District of            30,200   ................  ...............         ^30,200   ...............
 Columbia Corrections Trustee
 Operations.........................
Federal payment to the Metropolitan            5,000   ................  ...............          ^5,000   ...............
 Washington Council Governments
 (emergency supplemental)...........
Federal payment for Family Court Act          24,016   ................  ...............         ^24,016   ...............
Federal payment to the District of
 Columbia Water.....................
Federal payment to Faith and                      50   ................  ...............             ^50   ...............
 Politics Institute.................
Federal payment to the Thurgood                1,000   ................  ...............          ^1,000   ...............
 Marshall Academy Charter School....
Federal payment to the George                    250   ................  ...............            ^250   ...............
 Washington University Center for
 Excellence in Municipal Management.
Court Appointed Special Advocates...             250   ................  ...............            ^250   ...............
Protective clothing and breathing              7,144   ................  ...............          ^7,144   ...............
 apparatus (emergency supplemental).
Specialized hazardous materials                1,032   ................  ...............          ^1,032   ...............
 equipment (emergency supplemental).
Chemical and biological weapons               10,355   ................  ...............         ^10,355   ...............
 preparedness (emergency
 supplemental)......................
Federal Contribution for Enforcement             100   ................  ...............            ^100   ...............
 of Law Banning Possession of
 Tobacco Products by Minors (sec.
 130)...............................
Federal payment for District of       ...............  ................          20,000          +20,000          +20,000
 Columbia Charter School facilities.
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal funds to the            608,000           378,752          512,000          ^96,000         +133,248
       District of Columbia.........
 
     DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS
 
         Operating Expenses
 
Governmental direction and support..        (286,138)         (280,136)        (295,136)         (+8,998)        (+15,000)
Economic development and regulation.        (230,878)         (258,539)        (258,539)        (+27,661)  ...............
Public safety and justice...........        (633,853)         (639,892)        (639,892)         (+6,039)  ...............
Public education system.............      (1,108,665)       (1,200,201)      (1,220,201)       (+111,536)        (+20,000)

[[Page 711]]

 
Human support services..............      (1,803,923)       (2,496,297)      (2,500,297)       (+696,374)         (+4,000)
Public works........................        (300,151)         (324,828)        (324,828)        (+24,677)  ...............
Workforce Investments...............         (42,896)          (54,186)         (54,186)        (+11,290)  ...............
Reserve.............................        (120,000)          (70,000)         (70,000)        (^50,000)  ...............
Repayment of Loans and Interest.....        (247,902)         (267,451)        (267,451)        (+19,549)  ...............
Repayment of General Fund Recovery           (39,300)          (39,300)         (39,300)  ...............  ...............
 Debt...............................
Payment of Interest on Short-Term               (500)           (1,000)          (1,000)           (+500)  ...............
 Borrowing..........................
Wilson Building.....................          (8,859)           (4,194)          (4,194)         (^4,665)  ...............
Non-Departmental Agency.............          (5,799)           (5,799)          (5,799)  ...............  ...............
Certificates of Participation.......  ...............           (7,950)          (7,950)         (+7,950)  ...............
Settlements and Judgments...........  ...............          (22,822)         (22,822)        (+22,822)  ...............
Tobacco Settlement Trust Fund                (33,254)          (10,000)         (10,000)        (^23,254)  ...............
 Transfer...........................
Emergency Planning and Security              (16,058)          (15,000)         (15,000)         (^1,058)  ...............
 Costs..............................
Pay-As-You-Go Capital...............  ...............          (16,750)         (16,750)        (+16,750)  ...............
Capital Infrastructure development..  ...............  ................         (13,100)        (+13,100)        (+13,100)
Receivership Programs...............        (403,868)  ................  ...............       (^403,868)  ...............
Reserve Relief......................         (30,000)  ................  ...............        (^30,000)  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, operating expenses,          (5,312,044)       (5,714,345)      (5,766,445)       (+454,401)        (+52,100)
       general fund.................
 
     Enterprise and Other Funds
 
Water and Sewer Authority...........        (244,978)         (253,743)        (253,743)         (+8,765)  ...............
Washington Aqueduct.................         (46,510)          (57,847)         (57,847)        (+11,337)  ...............
Stormwater Permit Compliance                  (3,100)           (3,100)          (3,100)  ...............  ...............
 enterprise fund....................
Lottery and Charitable Games                (229,688)         (232,881)        (232,881)         (+3,193)  ...............
 enterprise fund....................
Sports and Entertainment Commission.          (9,627)          (15,510)         (20,510)        (+10,883)         (+5,000)
District of Columbia Retirement              (13,388)          (13,388)         (13,388)  ...............  ...............
 Board..............................
Washington Convention Center                 (57,278)          (78,700)         (78,700)        (+21,422)  ...............
 enterprise fund....................
Housing Finance Agency..............          (4,711)  ................  ...............         (^4,711)  ...............
National Capital Revitalization               (2,673)           (6,745)          (6,745)         (+4,072)  ...............
 Corporation........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Enterprise Funds.......        (611,953)         (661,914)        (666,914)        (+54,961)         (+5,000)
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, operating expenses.....      (5,923,997)       (6,376,259)      (6,433,359)       (+509,362)        (+57,100)
 
           Capital Outlay
 
General fund\1\.....................      (1,074,605)         (639,070)        (666,368)       (^408,237)        (+27,298)
Water and Sewer Fund................        (152,114)         (292,458)        (342,458)       (+190,344)        (+50,000)
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Capital Outlay.........      (1,226,719)         (931,528)      (1,008,826)       (^217,893)        (+77,298)
Emergency supplemental..............        (155,900)  ................  ...............       (^155,900)  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, District of Columbia         (7,306,616)       (7,307,787)      (7,442,185)       (+135,569)       (+134,398)
       funds........................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Grand total:
          Federal Funds to the               608,000           378,752          512,000          ^96,000         +133,248
           District of Columbia.....
          District of Columbia funds      (7,306,616)       (7,307,787)      (7,442,185)       (+135,569)       (+134,398)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Rounded.

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

         ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATION BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

   Mr. Domenici, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for energy and water development for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other 
     purposes, favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do 
     pass.


    Amount in new budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2003

Budget estimates considered by Senate...................$25,876,981,000
Amount of bill as reported to the Senate.................26,163,515,000
The bill as reported to the Senate--
  Above the budget estimate, 2003...........................286,534,000
  Over enacted bill, 2002...................................858,156,000

                                PURPOSE

       The purpose of this bill is to provide appropriations for 
     the fiscal year 2003 beginning October 1, 2002, and ending 
     September 30, 2003, for energy and water development, and for 
     other related purposes. It supplies funds for water resources 
     development programs and related activities of the Department 
     of the Army, Civil Functions--U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' 
     Civil Works Program in title I; for the Department of the 
     Interior's Bureau of Reclamation in title II; for the 
     Department of Energy's energy research activities (except for 
     fossil fuel programs and certain conservation and regulatory 
     functions), including environmental restoration and waste 
     management, and atomic energy defense activities of the 
     National Nuclear Security Administration in title III; and 
     for related independent agencies and commissions, including 
     the Appalachian Regional Commission, Delta Regional 
     Authority, Denali Commission, and the Nuclear Regulatory 
     Commission in title IV.

                SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

       The fiscal year 2003 budget estimates for the bill total 
     $25,876,981,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The 
     recommendation of the Committee totals $26,163,515,000. This 
     is $286,534,000 above the budget estimates and $858,156,000 
     over the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year.
       The bill, as recommended, is in compliance with the 
     subcommittee allocation agreed to by the Committee and 
     entered into the Congressional Record on June 28, 2002.

                            BILL HIGHLIGHTS

                    atomic energy defense activities

       The amount recommended in the bill includes $15,739,217,000 
     for atomic energy defense activities. Major programs and 
     activities include:

Weapons activities.......................................$6,108,959,000
Defense nuclear nonproliferation..........................1,115,630,000
Naval reactors..............................................706,790,000
Other defense activities....................................537,664,000
Defense waste management and environmental restoration....5,370,532,000
Defense facilities closure projects.......................1,125,314,000
Defense environmental privatization.........................158,399,000

                             energy supply

       The bill recommended by the Committee provides a total of 
     $815,306,000 for energy research programs including:

Renewable energy resources.................................$448,062,000
Nuclear energy..............................................323,608,000

                  nondefense environmental management

       An appropriation of $176,000,000 is recommended for 
     nondefense environmental management activities of the 
     Department of Energy.

                                science

       The Committee recommendation also provides a net 
     appropriation of $3,329,456,000 for

[[Page 712]]

     general science and research activities in life sciences, 
     high energy physics, and nuclear physics. Major programs are:

High energy physics research...............................$729,980,000
Nuclear physics.............................................387,370,000
Basic energy sciences.....................................1,044,600,000
Biological and environmental R&D............................531,215,000
Fusion energy sciences......................................259,310,000

               regulatory and other independent agencies

       Also recommended in the bill is $909,584,000 for various 
     regulatory and independent agencies of the Federal 
     Government. Major programs include:

Appalachian Regional Commission.............................$74,400,000
Delta Regional Authority.....................................15,000,000
Denali Commission............................................50,000,000
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission........................192,000,000
Nuclear Regulatory Commission...............................578,184,000

                      water resources development

Corps of Engineers:
  General Investigations...................................$148,304,000
  Construction, General...................................1,636,602,000
  Flood Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries..........346,437,000
  Operation and Maintenance, General......................1,956,182,000
  Regulatory Program........................................144,252,000
  Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program...........140,298,000
  General Expenses..........................................155,651,000
Central Utah Project Completion Account......................36,228,000
Bureau of Reclamation:
  Water and Related resources...............................919,921,000
  Central Valley Project Restoration Fund....................48,904,000
  Policy and Administration..................................54,870,000

       The Committee has recommended appropriations totaling 
     approximately $5,540,330,000 for Federal water resource 
     development programs. This includes projects and related 
     activities of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers--Civil and the 
     Bureau of Reclamation of the Department of the Interior. The 
     Federal water resource development program provides lasting 
     benefits to the Nation in the area of flood control, 
     municipal and industrial water supply, irrigation of 
     agricultural lands, water conservation, commercial 
     navigation, hydroelectric power, recreation, and fish and 
     wildlife enhancement.
       Water is our Nation's most precious and valuable resource. 
     It is evident that water supply in the near future will be as 
     important, if not more so, than energy. There is only so much 
     water available. Water cannot be manufactured. Our Nation 
     cannot survive without water, and economic prosperity cannot 
     occur without a plentiful supply.
       While many areas of the country suffer from severe 
     shortages of water, others suffer from the other extreme--an 
     excess of water which threatens both rural and urban areas 
     with floods. Because water is a national asset, and because 
     the availability and control of water affect and benefit all 
     States and jurisdictions, the Federal Government has 
     historically assumed much of the responsibility for financing 
     of water resource development.
       The existing national water resource infrastructure in 
     America is an impressive system of dams, locks, harbors, 
     canals, irrigation systems, reservoirs, and recreation sites 
     with a central purpose--to serve the public's needs.
       Our waterways and harbors are an essential part of our 
     national transportation system--providing clean, efficient, 
     and economical transportation of fuels for energy generation 
     and agricultural production, and making possible residential 
     and industrial development to provide homes and jobs for the 
     American people.
       Reservoir projects provide hydroelectric power production 
     and downstream flood protection, make available recreational 
     opportunities for thousands of urban residents, enhance fish 
     and wildlife habitat, and provide our communities and 
     industries with abundant and clean water supplies which are 
     essential not only to life itself, but also to help maintain 
     a high standard of living for the American people.

                         Subcommittee Hearings

       The Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development of the 
     Committee on Appropriations held four sessions in connection 
     with the fiscal year 2003 appropriation bill. Witnesses 
     included officials and representatives of the Federal 
     agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction.
       Although it is the policy of the subcommittee to receive 
     oral and written testimony from representatives of all of the 
     major Department and Agencies within its jurisdiction, the 
     Army Corps of Engineers provided written testimony only. The 
     administration fired Mike Parker, the Assistant Secretary of 
     the Army for Civil Works, early in the week in which the Army 
     Corps of Engineers hearing was scheduled to take place. Given 
     the confusion and controversy surrounding Mr. Parker's 
     dismissal, the subcommittee elected to accept written 
     testimony in lieu of an oral statement from a lower level 
     appointee in an acting capacity.
       In addition, the subcommittee received numerous statements 
     and letters from Members of the U.S. Senate and House of 
     Representatives, Governors, State and local officials and 
     representatives, and hundreds of private citizens of all 
     walks of life throughout the United States. Information, both 
     for and against many items, was presented to the 
     subcommittee. The recommendations for fiscal year 2003 
     therefore, have been developed after careful consideration of 
     available data.

                         Votes in the Committee

       By a vote of 00 to 00 the Committee on ----------, 
     recommended that the bill, as amended, be reported to the 
     Senate.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

                       Corps of Engineers--Civil


                              Introduction

       The Committee remains concerned about the level of the 
     budget requests for the water resources programs of the U.S. 
     Army Corps of Engineers. The budget request for fiscal year 
     2003 is about $600,000,000 less than the amount appropriated 
     to the Corps in fiscal year 2002. The budget request is 
     extraordinarily unbalanced. Four projects account for 30 
     percent of the proposed Construction, General budget with the 
     remainder of the projects severely underfunded. The proposed 
     General Investigations budget, which provides funding for 
     studies of water resources needs, is decimated. Only studies 
     in their final year were adequately funded, the remainder 
     were severely underfunded. The proposed Operations and 
     Maintenance budget appears to show an increase, however, when 
     accounting for inflation and a proposed funding transfer that 
     is unlikely to be enacted, the final total is less than the 
     amount appropriated in fiscal year 2002. The budget proposed 
     for the Mississippi River and Tributaries project, is equally 
     inadequate.
       If the proposed budget request were enacted, the Corps 
     would be forced to terminate on-going construction contracts 
     costing the government some $200,000,000 in termination fees.
       As has been the practice for the last several years, the 
     budget proposal contained no new discretionary study or 
     construction ``starts''. The budget proposal stated that this 
     was done in order to only fund the backlog of on-going work 
     (estimated at $21,000,000,000 in the budget proposal) and 
     that within 10 years, this backlog would be reduced to zero. 
     Followed to conclusion, that would mean that within 10 years 
     the Corps would only be an operation and maintenance agency 
     to oversee past constructed work. Since there are no other 
     nationwide agencies that address water resource problems and 
     needs, one can only assume that all water resource problems 
     will be solved in the next 10 years or that the Federal 
     Government intends to no longer fund water resource 
     development.

[[Page 713]]

       The Committee does not share the views in the budget 
     proposal and remains concerned about the huge and increasing 
     backlog of infrastructure development, maintenance, and 
     repair over which the Corps has jurisdiction. The proposed 
     budget causes the backlog of unconstructed projects to 
     increase from $40,000,000,000 to $44,000,000,000 and ignores 
     an accelerating critical maintenance backlog which increases 
     from $702,000,000 to $884,000,000. This maintenance backlog 
     will soon become entirely unmanageable under the weight of an 
     aging and crumbling inventory. Proposing no new study or 
     discretionary construction starts, underfunding on-going 
     projects, and providing minimal O&M funding for completed 
     projects leads the Committee to believe that the budget 
     preparation may have been influenced by very narrow interest 
     groups as opposed to providing for a robust national water 
     resources development program. The situation that the 
     proposed budget poses to the Nation's economy and quality of 
     life leave the Committee no option but to step forward in 
     support of these vital projects.
       The Committee recommendation for the Corps of Engineers 
     totals $4,547,953,000. This is $374,999,000 above the budget 
     request for fiscal year 2003, and is $109,143,000 above the 
     appropriation for the current year.


                       Building and Site Security

       Given the events of September 11, 2001, there is an evident 
     need for improving the security of the Nation's 
     infrastructure. The Committee is aware of the increased costs 
     all Federal agencies are beginning to realize. Therefore, the 
     Committee encourages the Corps of Engineers to utilize 
     technology that is presently available in both the private 
     and public sector as it evaluates its future infrastructure 
     security needs.


                         centers of excellence

       The Committee is concerned that Corps of Engineers 
     technical and planning capabilities have diminished over the 
     past decade. This diminished capability has been evident in 
     recent controversial studies such as the Upper Mississippi 
     River and Illinois Waterway System Navigation Study and the 
     Delaware River Deepening Study. The Committee urges the Corps 
     of Engineers to review ways in which it can improve its 
     capability, to include concentrating its technical and 
     planning expertise in regional centers. The Corps should 
     report back to this Committee within 1 year on its findings.


                           BUDGET CONSTRAINTS

       The budget allocation for non-Defense discretionary 
     programs contained in the Energy and Water Development bill 
     for fiscal year 2003 are constrained below what is necessary 
     for a robust, balanced national water resources program. 
     Faced with these budget realities, the Committee has had to 
     make tough decisions and choices in the development of the 
     Corps of Engineers' budget request for fiscal year 2003. 
     However, while the budget resources for non-Defense 
     discretionary programs have remained flat or have declined in 
     real terms, the number of requests of the Committee continue 
     to increase. This year the Committee received more than 1,200 
     requests for funding for water projects within the Corps' 
     Civil Works program. Many supported the funding level in the 
     budget request, but a majority of the requests made of the 
     Committee sought increases over the budgeted amounts or items 
     not contained in the President's budget for fiscal year 2003.


                   BASIS OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       In development of the fiscal year 2003 funding 
     recommendation for the Corps of Engineers, the Committee is 
     not able to include any new construction starts, and has 
     recommended only a limited number of new study starts in an 
     effort to restore balance to the water resource program of 
     the Corps, and to address high priority requests made to the 
     Committee. The limited resources available have been focused 
     on on-going projects where the Corps has contractual 
     commitments. While the Committee has not been able to fund 
     all projects at the optimum level, it has endeavored to 
     provide sufficient funding on each project to mitigate delays 
     and increased costs, to the greatest extent possible, across 
     the entire Corps' Civil Works program. Finally, the Committee 
     received numerous requests to include project authorizations 
     in the energy and water development appropriations bill. In 
     an effort to support and honor congressional authorizing 
     committees jurisdiction, the Committee has not included new 
     project authorizations


                         general investigations

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$154,350,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................102,483,000
Committee recommendation....................................148,304,000

       This appropriation funds studies to determine the need, 
     engineering feasibility, economic justification, and the 
     environmental and social suitability of solutions to water 
     and related land resource problems; and for preconstruction 
     engineering and design work, data collection, and interagency 
     coordination and research activities.
       The budget request and the recommended Committee allowance 
     are shown on the following table:

                                   CORPS OF ENGINEERS--GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Budget  estimate        Committee  recommendation
                     Project title                     ---------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Investigations    Planning   Investigations    Planning
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                        ALABAMA
 
ALABAMA RIVER BELOW CLAIBORNE LOCK AND DAM, AL........            300   ...........            300   ...........
BALDWIN COUNTY SHORE PROTECTION, AL...................            100   ...........            100   ...........
BALDWIN COUNTY WATERSHEDS, AL.........................            100   ...........            100   ...........
BAYOU LA BATRE, AL....................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
BREWTON AND EAST BREWTON, AL..........................            150   ...........            150   ...........
CAHABA RIVER WATERSHED, AL............................             50   ...........             50   ...........
DOG RIVER, AL.........................................            150   ...........            150   ...........
TUSCALOOSA COUNTY, AL.................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
VILLAGE CREEK, JEFFERSON COUNTY (BIRMINGHAM                       250   ...........            250   ...........
 WATERSHED), AL.......................................
 
                        ALASKA
 
AKUTAN HARBOR, AK.....................................  ..............          200  ..............          350
ALASKA REGIONAL PORTS, AK.............................  ..............  ...........            200   ...........
ANCHOR POINT HARBOR, AK...............................             50   ...........            100   ...........
ANCHORAGE HARBOR DEEPENING, AK........................             50   ...........            150   ...........
ANIAK HARBOR, AK......................................             50   ...........            100   ...........
BARROW COASTAL STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION, AK.............            200   ...........            500   ...........
CHENA RIVER WATERSHED, AK.............................             50   ...........            100   ...........
COFFMAN COVE, AK......................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
DELONG MOUNTAIN HARBOR, AK............................            150   ...........            500   ...........
EKLUTNA WATERSHED, AK.................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
FALSE PASS HARBOR, AK.................................  ..............           25  ..............           25
FIRE ISLAND CAUSEWAY, AK..............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
HAINES HARBOR, AK.....................................  ..............          115  ..............         400-
HOMER HARBOR, AK......................................  ..............  ...........            200   ...........
KAKTOVIK BEACH EROSION, AK............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
KENAI RIVER BLUFF EROSION STUDY, AK...................  ..............  ...........            185   ...........
KETCHIKAN HARBOR, AK..................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
KNIK BRIDGE CROSSING, AK..............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
KOTZEBUE SMALL BOAT HARBOR, AK........................             50   ...........            200   ...........
LITTLE DIOMEDE HARBOR, AK.............................            115   ...........            200   ...........
MATANUSKA EROSION STUDY, AK...........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
MCGRATH BANK STABLIZATION, AK.........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
MEKORYUK HARBOR, AK...................................             50   ...........            100   ...........
PORT LIONS HARBOR, AK.................................             50   ...........            100   ...........
QUINHAGAK HARBOR, AK..................................  ..............  ...........            200   ...........
SAINT GEORGE NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS, AK..............             75   ...........            500   ...........
SAND POINT HARBOR, AK.................................  ..............           50  ..............           50
SHIP CREEK WATERSHED, AK..............................             50   ...........             50   ...........
SITKA HARBOR, AK......................................             50   ...........            100   ...........
SKAGWAY HARBOR MODIFICATION, AK.......................             45   ...........             45   ...........
SKAGWAY RIVER FLOOD CONTROL, AK.......................             50   ...........             50   ...........
UNALAKLEET HARBOR, AK.................................             50   ...........             50   ...........

[[Page 714]]

 
UNALASKA HARBOR, AK...................................            144   ...........            400   ...........
VALDEZ HARBOR EXPANSION, AK...........................  ..............          150  ..............          250
WHITTIER BREAKWATER, AK...............................             50   ...........            100   ...........
 
                     AMERICA SOMOA
 
TUTUILA HARBOR, AS....................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
 
                        ARIZONA
 
AGUA FRIA RIVER, AZ...................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
NAVAJO NATION, AZ, NM AND UT..........................            100   ...........            500   ...........
PIMA COUNTY, AZ.......................................            200   ...........            500   ...........
RILLITO RIVER, PIMA COUNTY, AZ........................            150   ...........            150   ...........
RIO DE FLAG, FLAGSTAFF, AZ............................  ..............          150  ..............          880
RIO SALADO OESTE, SALT RIVER, AZ......................            150   ...........            150   ...........
SANTA CRUZ RIVER, GRANT RD TO FT LOWELL RD, AZ........             50   ...........             50   ...........
SANTA CRUZ RIVER, PASEO DE LAS IGLESIAS, AZ...........            200   ...........            575   ...........
TRES RIOS, AZ.........................................  ..............          350  ..............        1,500
TUCSON DRAINAGE AREA, AZ..............................  ..............          100  ..............          200
VA SHLY-AY AKIMEL SALT RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT, AZ..            200   ...........            400   ...........
 
                       ARKANSAS
 
ARKANSAS RIVER LEVEES, AR.............................  ..............           50  ..............          150
ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION STUDY, AR AND OK............            910   ...........          1,500   ...........
HOT SPRINGS CREEK STUDY, AR...........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, AR............................  ..............          100  ..............          100
NORTH LITTLE ROCK, DARK HOLLOW, AR....................  ..............          200  ..............          200
PINE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR................................  ..............          150  ..............          350
RED RIVER NAVIGATION, SW ARKANSAS, AR AND LA..........  ..............  ...........            583   ...........
SOUTHWEST ARK, LITTLE RIVER BASIN, AR.................  ..............  ...........            200   ...........
WHITE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, AR AND MO............            400   ...........            800   ...........
WHITE RIVER MINIMUM FLOWS, AR.........................            150   ...........            300   ...........
 
                      CALIFORNIA
 
ALISO CREEK MAINSTEM, CA..............................            250   ...........            250   ...........
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED, CA..........................  ..............        1,275  ..............        2,600
ARANA GULCH WATERSHED, CA.............................             50   ...........             50   ...........
ARROYO SECO WATERSHED RESTORATION, CA.................            100   ...........            100   ...........
BALLONA CREEK ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA...............            100   ...........            150   ...........
BOLINAS LAGOON ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA..............  ..............          200  ..............          400
CALIFORNIA COSTAL SEDIMONT MASTER PLAN, CA............  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CA.............................            100   ...........            100   ...........
COAST OF CALIFORNIA, SOUTH COAST REGION, LA COUNTY, CA  ..............  ...........            400   ...........
COYOTE DAM, CA........................................             50   ...........            150   ...........
FOLSOM DAM, CA........................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
GRAYSON AND MURDERER'S CREEKS, CA.....................            200   ...........            200   ...........
HUNTINGTON HARBOR DREDGING, CA........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
LAGUNA DE SANTA ROSA, CA..............................            200   ...........            200   ...........
LAKE ELSINORE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, CA...........            100   ...........            100   ...........
LLAGAS CREEK, CA......................................  ..............          225  ..............          225
LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CA................................            150   ...........            300   ...........
LOWER CACHE CREEK, YOLO COUNTY, WOODLAND AND VICINITY,  ..............          200  ..............          200
 CA...................................................
LOWER MISSION CREEK, CA...............................  ..............          200  ..............          600
MALIBU CREEK WATERSHED, CA............................            200   ...........            200   ...........
MARIN COUNTY SHORELINE, SAN CLEMENTE CREEK, CA........             25   ...........             25   ...........
MARINA DEL REY AND BALLONA CREEK, CA..................            170   ...........            250   ...........
MATILIJA DAM, CA......................................            150   ...........            150   ...........
MIDDLE CREEK, CA......................................  ..............           50  ..............           50
MORRO BAY ESTUARY, CA.................................            200   ...........            200   ...........
MUGU LAGOON, CA.......................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
N CA STREAMS, DRY CREEK, MIDDLETOWN, CA...............            200   ...........            200   ...........
N CA STREAMS, LOWER SACRAMENTO RVR RIPARIAN                       100   ...........            100   ...........
 REVEGETATION, CA.....................................
NAPA RIVER, SALT MARSH RESTORATION, CA................            100   ...........          1,000   ...........
NAPA VALLEY WATERSHED MANAGEMENT, CA..................            150   ...........            150   ...........
NEWPORT BAY (LA-3 SITE DESIGNATION), CA...............  ..............  ...........            350   ...........
NEWPORT BAY HARBOR, CA................................  ..............          100  ..............          100
NEWPORT BAY/SAN DIEGO CREEK WATERSHED, CA.............            200   ...........            200   ...........
OCEAN BEACH, CA.......................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
ORANGE COUNTY, SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA..............            200   ...........            200   ...........
ORANGE COUNTY SAMP, CA................................  ..............  ...........            200   ...........
PAJARO RIVER AT WATSONVILLE, CA.......................  ..............          275  ..............          400
PAJARO RIVER BASIN STUDY, CA..........................            100   ...........            100   ...........
PINE FLAT DAM, FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT RESTORATION,   ..............          200  ..............          200
 CA...................................................
PORT OF STOCKTON, CA..................................            100   ...........  ..............  ...........
POSO CREEK, CA........................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
PRADO BASIN ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, CA.............             50   ...........             50   ...........
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAMP, CA.............................  ..............  ...........          1,000   ...........
ROCK CREEK AND KEEFER SLOUGH, CA......................  ..............           25  ..............           25
RUSSIAN RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA...............            200   ...........            200   ...........
SACRAMENTO--SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CA.....................            100   ...........            100   ...........
SACRAMENTO AND SAN JOAQUIN COMPREHENSIVE BASIN STUDY,           2,973   ...........          3,173   ...........
 CA...................................................
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA.............................             50   ...........             50   ...........
SAN CLEMENTE SHORELINE, CA............................            100   ...........            398   ...........
SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAMP, CA.............................  ..............  ...........            500   ...........
SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHORELINE, CA........................  ..............  ...........            500   ...........
SAN FRANCISCO BAY, CA.................................            225   ...........            225   ...........
SAN JACINTO RIVER, CA.................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
SAN JOAQUIN RB, W STANISLAUS, DEL PUERTO AND SALADO               100   ...........            200   ...........
 CREEK, CA............................................
SAN JOAQUIN RB, WEST STANISLAUS COUNTY, ORESTIMBA       ..............          100  ..............          100
 CREEK, CA............................................
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, ARROYO PASAJERO, CA..........            100   ...........            100   ...........
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, CONSUMNES AND MOKELUMNE                  100   ...........            100   ...........
 RIVERS, CA...........................................
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, FRAZIER CREEK, CA............            100   ...........            100   ...........
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, STOCKTON METROPOLITAN AREA,              100   ...........            100   ...........
 CA...................................................
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, TUOLUMNE RIVER, CA...........            100   ...........            100   ...........
SAN JUAN CREEK, SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY, CA...............            100   ...........            100   ...........
SAN PABLO BAY WATERSHED, CA...........................            240   ...........            240   ...........
SANTA ANA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, BIG BEAR LAKE, CA....            100   ...........            100   ...........
SANTA CLARA RIVER, CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CA..........            100   ...........            100   ...........
SANTA CRUZ PORT, CA...................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
SANTA ROSA CREEK WATERSHED, CA........................            260   ...........            260   ...........
SANTA YNEZ RIVER, CA..................................             50   ...........             50   ...........

[[Page 715]]

 
SOLANA BEACH, CA......................................  ..............  ...........            500   ...........
SONOMA CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, CA......................            150   ...........            150   ...........
STRONG AND CHICKEN RANCH SLOUGHS, CA..................            100   ...........            100   ...........
SUTTER COUNTY, CA.....................................            677   ...........            677   ...........
TAHOE BASIN, CA AND NV................................            690   ...........          1,500   ...........
TIJUANA RIVER VALLEY, CA..............................            200   ...........            200   ...........
UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK, CA............................            559   ...........            559   ...........
UPPER SANTA ANA RIVER WATERSHED, CA...................            150   ...........            150   ...........
VENTURA AND SANTA BARBARA COUNTY SHORELINE, CA........            100   ...........            100   ...........
VENTURA HARBOR SAND BYPASS, CA........................            150   ...........            150   ...........
WESTMINSTER, COYOTE AND CARBON CANYON CREEK                        50   ...........             50   ...........
 WATERSHEDS, CA.......................................
WESTMINSTER, EAST GARDEN GROVE, CA....................            200   ...........            200   ...........
WHITE RIVER AND DEER CREEK, CA........................            100   ...........            100   ...........
WILDCAT AND SAN PABLO CREEKS, CA......................             50   ...........             50   ...........
YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA..................................  ..............          250  ..............          250
 
                       COLORADO
 
ADAMS COUNTY, CO......................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
ARAPAHOE COUNTY, CO...................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
CACHE-LA POUDRE, CO...................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
CHATFIELD, CHERRY CREEK AND BEAR CREEK RESERVOIRS, CO.            200   ...........            200   ...........
FOUNTAIN CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, CO....................            330   ...........            330   ...........
ZUNI AND SUN VALLEY REACHES, SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, CO...  ..............          200  ..............  ...........
 
     COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS
 
ROTA HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, CNMI.......................             25   ...........             25   ...........
TINIAN HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, CNMI.....................             50   ...........             50   ...........
 
                       DELAWARE
 
DELAWARE COAST, CAPE HENLOPEN TO FENWICK ISLAND, DE...  ..............          100  ..............          314
 
                        FLORIDA
 
HILLSBOROUGH RIVER, FL................................            280   ...........            280   ...........
LAKE WORTH INLET, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FL...............            126   ...........            126   ...........
PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL............................  ..............          100  ..............          100
ST JOHNS COUNTY BEACHES, FL...........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
ST PETERSBURG HARBOR, FL..............................  ..............          100  ..............          100
WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER, FL...............................            271   ...........            271   ...........
 
                        GEORGIA
 
ALLATOONA LAKE, GA....................................            186   ...........            186   ...........
ARABIA MOUNTAIN, GA...................................             50   ...........            100   ...........
AUGUSTA, GA...........................................            230   ...........            230   ...........
DEEP AND CAMP CREEKS WATERSHED STUDY, GA..............  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
INDIAN, SUGAR, ENTRENCHMENT AND FEDERAL PRISON CREEKS,            100   ...........            100   ...........
 GA...................................................
LONG ISLAND, MARSH AND JOHNS CREEKS, GA...............            150   ...........            150   ...........
METRO ATLANTA WATERSHED, GA...........................             50   ...........             50   ...........
NEW SAVANNAH BLUFF LOCK AND DAM, GA AND SC............  ..............           50  ..............          176
SAVANNAH HARBOR ESTUARY RESTORATION STUDY, GA AND SC..            100   ...........            100   ...........
SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GAAND SC...................  ..............          428  ..............          428
SAVANNAH HARBOR SEDIMENT CONTROL WORKS, GA AND SC.....             50   ...........             50   ...........
SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, GA AND SC.........            120   ...........            120   ...........
UTOY, SANDY AND PROCTOR CREEKS, GA....................            150   ...........            150   ...........
 
                        HAWAII
 
ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI...............................            135   ...........            135   ...........
BARBERS POINT HARBOR MODIFICATION, OAHU, HI...........  ..............           50  ..............           50
KAHUKU, HI............................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
KAWAIHAE DEEP DRAFT HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, HAWAII, HI..            142   ...........            142   ...........
KIHEI AREA EROSION, HI................................             50   ...........            100   ...........
NAWILIWILI HARBOR MODIFICATION, KAUAI, HI.............             50   ...........            300   ...........
WAIKIKI EROSION CONTROL, HI...........................  ..............           48  ..............          250
WAILUPE STREAM FLOOD CONTROL STUDY, OAHU, HI..........  ..............           50  ..............           50
 
                         IDAHO
 
BOISE RIVER, BOISE, ID................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
LITTLE WOOD RIVER, GOODING, ID........................            145   ...........  ..............          145
 
                       ILLINOIS
 
ALEXANDER AND PULASKI COUNTIES, IL....................            147   ...........            147   ...........
DES PLAINES RIVER, IL (PHASE II)......................            335   ...........            500   ...........
ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL..................          1,051   ...........          1,500   ...........
ILLINOIS RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, IL..............            365   ...........            600   ...........
PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, IL.....................  ..............          237  ..............          237
ROCK RIVER, IL AND WI.................................            182   ...........            182   ...........
UPPER MISS AND ILLINOIS NAV STUDY, IL, IA, MN, MO AND           1,000   ...........          3,685   ...........
 WI...................................................
UPPER MISS RVR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IL, IA, MO, MN AND           1,814   ...........          1,814   ...........
 WI...................................................
UPPER MISS RVR SYS FLOW FREQUENCY STUDY, IL, IA, MN, M            463   ...........            463   ...........
WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL...................................  ..............          200  ..............          200
WOOD RIVER LEVEE, IL..................................  ..............          130  ..............          130
 
                        INDIANA
 
COLUMBUS WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, IN...........  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
INDIANA HARBOR, IN....................................            248   ...........            500   ...........
JOHN T MYERS LOCKS AND DAM, IN AND KY.................  ..............        1,346  ..............        2,100
VINCENNES WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, IN..........  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
 
                         IOWA
 
DAVENPORT, IA.........................................  ..............           61  ..............          125
DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, IA.....................             51   ...........            400   ...........
FORT DODGE, IA........................................             87   ...........            100   ...........
LOWER DES MOINES, IA AND MO...........................             89   ...........            150   ...........
 
                        KANSAS
 
GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN STUDY, KS AND OK...........  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
MANHATTAN, KS.........................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
TOPEKA, KS............................................            125   ...........            125   ...........
TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KS AND MO.........................  ..............          250  ..............          434

[[Page 716]]

 
UPPER TURKEY CREEK, KS................................            125   ...........            125   ...........
WALNUT AND WHITEWATER RIVER WATERSHEDS, KS............            110   ...........            110   ...........
 
                       KENTUCKY
 
COVINGTON WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, KY..........  ..............  ...........            200   ...........
GREENUP LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, KY AND OH..........  ..............        1,302  ..............        2,100
METROPOLITAN LOUISVILLE, JEFFERSON COUNTY, KY.........            225   ...........            225   ...........
METROPOLITAN LOUISVILLE, MILL CREEK BASIN, KY.........            187   ...........            187   ...........
METROPOLITAN LOUISVILLE, SOUTHWEST, KY................            140   ...........            250   ...........
OHIO RIVER MAIN STEM SYSTEMS STUDY, KY, IL, IN, PA, WV          3,000   ...........          3,000   ...........
 
                       LOUISIANA
 
AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA.            150   ...........            300   ...........
AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, BAYOU MANCHAC, LA........            100   ...........            100   ...........
ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF AND BLACK,              100   ...........            240   ...........
 LA...................................................
BARATARIA BASIN BARRIER SHORELINE RESTORATION, LA.....  ..............          100  ..............          100
BARATARIA BASIN MARSH CREATION AND RESTORATION, LA....  ..............          100  ..............          100
BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LA.................................  ..............          110  ..............          200
CALCASIEU LOCK, LA....................................            150   ...........            200   ...........
CALCASIEU RIVER BASIN, LA.............................            150   ...........            200   ...........
CALCASIEU RIVER PASS SHIP CHANNEL ENLARGEMENT, LA.....  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
GIWW ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA........................            100   ...........            100   ...........
HURRICANE PROTECTION, LA..............................            125   ...........            125   ...........
JEFFERSON PARISH, LA..................................  ..............           25  ..............           25
LAFAYETTE PARISH, LA..................................  ..............          125  ..............          125
LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA......            585   ...........            585   ...........
ORLEANS PARISH, LA....................................  ..............           25  ..............           25
OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, LA AND AR..................             37   ...........             37   ...........
PLAQUEMINES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA............            100   ...........            200   ...........
PORT OF IBERIA, LA....................................            185   ...........            185   ...........
ST BERNARD PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA.............            150   ...........            150   ...........
ST CHARLES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA.............            100   ...........            200   ...........
ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST PARISH, LA.......................            100   ...........            200   ...........
WEST SHORE, LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA....................  ..............          100            200   ...........
 
                       MARYLAND
 
ANACOSTIA RIVER, PG COUNTY LEVEE, MD AND DC...........            248   ...........            248   ...........
BALTIMORE METRO, GWYNNS FALLS, MD.....................  ..............           50  ..............          250
CHESAPEAKE BAY SHORELINE EROSION, MD, VA AND DE.......            350   ...........            350   ...........
EASTERN SHORE, MD.....................................            350   ...........          1,070   ...........
LOWER POTOMAC ESTUARY WATERSHED, ST MARY'S, MD........            100   ...........            100   ...........
MIDDLE POTOMAC RIVER BASIN, MD........................            350   ...........            350   ...........
SMITH ISLAND ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, MD............  ..............          249  ..............          249
 
                     MASSACHUSETTS
 
BLACKSTONE RIVER WATERSHED RESTORATION, MA AND RI.....            140   ...........            140   ...........
BOSTON HARBOR (45-FOOT CHANNEL), MA...................            362   ...........            362   ...........
COASTAL MASSACHUSETTS ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, MA.......             80   ...........             80   ...........
MUDDY RIVER, BROOKLINE AND BOSTON, MA.................  ..............          322  ..............          322
SOMERSET AND SEARSBURG DAMS, DEERFIELD RIVER, MA AND               62   ...........             62   ...........
 VT...................................................
 
                       MICHIGAN
 
DETROIT RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, MI..............  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
DETROIT RIVER MASTER PLAN, MI.........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
DETROIT RIVER SEAWALLS, MI............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, MI.....  ..............  ...........            174   ...........
GREAT LAKES NAV SYST STUDY, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, PA            375   ...........            750   ...........
JOHN GLENN GREAT LAKES STRATEGIC PLAN, MI.............  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
LANSING, MI...........................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
ROUGE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, MI................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
MUSKEGON LAKE ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, MI..............  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
ST CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST CLAIR, MI..................  ..............  ...........            124   ...........
WHITE LAKE ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, MI.................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
 
                       MINNESOTA
 
MINNESOTA DAM SAFETY, MN..............................            222   ...........            222   ...........
RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN, ND, SD AND MANITOBA,          1,078   ...........          2,078   ...........
 CANADA...............................................
UPPER MISS RIVER WATERSHED MGMT, LAKE ITASCA TO L/D 2.            400   ...........            400   ...........
 
                      MISSISSIPPI
 
PEARL RIVER WATERSHED, MS.............................            363   ...........            500   ...........
 
                       MISSOURI
 
CHESTERFIELD, MO......................................  ..............          385  ..............          715
KANSAS CITYS, MO AND KS...............................            400   ...........            750   ...........
MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, UNITS L455 AND R460-471,             100   ...........            331   ...........
 MO AND KS............................................
RIVER DES PERES, MO...................................  ..............          130  ..............          185
SPRINGFIELD, MO.......................................            140   ...........            440   ...........
ST. LOUIS AREA MISSISSIPPI RIVERFRONT, MO AND IL......            185   ...........            185   ...........
ST. LOUIS HARBOR, MO AND IL...........................  ..............           73  ..............           73
ST. LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO........................  ..............          150  ..............          150
SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, KANSAS CITY, MO...........  ..............          100  ..............          350
WEARS CREEK, JEFFERSON CITY, MO.......................             57   ...........             57   ...........
 
                        MONTANA
 
YELLOWSTONE RIVER CORRIDOR, MT........................            300   ...........            300   ...........
 
                       NEBRASKA
 
LOWER PLATTE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NE................            139   ...........            139   ...........
SAND CREEK WATERSHED, WAHOO, NE.......................  ..............          130  ..............          130
WESTERN SARPY AND CLEAR CREEK, NE.....................  ..............          180  ..............          180
 
                        NEVADA
 
LAS VEGAS WASH, NORTH LAS VEGAS, NV...................            100   ...........            500   ...........
LOWER LAS VEGAS WASH WETLANDS, NV.....................            100   ...........            400   ...........
TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV...................................  ..............          650  ..............        1,000
WALKER RIVER BASIN, NV................................             25   ...........             25   ...........
 

[[Page 717]]

 
                     NEW HAMPSHIRE
 
CONNECTICUT RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, NH AND VT....             25   ...........             25   ...........
MERRIMACK RIVER BASIN, NH.............................            350   ...........            500   ...........
PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER, UPPER TURNING   ..............  ...........            100   ...........
 BASIN, NH AND ME.....................................
 
                      NEW JERSEY
 
BARNEGAT BAY, NJ......................................  ..............  ...........  ..............          100
DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, NJ, NY, DE AND PA.            100   ...........            325   ...........
GREAT EGG INLET TO TOWNSEND INLET, NJ.................  ..............          300  ..............          300
HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS         ..............  ...........            100   ...........
 ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, NJ............................
HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ......            206   ...........            206   ...........
LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ...............................             30   ...........             30   ...........
MANASQUAN INLET TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ.................  ..............          200  ..............          200
NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION, HEREFORD TO CAPE MAY                 100   ...........            100   ...........
 INLET, NJ............................................
NEW JERSEY SHORELINE ALTERNATIVE LONG-TERM                        100   ...........            100   ...........
 NOURISHMENT, NJ......................................
PASSAIC RIVER, HARRISON, NJ...........................  ..............          270  ..............          270
PECKMAN RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ.....................             50   ...........             50   ...........
RAHWAY RIVER BASIN, NJ................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, HIGHLANDS, NJ.........            100   ...........            100   ...........
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, KEYPORT, NJ...........            100   ...........            100   ...........
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, LEONARDO, NJ..........            200   ...........            200   ...........
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, PORT MONMOUTH, NJ.....  ..............          100  ..............          100
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION BEACH, NJ.......  ..............          100  ..............          100
SHREWSBURY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ..................            100   ...........            100   ...........
SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NJ..................  ..............          100  ..............          100
STONY BROOK, MILLSTONE RIVER BASIN, NJ................            100   ...........            100   ...........
UPPER PASSAIC RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ...............  ..............           30  ..............           30
UPPER ROCKAWAY RIVER, NJ..............................            300   ...........            300   ...........
WOODBRIDGE RIVER BASIN, NJ............................            100   ...........            100   ...........
 
                      NEW MEXICO
 
EAST MESA, LAS CRUCES, NM.............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
ESPANOLA VALLEY, RIO GRANDE AND TRIBUTARIES, NM.......             50   ...........             50   ...........
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE BOSQUE, NM..........................            100   ...........            400   ...........
RIO GRANDE BASIN, NM, CO AND TX.......................            300   ...........            300   ...........
SANTA FE, NM..........................................            205   ...........            205   ...........
SW VALLEY FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION STUDY, ALBUQUERQUE,    ..............          250  ..............          450
 NM...................................................
 
                       NEW YORK
 
AUSABLE RIVER BASIN, ESSEX AND CLINTON COUNTIES, NY...             50   ...........             50   ...........
BOQUET RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ESSEX COUNTY, NY........             50   ...........             50   ...........
BRONX RIVER BASIN, NY.................................             30   ...........             30   ...........
BUFFALO RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, NY..............  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY............................            258   ...........            258   ...........
FREEPORT CREEK, VILLAGE OF FREEPORT, NY...............            100   ...........            100   ...........
HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, GOWANUS CANAL, NY AND NJ.....            360   ...........            360   ...........
HUDSON--RARITAN ESTUARY, NY AND NJ....................            676   ...........            676   ...........
HUDSON RIVER HABITAT RESTORATION, NY..................  ..............           50  ..............           50
JAMAICA BAY, MARINE PARK AND PLUMB BEACH, ARVERNE, NY.             50   ...........             50   ...........
JAMAICA BAY, MARINE PARK AND PLUMB BEACH, NY..........            200   ...........            200   ...........
LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY...............................             30   ...........             30   ...........
LINDENHURST, NY.......................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
NEW YORK HARBOR ANCHORAGE AREAS, NY...................            364   ...........            364   ...........
NORTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, ASHAROKEN, NY.............            200   ...........            200   ...........
NORTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, BAYVILLE, NY..............            250   ...........            250   ...........
ONONDAGA LAKE COUNTY WATERSHED MANAGEMENT STUDY, NY...  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
ONONDAGA LAKE, NY.....................................            300   ...........            300   ...........
SAW MILL RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NY....................             50   ...........             50   ...........
SOUTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, NY........................             50   ...........             50   ...........
SOUTH SHORE OF STATEN ISLAND, NY......................            200   ...........            200   ...........
UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, NY....................            146   ...........            146   ...........
UPPER SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN ENVIRON RESTORATION, NY.            161   ...........            161   ...........
 
                    NORTH CAROLINA
 
BOGUE BANKS, NC.......................................            300   ...........            450   ...........
CURRITUCK SOUND, NC...................................            200   ...........            300   ...........
DARE COUNTY BEACHES, HATTERAS AND ORACOKE ISLANDS, NC.            150   ...........            300   ...........
NEUSE RIVER BASIN, NC.................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
SURF CITY AND NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH, NC.................            173   ...........            200   ...........
 
                         OHIO
 
ASHTABULA RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OH............  ..............          160  ..............          600
BELPRE, OH............................................  ..............  ...........  ..............          400
BUTLER COUNTY, OH.....................................            243   ...........            243   ...........
DUCK CREEK WATERSHED, OH..............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
OHIO RIVERFRONT STUDY, CINCINNATI, OH.................  ..............  ...........            400   ...........
COLUMBUS METROPOLITAN AREA, OH........................            100   ...........            100   ...........
HOCKING RIVER BASIN ENV RESTORATION, MONDAY CREEK, OH.            205   ...........            205   ...........
HOCKING RIVER BASIN ENV RESTORATION, SUNDAY CREEK, OH.            225   ...........            225   ...........
MAHONING RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OH AND PA......             40   ...........          1,000   ...........
MUSKINGUM BASIN SYSTEM STUDY, OH......................            225   ...........            225   ...........
POLK RUN CREEK, OH....................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
 
                       OKLAHOMA
 
MIAMI AND VICINITY, OK................................            380   ...........            380   ...........
MOUNTAIN FORK WATERSHEAD STUDY, OK....................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
OOLOGAH LAKE WATERSHED, OK AND KS.....................            310   ...........            450   ...........
RED RIVER WATERWAY, OK, TX AND AR.....................             50   ...........             50   ...........
SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCE STUDY, OK...........            100   ...........            100   ...........
SPAVINAW CREEK, OK....................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
WASHITA RIVER BASIN, OK...............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
WISTER LAKE WATERSHED, OK.............................             50   ...........            200   ...........
 
                        OREGON
 
AMAZON CREEK, OR......................................            100   ...........            100   ...........
LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR AND WA.            300   ...........            300   ...........
TILLAMOOK BAY AND ESTUARY ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR...            266   ...........            266   ...........
WALLA WALLA RIVER WATERSHED, OR AND WA................            390   ...........            800   ...........

[[Page 718]]

 
WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN REVIEW, OR.....................            100   ...........            100   ...........
WILLAMETTE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OR...........            249   ...........            249   ...........
WILLAMETTE RIVER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, OR...........            150   ...........            150   ...........
 
                     PENNSYLVANIA
 
BLOOMSBURG, PA........................................            204   ...........            204   ...........
CHRISTINA RIVER WATERSHED, PA, DE AND MD..............            100   ...........            300   ...........
SCHUYLKILL RIVER, WISSAHICKON, PA.....................            100   ...........            500   ...........
SCHUYLKILL RIVER BASIN ESTAURINE, PA..................  ..............  ...........            250   ...........
UPPER OHIO RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM STUDY, PA..........  ..............  ...........          1,200   ...........
 
                      PUERTO RICO
 
RIO NIGUA AT SALINAS, PR..............................  ..............          147  ..............          147
 
                     RHODE ISLAND
 
QUONSET DAVISVILLE PORT, RI...........................             25   ...........  ..............  ...........
RHODE ISLAND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, RI................             25   ...........             25   ...........
 
                    SOUTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC....................            475   ...........            625   ...........
BROAD RIVER BASIN, SC.................................            103   ...........            250   ...........
CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC.................................            135   ...........            135   ...........
PAWLEYS ISLAND, SC....................................  ..............          100  ..............          100
REEDY RIVER, SC.......................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
SANTEE DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, SC............             50   ...........             50   ...........
WACCAMAW RIVER, SC....................................             25   ...........             25   ...........
 
                     SOUTH DAKOTA
 
JAMES RIVER, SD.......................................  ..............  ...........          1,000   ...........
NIOBRARA RIVER AND MISSOURI RIVER, SD.................            100   ...........            100   ...........
WATERTOWN, SD.........................................  ..............  ...........            750   ...........
 
                       TENNESSEE
 
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER,TN..................  ..............          252  ..............        4,000
DAVIDSON COUNTY, TN...................................            240   ...........            240   ...........
FRENCH BROAD WATERSHED, TN............................            205   ...........            264   ...........
LICK BRANCH WATERSHED, TN.............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
WASHINGTON DEE CEE BASIN, TN..........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
 
                         TEXAS
 
BOIS D'ARC CREEK, BONHAM, TX..........................            100   ...........            100   ...........
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, WHITE OAK BAYOU, TX....            160   ...........            160   ...........
CEDAR BAYOU, TX.......................................  ..............          310  ..............          510
COLONIAS-LWR RIO GRANDE BASIN ALONG TX AND MEXICO       ..............          100  ..............          300
 BORDER, TX...........................................
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.......................            410   ...........            410   ...........
FREEPORT HARBOR, TX...................................            200   ...........            500   ...........
FREEPORT HURRICANE PROTECTION LEVEE, TX...............            100   ...........            300   ...........
GIWW MODIFICATIONS, TX................................            225   ...........            225   ...........
GIWW, BRAZOS RIVER TO PORT O'CONNOR, TX...............            225   ...........            225   ...........
GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER, TX.................  ..............          275  ..............          275
GIWW, MATAGORDA BAY, TX...............................  ..............          480  ..............          480
GIWW, PORT O'CONNOR TO CORPUS CHRISTI BAY, TX.........            228   ...........            228   ...........
GREENS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX.............................  ..............          150  ..............          150
GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASINS, TX............            300   ...........          1,050   ...........
HARRIS GULLY, HOUSTON, TX.............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, TX........................            600   ...........          2,200   ...........
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL (PORT LAVACA), TX..............  ..............  ...........            650   ...........
MIDDLE BRAZOS RIVER, TX...............................             50   ...........             50   ...........
MUSTANG BAYOU, BRAZORIA COUNTY, TX....................            137   ...........            137   ...........
NORTH BOSQUE RIVER, TX................................  ..............           50  ..............           50
NORTHWEST EL PASO, TX.................................            228   ...........            228   ...........
NUECES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX......................             87   ...........             87   ...........
RAYMONDVILLE DRAIN, TX................................  ..............          250  ..............          250
RESACAS AT BROWNSVILLE, TX............................            200   ...........            200   ...........
SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX............................            400   ...........            400   ...........
SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX......................            250   ...........            250   ...........
SOUTH MAIN CHANNEL, TX................................  ..............          200  ..............          200
SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX.............            137   ...........            137   ...........
SULPHUR RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, TX...........             50   ...........             50   ...........
TEXAS CITY CHANNEL (50-FOOT PROJECT), TX..............  ..............          200  ..............        1,000
UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX.........................            433   ...........          1,800   ...........
 
                         UTAH
 
PARK CITY WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, UT....................  ..............  ...........            500   ...........
PROVO AND VICINITY, UT................................             25   ...........             25   ...........
 
                       VIRGINIA
 
AIWW, BRIDGES AT DEEP CREEK, VA.......................  ..............          275  ..............          275
CLINCH RIVER WATER PROJECT, VA........................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
ELIZABETH RIVER, HAMPTON ROADS, VA....................  ..............          471  ..............          471
FOURMILE RUN, VA......................................             37   ...........             37   ...........
JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA...............................  ..............          109  ..............          109
JOHN H KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA AND NC (SECTION 216)            300   ...........            400   ...........
LOWER RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER BASIN, VA....................            157   ...........            157   ...........
LYNNHAVEN RIVER BASIN, VA.............................             37   ...........            237   ...........
NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS, CRANEY ISLAND, VA........            350   ...........            350   ...........
POWELL RIVER WATERSHED, VA............................            100   ...........            100   ...........
 
                      WASHINGTON
 
BELLINGHAM BAY, WA....................................             50   ...........             50   ...........
CENTRALIA, WA.........................................  ..............          500  ..............        1,000
CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WA..............................            250   ...........            250   ...........
COMMENCEMENT BAY AND HYLEBOS WATERWAY, PIERCE COUNTY,             200   ...........            500   ...........
 WA...................................................
DUWAMISH AND GREEN RIVER BASIN, WA....................  ..............          265  ..............          265
ELLIOT BAY SEAWALL, WA................................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA........................            450   ...........            450   ...........
PUGET SOUND CONFINED DISPOSAL SITES, WA...............             50   ...........             50   ...........
PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT RESTORATION, WA..            250   ...........            900   ...........

[[Page 719]]

 
SKAGIT RIVER, WA......................................            450   ...........            900   ...........
STILLAGUAMISH RIVER BASIN, WA.........................  ..............          100  ..............          100
WHITE RIVER FLOOD CONTROL AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, W            200   ...........            200   ...........
 
                     WEST VIRGINIA
 
ISLAND CREEK AT LOGAN, WV.............................  ..............          697  ..............          697
LITTLE KANAWHA RIVER, WV..............................  ..............  ...........            100   ...........
NEW RIVER BASIN, WV, NC AND VA........................            235   ...........            235   ...........
 
                       WISCONSIN
 
BARABOO RIVER, WI.....................................            350   ...........            350   ...........
FOX RIVER, WI.........................................             40   ...........             40   ...........
FOX RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, WI..................  ..............  ...........            200   ...........
 
                        WYOMING
 
JACKSON HOLE RESTORATION, WY..........................  ..............          108  ..............          108
 
                     MISCELLANEOUS
 
COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION.........................          2,500   ...........          4,500   ...........
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES............................            100   ...........            100   ...........
FLOOD DAMAGE DATA.....................................            300   ...........            300   ...........
FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES.......................          7,500   ...........          9,000   ...........
GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM (SECTION 401).....  ..............  ...........          2,000   ...........
HYDROLOGIC STUDIES....................................            400   ...........            400   ...........
INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES...........................            400   ...........            400   ...........
NATIONAL SHORELINE....................................            500   ...........            500   ...........
OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS...........................          4,850   ...........          5,250   ...........
PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES.........................          6,000   ...........          6,500   ...........
PRECIPITATION STUDIES (NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE)......            300   ...........            300   ...........
REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT..            200   ...........            200   ...........
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT..............................         22,000   ...........         25,000   ...........
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTERS..........            100   ...........            100   ...........
STREAM GAGING (U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY)................            500   ...........            500   ...........
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS................................            500   ...........            500   ...........
TRI-SERVICE CADD/GIS TECHNOLOGY CENTER................            450   ...........            450   ...........
REDUCTION FOR ANTICIPATED SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE........        -21,430   ...........        -41,263   ...........
ADJUSTMENT FOR ACTUAL RETIREMENT ACCRUALS.............           -517   ...........  ..............  ...........
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS...................         83,488        18,995        114,394        33,910
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Knik Bridge Crossing, AK.--The Committee has included 
     $100,000 to initiate feasibility.
       Hot Springs, AR.--The Committee has provided $100,000 for a 
     reconnaissance study to identify and evaluate alternatives 
     for flood damage prevention.
       Red River Navigation, Southwest Arkansas, AR and LA.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $583,000 to complete the 
     cost-shared navigation study. The Committee understands that 
     navigation in the Shreveport, LA, to Index, AR reach is an 
     extension of the existing J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, and 
     as such, urges the Corps to perform an additional analysis 
     using the same discount rate and local cost-sharing 
     requirements as required for the existing waterway. This 
     analysis should be displayed as a part of all study and 
     project documents.
       Southwest Arkansas Study, Little River Basin, AR.--The 
     Committee has provided $200,000 to initiate and complete an 
     expanded reconnaissance study to address flooding, 
     environmental restoration, water quality and other water 
     resource needs in the Red River and Little Red River basins.
       Rio de Flag, Flagstaff, AZ.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $880,000 for preconstruction engineering and design 
     phase for Rio de Flag, Flagstaff, AZ.
       American River Watershed, CA.--The Committee has provided 
     $2,600,000 for continuing analyses on the American River 
     Watershed Long-Term Study, which recommends authorization of 
     the so-called Folsom Dam Mini-Raise. In the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999, Congress directed the Corps of 
     Engineers to study a potential increase in flood storage at 
     the Folsom reservoir. The Corps has completed its review and 
     has concluded that raising the existing dam by 7 feet would 
     provide substantially increased flood control benefits, and 
     is technically feasible, economically justified and 
     environmentally preferable, to other flood control options 
     for the Sacramento region. The Congress has methodically 
     authorized and funded improvements in the Sacramento region 
     to reduce flooding and these efforts should continue without 
     further delay. The Mini-Raise is widely supported by 
     virtually all of the congressional delegation as well as 
     State and local officials and the environmental community. 
     However, the project continues to have narrow but persistent 
     opposition. The Committee believes it is time to provide 
     Sacramento with much needed and deserved flood protection. It 
     is the Committee's understanding that the Chief's report for 
     this project is currently under review. The longer the review 
     drags on, the longer tens of thousands of citizens in the 
     Sacramento, California, region will remain in jeopardy from 
     catastrophic flooding. The Committee directs that this review 
     be expedited such that the project will be eligible for 
     authorization in 2002. The Committee also strongly urges the 
     congressional authorizing committees to authorize the Folsom 
     Mini-Raise in the next Water Resources Development Act.
       Coast of California, South Coast Region, Los Angeles 
     County, CA.--The Committee has provided $400,000 to continue 
     data collection and surveys.
       Huntington Harbor Dredging, CA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $100,000 for a reconnaissance study 
     for ecosystem restoration of Huntington Harbor, CA.
       Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, CA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $1,000,000 to complete the 
     feasibility study and to initiate preconstruction engineering 
     and design activities for Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration, 
     CA.
       Sacramento and San Joaquin Comprehensive Basin Study, CA.--
     The Committee recommendation includes $3,173,000 to complete 
     the feasibility study and to initiate preconstruction 
     engineering and design.
       Tahoe Basin, CA & NV.--The Committee has included 
     $1,500,000 to continue the comprehensive watershed study of 
     the Lake Tahoe Basin Watershed.
       Adams County, CO.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $100,000 for a reconnaissance study for ecosystem restoration 
     study for Adams County, CO.
       New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam, GA & SC.--The Committee 
     has provided $176,000 to continue the preconstruction 
     engineering and design phase of the New Savannah Bluff Lock 
     and Dam, GA & SC.
       Savannah Harbor Estuary Restoration Study, GA.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $100,000 for a 
     reconnaissance study for ecosystem restoration study for the 
     Savannah Harbor Estuary Restoration Study, GA.
       Waikiki Erosion Control, HI.--The Committee has provided 
     $250,000 to continue preconstruction engineering and design 
     for the Waikiki Erosion Control, HI, project.
       Upper Mississippi & Illinois Navigation Study, IL, IA, MN, 
     MO, & WI.--The Committee recommendation includes $3,685,000 
     to continue the system feasibility phase of this study to 
     ensure timely completion in fiscal year 2004. The Committee 
     understands that the Corps has submitted an Interim Report in 
     compliance with direction in the fiscal year 2003 Senate 
     Energy and Water Development bill.
       Columbus Waterfront Development Project, Columbus, IN.--The 
     Committee has provided $100,000 to initiate and complete a 
     reconnaissance study of the Columbus, IN waterfront area.
       Vincennes Waterfront Development Project, Vincennes, IN.--
     The Committee has provided $100,000 to initiate and complete 
     a reconnaissance study of the Vincennes, IN waterfront area.
       Covington Waterfront Development Project, Covington, KY.--
     The Committee has provided

[[Page 720]]

     $200,000 to initiate and complete a reconnaissance study of 
     the Covington, KY waterfront area.
       Muddy River, Brookline and Boston, MA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $322,000 to complete the 
     preconstruction engineering and design phase of the flood 
     damage reduction and ecosystem restoration for the Muddy 
     River in Boston and Brookline, MA.
       Detroit River Environmental Dredging, MI.--The Committee 
     has provided $100,000 to initiate the feasibility study of 
     dredging and disposal requirements of contaminated sediments 
     in the Detroit River.
       Detroit River Master Plan, Detroit, MI.--The Committee has 
     provided $100,000 to continue the Detroit River Master Plan 
     study.
       Detroit River Seawalls, Detroit, MI.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $100,000 for continued studies of the 
     Detroit River Seawalls.
       Rouge River Environmental Dredging, MI.--The Committee has 
     provided $100,000 for a reconnaissance study on remediation 
     of contaminated sediments in the Rouge River.
       Red River of the North Basin, MN, ND, SD, & Manitoba, 
     Canada.--The Committee recommendation includes $2,078,000 to 
     continue feasibility studies and incorporate the Fargo 
     Southside, ND, project formerly being studied under the 
     Continuing Authorities Program.
       The Committee is aware that several stakeholder groups in 
     the Red River Basin are coordinating water resource 
     management efforts across State and international borders by 
     forming the Red River Basin Commission (RRBC). The Committee 
     recognizes this Commission, which includes local, provincial, 
     State, and Federal interests, as a non-profit entity 
     registered in the States of Minnesota, North Dakota, South 
     Dakota, and the Canadian Province of Manitoba.
       Missouri River Levee System, Units L455 & R 460-471, MO & 
     KS.--The Committee has provided $331,000 to complete the 
     feasibility study.
       Portsmouth Harbor & Piscataqua River, Upper Turning Basin, 
     NH & ME.--The Committee recommendation includes $100,000 for 
     a reconnaissance study of navigation improvements at 
     Portsmouth Harbor.
       Hudson-Raritan Estuary -- Hackensack Meadowlands Ecosystem 
     Restoration, NJ.--The Committee has provided $100,000 to 
     initiate the feasibility study.
       Onondaga Lake County Watershed Management Study, NY.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $100,000 to initiate 
     comprehensive watershed studies for the Onondaga County 
     Watershed.
       Duck Creek Watershed, OH.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $100,000 to initiate and complete a reconnaissance 
     study and negotiate a feasibility cost sharing agreement.
       Ohio Riverfront Study, Cincinnati, OH.--The Committee has 
     provided $400,000 to initiate a feasibility study.
       James River, SD.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $1,000,000 to complete reconnaissance studies and to initiate 
     feasibility studies for flood damage reduction in the James 
     River basin.
       Watertown, SD.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $750,000 for initiation of a general reevaluation report for 
     a flood protection project at Watertown, SD.
       Guadalupe and San Antonio River Basins, TX.--The Committee 
     has provided $1,050,000 to continue basinwide environmental 
     restoration studies and for basin hydrologic studies to 
     update flood plain mapping in Goliad, Karnes, and Wilson 
     Counties.
       Harris Gully, Houston, TX.--The Committee has provided 
     $100,000 for studies to determine the feasibility of 
     alternative measures relating to flood damage reduction, 
     ecosystem restoration, and other allied purposes for Harris 
     Gully, Houston, TX.
       Matagorda Ship Channel (Port Lavaca), TX.--The Committee 
     has provided $650,000 for studies of navigation improvements 
     of the Matagorda Ship Channel.
       Duwamish and Green River Basin, WA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $265,000 to complete the 
     preconstruction engineering and design phase for ecosystem 
     restoration of the Duwamish and Green River Basin.
       Coastal Field Data Collection.--Within the funds provided, 
     the Committee has provided $1,000,000 for the Southern 
     California Beach Processes Study and $1,000,000 for Hurricane 
     Evaluation Studies in the State of Hawaii and U.S. 
     Territories.
       Flood Plain Management Services.--Within the amount 
     provided for the Flood Plain Management Services Program, the 
     Committee urges the Corps to develop information and 
     decision-support tools for hurricane preparedness in the 
     State of Hawaii and U.S. Territories and to conduct a flood 
     plain management study for Dexter, MO, and a flood plain 
     management study for Cumberland County, TN.
       Other Coordination Programs.--Within the funds provided, 
     the Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for activities 
     related to the Environmental Improvement Program for the Lake 
     Tahoe Basin, CA & NV, $200,000 for the American Heritage 
     Rivers Program, $500,000 for international waters studies, 
     and $600,000 for the Tri-Service CADD/GIS Technology Center.
       Planning Assistance to States.--The Committee has provided 
     $6,500,000 for the Planning Assistance to States Program. 
     Within the funds provided, the Committee urges the Corps of 
     Engineers to assist in the development of a watershed 
     management assessment plan for Lamar County, AL, initiate 
     studies for Cross Lake, LA, and a drought watershed 
     management plan for Big Hole, MT.
       Research and Development.--Within the funds provided for 
     the Corps of Engineers R&D Program, $2,000,000 is provided 
     for innovative technology demonstrations for urban flooding 
     and channel restoration. These demonstrations shall be 
     conducted in close coordination and cooperation with the 
     Urban Water Research Program of the Desert Research Institute 
     of Nevada. $500,000 is provided to conduct investigations, 
     assessment, and demonstrations on large-scale submerged 
     aquatic vegetation restoration techniques and technologies. 
     Appropriate demonstration activities should be considered 
     within the Chesapeake Bay, MD.
       The Committee is aware that WRDA 1999, Sec. 503 authorized 
     the test and demonstration of innovative technologies for 
     environmentally sound management of contaminated sediments. 
     The Committee encourages the Corps of Engineers to continue 
     its work in this matter in cooperation with the University of 
     New Hampshire.


                         construction, general

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,715,951,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,415,612,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,636,602,000

       This appropriation includes funds for construction, major 
     rehabilitation and related activities for water resources 
     development projects having navigation, flood control, water 
     supply, hydroelectric, environmental restoration, and other 
     attendant benefits to the Nation. The construction and major 
     rehabilitation projects for inland and costal waterways will 
     derive one-half of the funding from the Inland Waterway Trust 
     Fund. Funds to be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust 
     Fund will be applied to cover the Federal share of the 
     Dredged Material Disposal Facilities Program.
       The appropriation provides funds for the Continuing 
     Authorities Program (projects which do not require specific 
     authorizing legislation), which includes projects for flood 
     control (Section 205), emergency streambank and shoreline 
     protection (Section 14), beach erosion control (Section 103), 
     mitigation of shore damages (Section 111), navigation 
     projects (Section 107), snagging and clearing (Section 208), 
     aquatic ecosystem restoration (Section 206), beneficial uses 
     of dredged material (Section 204), and project modifications 
     for improvement of the environment (Section 1135).
       The budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 
     shown on the following table:

                                    CORPS OF ENGINEERS--CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      Budget         Committee
                                  Project title                                      estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     ALABAMA
 
MOBILE HARBOR, AL...............................................................             200           1,000
WALTER F GEORGE POWERHOUSE AND DAM, AL AND GA (MAJOR REH........................          16,473          16,473
WALTER F GEORGE POWERPLANT, AL AND GA (MAJOR REHAB).............................           2,852           2,852
 
                                     ALASKA
 
BETHEL EMERGENCY BANK STABILIZATION, AK.........................................  ..............           3,000
BUCKLAND ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, AK.......................................  ..............           2,000
CHIGNIK HARBOR, AK..............................................................           3,120           3,120
DILLINGHAM BANK STABILIZATION, AK...............................................  ..............           4,000
GALENA, AK......................................................................  ..............           3,000
KAKE, AK........................................................................  ..............           2,000
NOME HARBOR IMPROVEMENTS, AK....................................................           4,500           4,500
ST PAUL HARBOR, AK..............................................................           5,880           5,880
SEWARD HARBOR, AK...............................................................  ..............           3,500
WRANGELL HARBOR, AK.............................................................           5,000           5,000
 

[[Page 721]]

 
                                     ARIZONA
 
RIO SALADO, PHOENIX AND TEMPE REACHES, AZ.......................................          14,300          17,000
 
                                    ARKANSAS
 
FOURCHE BAYOU BASIN, AR.........................................................  ..............             500
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR.............................           3,360           3,360
MONTGOMERY POINT LOCK AND DAM, AR...............................................          20,000          24,000
RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAM, AR, LA, TX, AND OK.................................  ..............           2,500
RED RIVER EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION, AR, LA, TX, AND OK.........................  ..............           4,000
 
                                   CALIFORNIA
 
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM MODIFICATIONS), CA.........................           4,900           4,900
AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED, CA....................................................          22,280          22,280
CORTE MADERA CREEK, CA..........................................................             100             100
GUADALUPE RIVER, CA.............................................................           5,000           9,000
HAMILTON AIRFIELD WETLANDS RESTORATION, CA......................................           3,900           5,000
HARBOR/SOUTH BAY WATER RECYCLING, CA............................................  ..............           7,000
IMPERIAL BEACH, SILVER STRAND SHORELINE, CA.....................................             200             600
KAWEAH RIVER, CA................................................................          10,151          11,000
LOS ANGELES HARBOR, MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING, CA..................................  ..............          10,300
LOWER SACRAMENTO AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA..................................           1,680           1,680
MARYSVILLE/YUBA CITY LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA...................................           5,900           5,900
MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA.......................................................             500             500
MID-VALLEY AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA........................................           5,172           5,172
NAPA RIVER, CA..................................................................           5,000           8,000
OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA............................................           5,000           5,000
PETALUMA RIVER, CA..............................................................           4,000           2,200
SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA....................................           2,600           2,600
SACRAMENTO RIVER DEEPWATER SHIP CHANNEL, CA.....................................             250             400
SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA IRRIGATION DISTRICT, CA..........................             806             806
SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON, CA...............................................  ..............           1,150
SAN LORENZO RIVER, CA...........................................................           2,751           2,751
SAN RAMON VALLEY RECYCLED WATER PROJECT, CA.....................................  ..............             500
SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA....................................................          29,700          32,000
SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA........................................................             100             100
SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, CA.............................................           2,000           7,000
STOCKTON METROPOLITIAN FLOOD CONTROL REIMBURSEMENT, CA..........................           1,000  ..............
SUCCESS DAM, TULE RIVER, CA (DAM SAFETY)........................................           1,000           1,000
SURFSIDE-SUNSET-NEWPORT BEACH, CA...............................................           4,300           4,300
TULE RIVER, CA..................................................................  ..............           1,500
UPPER SACRAMENTO AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA..................................           3,510           3,510
 
                                    DELAWARE
 
DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWES BEACH, DE......................             500           1,200
DELAWARE COAST PROTECTION, DE...................................................             294             294
DELAWARE COAST, REHOBOTH BEACH TO DEWEY BEACH, DE...............................           1,000           2,000
 
                                     FLORIDA
 
BREVARD COUNTY, FL..............................................................  ..............           1,500
CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL............................................................           3,600           3,600
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL................................................         108,202          90,000
DADE COUNTY, FL.................................................................  ..............           2,000
EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL..........................          19,526          19,526
JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL.........................................................           4,028           3,528
JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM POWERHOUSE, FL AND GA (MAJOR R........................           1,742           1,742
KISSIMMEE RIVER, FL.............................................................          23,727          23,727
MIAMI HARBOR CHANNEL, FL........................................................          13,100           4,000
PALM BEACH COUNTY (REIMBURSEMENT), FL...........................................  ..............           1,500
PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL..........................................................           1,645           1,645
ST JOHNS COUNTY, FL.............................................................  ..............             300
 
                                     GEORGIA
 
BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA............................................................          11,116           6,000
BUFORD POWERHOUSE, GA (MAJOR REHAB).............................................           3,374           3,374
HARTWELL LAKE POWERHOUSE, GA AND SC (MAJOR REHAB)...............................           2,493           2,493
LOWER SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN, GA AND SC...........................................             250             250
OATES CREEK, RICHMOND COUNTY, GA (DEF CORR).....................................             850             850
RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA AND SC.......................................           1,000           1,000
THURMOND LAKE POWERHOUSE, GA AND SC (MAJOR REHAB)...............................           3,500           3,500
 
                                     HAWAII
 
HAWAII WATER MANAGEMENT, HI.....................................................  ..............           2,000
IAO STREAM FLOOD CONTROL, MAUI, HI (DEF CORR)...................................             419             419
KAUMALAPAU HARBOR, HI...........................................................  ..............           2,000
KIKIAOLA SMALL BOAT HARBOR, KAUAI, HI...........................................           4,303           4,303
MAALAEA HARBOR, MAUI, HI........................................................           2,262           2,262
 
                                    ILLINOIS
 
CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (DEF CORR)..........................           2,037           2,037
CHICAGO SHORELINE, IL...........................................................          19,000          21,000
COOK COUNTY, IL.................................................................  ..............             400
DES PLAINES RIVER, IL...........................................................  ..............           2,500
EAST ST LOUIS, IL...............................................................             800             800
LOCK AND DAM 24, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL AND MO (MAJOR REH........................          10,000          10,000
LOVES PARK, IL..................................................................           2,973           2,973
MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL..............................................          10,000          12,000
MELVIN PRICE LOCK AND DAM, IL AND MO............................................           1,200           1,200
NUTWOOD LEVEE, IL...............................................................  ..............             200
OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL AND KY....................................          77,000          65,000
UPPER MISS RVR SYSTEM ENV MGMT PROGRAM, IL, IA, MN, MO..........................          12,200          15,000
 
                                     INDIANA
 
CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, IN (ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE).........................  ..............             500
INDIANA HARBOR (CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITY), IN.................................           6,800           6,800
INDIANAPOLIS, WHITE RIVER (NORTH), IN...........................................           2,000           2,000
LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, IN........................................................           3,562           3,562
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN (MAJOR REHAB).............................................           7,094           7,094
OHIO RIVER GREENWAY PUBLIC ACCESS, IN...........................................             732             732
 
                                      IOWA
 
DES MOINES RECREATIONAL RIVER AND GREENBELT, IA.................................  ..............           1,400

[[Page 722]]

 
LOCK AND DAM 11, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IA (MAJOR REHAB)............................           1,366           2,250
LOCK AND DAM 12, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IA (MAJOR REHAB)............................           5,404           5,404
MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE MITIGATION, IA, NE, K..........................          17,500          18,600
MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, IA, NE, KS AND MO..................................           6,978          10,000
PERRY CREEK, IA.................................................................           4,000           4,500
 
                                     KANSAS
 
ARKANSAS CITY, KS...............................................................           3,000           3,000
 
                                    KENTUCKY
 
DEWEY LAKE, KY (DAM SAFETY).....................................................             600             600
KENTUCKY LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE RIVER, KY......................................          27,400          31,000
MCALPINE LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, KY AND IN...................................           6,192          16,000
METROPOLITAN LOUISVILLE, BEARGRASS CREEK, KY....................................           3,838           3,838
METROPOLITAN LOUISVILLE, POND CREEK, KY.........................................           2,000           2,000
 
                                    LOUISIANA
 
ASCENSION PARISH (ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE), LA.............................  ..............             300
COMITE RIVER, LA................................................................           3,000           3,000
EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA (ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE)......................  ..............             300
GRAND ISLE AND VICINITY, LA.....................................................  ..............             213
INNER HARBOR NAVIGATION CANAL LOCK, LA..........................................           9,000          15,000
J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA.................................................          11,016          17,000
LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN AND VICINITY, LA (HURRICANE PROTECT..........................           4,900           7,000
LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA (HURRICANE PROTECTION)..............................             410             410
LIVINGSTON PARISH (ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE), LA............................  ..............             300
MISSISSIPPI RIVER GULF OUTLET, LA...............................................  ..............             500
MISSISSIPPI RIVER SHIP CHANNEL, GULF TO BATON ROUGE, LA.........................             200             200
NEW ORLEANS TO VENICE, LA (HURRICANE PROTECTION)................................             900           1,500
OUACHITA RIVER LEVEES, LA.......................................................  ..............           1,500
SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA, LA.........................................................          20,083          40,000
WEST BANK AND VICINITY, NEW ORLEANS, LA.........................................           5,000          10,000
 
                                    MARYLAND
 
ASSATEAGUE ISLAND, MD...........................................................           6,900           6,900
ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND, MD..................................................             200             200
BALTIMORE HARBOR ANCHORAGES AND CHANNELS, MD AND VA.............................          10,590          10,590
CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION, MD, PA, AND VA.........  ..............           2,000
CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD AND VA.......................................           2,000           3,000
CUMBERLAND, MD..................................................................  ..............           5,000
POPLAR ISLAND, MD...............................................................          10,600          10,600
 
                                  MASSACHUSETTS
 
CAPE COD CANAL RAILROAD BRIDGE, MA (MAJOR REHAB)................................           8,500           8,500
WEST HILL DAM, MA (MAJOR REHAB).................................................           2,800           2,800
 
                                    MICHIGAN
 
GENESEE COUNTY (ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE), MI...............................  ..............             200
NEGAUNEE, MI....................................................................  ..............             575
SAULT STE MARIE REPLACEMENT LOCK, MI............................................  ..............           2,000
TWELVE TOWNS DRAIN RETENTION FACILITY, MI.......................................  ..............             300
 
                                    MINNESOTA
 
BRECKENRIDGE, MN................................................................  ..............           2,000
CROOKSTON, MN...................................................................           3,202           3,202
LOCK AND DAM 3, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN (MAJOR REHAB).............................           3,000           3,000
MILLE LACS REGIONAL WASTEWATER, MN..............................................  ..............           1,000
 
                                   MISSISSIPPI
 
DESOTO COUNTY, MS...............................................................  ..............           4,000
GULFPORT HARBOR, MS.............................................................  ..............             800
MISSISSIPPI ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE (SECTION 592), MS......................  ..............          12,000
PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS...........................................................           2,476           5,834
 
                                    MISSOURI
 
BLUE RIVER BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MO...............................................             200             200
BLUE RIVER CHANNEL, KANSAS CITY, MO.............................................           6,676          13,000
BOIS BRULE DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, MO......................................  ..............             200
MERAMEC RIVER BASIN, VALLEY PARK LEVEE, MO......................................             600           4,000
MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO..........................           1,700           3,500
STE GENEVIEVE, MO...............................................................             300             300
TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO AND AR (DAM SAFETY).........................................          10,000          12,000
 
                                     MONTANA
 
FORT PECK FISH HATCHERY, MT.....................................................  ..............           8,000
RURAL MONTANA, MT...............................................................  ..............           3,500
 
                                    NEBRASKA
 
ANTELOPE CREEK, NE..............................................................  ..............           2,000
MISSOURI NATIONAL RECREATIONAL RIVER, NE AND SD.................................             750             750
WOOD RIVER, GRAND ISLAND, NE....................................................           3,536           3,536
 
                                     NEVADA
 
RURAL NEVADA, NV................................................................  ..............          13,000
TROPICANA AND FLAMINGO WASHES, NV...............................................          33,900          45,000
 
                                   NEW JERSEY
 
BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG INLET (ABSECON ISLAND), NJ........................             500             500
CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ............................................              82              82
DELAWARE RIVER MAIN CHANNEL, NJ, PA AND DE......................................          12,000           2,000
GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET AND PECK BEACH, NJ.......................................             460             460
LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NJ......................................           2,000             500
PASSAIC RIVER PRESERVATION OF NATURAL STORAGE AREAS, NJ.........................           3,000           3,000
PASSAIC RIVER STREAMBANK RESTORATION, NJ........................................  ..............           1,000
RAMAPO AND MAHWAH RIVERS, MAHWAH, NJ AND SUFFERN, NY............................             500             500
RAMAPO RIVER AT OAKLAND, NJ.....................................................           5,241           5,241
RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, NJ..............................................           1,000             500
RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ..................................           5,000           5,000
SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ................................................           4,434           4,434
TOWNSENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ...........................................           7,000           7,000
 

[[Page 723]]

 
                                   NEW MEXICO
 
ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NM..................................................           1,500           5,200
ALAMOGORDO, NM..................................................................           5,400           5,400
CENTRAL NEW MEXICO, NM..........................................................  ..............           8,000
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE FLOOD PROTECTION, BERNALILLO TO BELEN, NM.....................             800             800
RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, SAN ACACIA TO BOSQUE DEL APACHE, NM........................             800             800
 
                                    NEW YORK
 
ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, NY.......................             450             450
EAST ROCKAWAY INLET TO ROCKAWAY INLET AND JAMAICA BAY, NY.......................           1,000           1,000
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY............................................             500             500
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY..........................................           2,750           2,750
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY AND NJ.......................................         120,000         100,000
 
                                 NORTH CAROLINA
 
BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES, NC....................................................             700             700
STANLY COUNTY WASTEWATER, NC....................................................  ..............           1,000
WEST ONSLOW BEACH AND NEW RIVER INLET, NC.......................................           1,200           1,200
WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC...........................................................          24,650          38,000
 
                                  NORTH DAKOTA
 
BUFORD-TRENTON IRRIGATION DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION, ND.........................           1,000           2,500
DEVILS LAKE, ND.................................................................  ..............           5,000
GARRISON DAM AND POWER PLANT, ND (MAJOR REHAB)..................................           6,500           6,500
GRAFTON, PARK RIVER, ND.........................................................  ..............           1,000
GRAND FORKS, ND--EAST GRAND FORKS, MN...........................................          30,000          40,000
HOMME LAKE, ND (DAM SAFETY).....................................................           2,272           2,272
SHEYENNE RIVER, ND..............................................................           2,417           2,417
 
                                      OHIO
 
HOLES CREEK, WEST CARROLLTON, OH................................................  ..............           3,900
METROPOLITAN REGION OF CINCINNATI, DUCK CREEK, OH...............................           3,270           5,000
MILL CREEK, OH..................................................................           1,100           6,500
WEST COLUMBUS, OH...............................................................           2,000           3,000
 
                                    OKLAHOMA
 
SKIATOOK LAKE, OK (DAM SAFETY)..................................................           3,000           3,000
TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK (DAM SAFETY)...........................................           4,600           4,600
 
                                     OREGON
 
BONNEVILLE POWERHOUSE PHASE II, OR AND WA (MAJOR REHAB).........................           8,913           8,913
COLUMBIA RIVER CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS, OR AND WA..................................  ..............           5,000
COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS SITES, OR AND WA...........................           5,800           5,800
ELK CREEK LAKE, OR..............................................................           1,000           1,000
LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN BANK PROTECTION, OR AND WA...........................             100             100
LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR AND WA...........................           2,000  ..............
WILLAMETTE RIVER TEMPERATURE CONTROL, OR........................................           6,000           8,000
 
                                  PENNSYLVANIA
 
LACKAWANNA RIVER, OLYPHANT, PA..................................................           1,161           1,161
LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3 AND 4, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA................................          36,017          43,000
PRESQUE ISLE PENINSULA, PA (PERMANENT)..........................................             580           1,080
SAW MILL RUN, PITTSBURGH, PA....................................................           4,103           4,103
SCHUYLKILL RIVER PARK, PA.......................................................  ..............           1,000
WYOMING VALLEY, PA (LEVEE RAISING)..............................................           9,439           9,439
 
                                   PUERTO RICO
 
ARECIBO RIVER, PR...............................................................           5,000           5,000
PORTUGUES AND BUCANA RIVERS, PR.................................................           5,500           5,500
RIO DE LA PLATA, PR.............................................................             500             500
RIO GRANDE DE MANATI, PR........................................................           4,981           4,981
RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR............................................................           8,778           8,778
SAN JUAN HARBOR, PR.............................................................           1,457           1,457
 
                                 SOUTH CAROLINA
 
CHARLESTON HARBOR (DEEPENING AND WIDENING), SC..................................           4,539           6,500
HARTWELL LK, CLEMSON UPPER AND LOWER DIVERSION, SC (DAM S)......................           5,791           5,791
MYRTLE BEACH STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION, SC.........................................  ..............             400
 
                                  SOUTH DAKOTA
 
BIG SIOUX RIVER, SIOUX FALLS, SD................................................           3,964           3,964
CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX, SD...............................           1,700           9,500
MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, SD..................................................             750             750
PIERRE, SD......................................................................           1,426           6,000
 
                                    TENNESSEE
 
BLACK FOX, OAKLANDS AND MURFREE SPRINGS WETLANDS, TN............................  ..............           3,591
 
                                      TEXAS
 
BOSQUE AND LEON RIVERS, TX......................................................  ..............           1,000
BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX........................................................           3,798           3,798
CLEAR CREEK, TX.................................................................           1,200           3,591
DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TX...................................................  ..............           9,744
EL PASO, TX.....................................................................           1,000           1,000
HOUSTON-GALVESTON NAVIGATION CHANNELS, TX.......................................          19,487          40,000
JOHNSON CREEK, UPPER TRINITY BASIN, ARLINGTON, TX...............................           3,636           3,636
NECHES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES SALTWATER BARRIER, TX..............................           7,000           7,000
NORTH PADRE ISLAND, PACKERY CHANNEL, TX.........................................  ..............           5,000
RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE CONTROL, TX............................................  ..............           2,000
SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TX.............................................           3,219           3,219
SIMS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX.........................................................           9,000           9,000
 
                                      UTAH
 
UPPER JORDAN RIVER, UT..........................................................             500             500
 
                                     VERMONT
 
VERMONT DAMS REMEDIATION, VT....................................................  ..............             500
 
                                    VIRGINIA
 
AIWW BRIDGE AT GREAT BRIDGE, VA.................................................           3,401           3,401

[[Page 724]]

 
EMBREY DAM, VA..................................................................  ..............           2,500
JOHN H KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA AND NC (MAJOR REHAB)..........................           6,600           6,600
LYNCHBURG (COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW), VA.........................................  ..............             500
NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS (DEEPENING), VA.....................................             477             477
RICHMOND (COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW), VA..........................................  ..............             500
ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, HEADWATERS AREA, VA..................................             850             850
SANDBRIDGE BEACH, VA............................................................  ..............           1,400
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA (HURRICANE PROTECTION).......................................             120             120
 
                                   WASHINGTON
 
COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR AND ID...................................          98,000          85,500
GRAYS HARBOR, WA................................................................              50             100
HOWARD HANSON DAM ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA.....................................           5,776           7,500
LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE COMPENSATION, WA, OR........................           4,600           4,600
MT ST HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA...............................................             281             281
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA (DAM SAFETY)...............................................           1,200           2,500
SHOALWATER BAY SHORELINE EROSION, WA............................................  ..............           1,000
THE DALLES POWERHOUSE (UNITS 1-14), WA AND OR (MAJOR REH).......................           3,000           3,000
 
                                  WEST VIRGINIA
 
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV (DAM SAFETY).................................................           8,500          13,100
LEVISA AND TUG FORKS OF THE BIG SANDY RIVER AND UPPER CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV AND            10,400          16,900
 VA.............................................................................
LONDON LOCKS AND DAM, KANAWHA RIVER, WV (MAJOR REHAB)...........................          11,934          11,934
LOWER MUD RIVER, WV.............................................................  ..............             750
MARMET LOCK, KANAWHA RIVER, WV..................................................          10,978          58,500
ROBERT C BYRD LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, WV AND OH..............................           1,500           1,500
WINFIELD LOCKS AND DAM, KANAWHA RIVER, WV.......................................             200             200
 
                                    WISCONSIN
 
LAFARGE LAKE, WI................................................................           4,361           4,361
FOX RIVER LOCKS, WI.............................................................  ..............           5,000
 
                                  MISCELLANEOUS
 
AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206).....................................          10,000          20,000
AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM...................................................           3,000           5,000
BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204)...............................           1,500           1,500
DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION PROGRAM.............................           5,000          10,000
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROGRAM....................................           9,000           9,000
EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (SEC 14)..........................           7,000           9,000
EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION.........................................................          20,000          20,000
FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205)............................................          30,000          45,000
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--BOARD EXPENSE.....................................              45              45
INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD--CORPS EXPENSE.....................................             185             185
NAVIGATION MITIGATION PROJECT (SECTION 111).....................................             500           2,000
NAVIGATION PROJECTS (SECTION 107)...............................................           7,000           9,100
PROJECT MODIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT........................          16,000          23,000
SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION.........................           8,000           8,000
SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECTS (SECTION 103).....................................           5,000           5,000
SNAGGING AND CLEARING PROJECT (SECTION 208).....................................           1,000           1,000
TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM......................................................  ..............           2,000
REDUCTION FOR ANTICIPATED SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE..................................        -103,454        -281,351
ADJUSTMENT FOR ACTUAL RETIREMENT ACCRUALS.......................................          -2,388  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, CONSTRUCTION GENERAL...............................................       1,415,612       1,636,602
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Bethel Emergency Bank Stabilization, Bethel, AK.--The 
     Committee is aware that extenuating circumstances and the 
     dire situation with regard to the Bethel Emergency Bank 
     Stabilization project. Therefore, the Committee urges the 
     Corps of Engineers to take all steps necessary to address the 
     rapidly deteriorating seawall in order to prevent its 
     imminent collapse.
       Kake, AK.--The Committee has provided an additional 
     $2,000,000 to previously appropriated amounts for the Kake, 
     AK, project.
       Montgomery Point Lock and Dam, AR.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $24,000,000. The Committee 
     understands that this is far less than the Corps capability 
     for this important navigation project that contributes to the 
     Nation's economic security, but in a constrained budget 
     environment, is an increase over the budget amount.
       Red River Below Denison Dam, AR, LA, OK & TX.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $2,500,000 to continue the 
     levee rehabilitation and bank stabilization project in 
     Arkansas.
       Red River Emergency Bank Protection, AR, LA, OK & TX.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $4,000,000 to continue the 
     project.
       Harbor/South Bay Water Recycling, CA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $7,000,000 to continue construction 
     of the project.
       Los Angeles Harbor Main Channel Deepening, CA.--The 
     Committee has provided $10,300,000 to continue construction 
     of the channel deepening project.
       Petaluma River, CA.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $2,200,000 for this project.
       San Francisco Bay to Stockton, CA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $1,150,000 for continuation of the 
     General Reevaluation Reports on the Avon Turning Basin and 
     for the minimal deepening of the San Francisco Bay to the 
     Port of Stockton.
       South Sacramento County Streams, CA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $7,000,000.
       Central and Southern Florida, FL.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $90,000,000 to continue Everglades 
     Restoration projects. This is a $18,202,000 reduction from 
     the budget request. This should in no way be considered any 
     diminution of interest or support for these vitally important 
     ecosystem restoration projects by the Committee. Rather, this 
     cut is due to recent questions raised concerning 
     implementation of the restoration project. The Committee is 
     concerned that the project may be too heavily weighted in 
     favor of commercial development of water supplies rather than 
     the restoration of historic water flow characteristics and 
     water quality needed to save the Everglades. The Committee 
     believes that the Corps should respond to these concerns and 
     provide written notification to the Committee that addresses 
     these concerns.
       Hawaii Water Management, HI.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $2,000,000 for continued construction of the Hawaii 
     Water Management Project.
       Kaumalapau Harbor, HI.--The Committee has provided 
     $2,000,000 for continued construction of the harbor project.
       Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation, IA, NE, KS, 
     and MO.--The Committee recommendation includes $1,100,000 
     above the budget amount for habitat acquisition. Additional 
     funding should be focused on acquisition of lands at the 
     confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers near St. 
     Louis, MO.
       Des Plaines River, IL (Phase I).--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $2,500,000 to continue construction 
     of the project.
       Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River, IL & KY.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $65,000,000 to continue construction 
     of the replacement navigation structure. This is a 
     $12,000,000 reduction from the budget request, but should in 
     no way be considered any diminution of interest in this 
     critically important portion of the Nation's inland waterway 
     system by the Committee. Rather it reflects the 
     extraordinarily unbalanced nature of the budget request and 
     the Committee's attempt to restore some balance to this 
     account. None of the funds provided for the Olmsted Locks and 
     Dam Project are to be used to reimburse the Claims and 
     Judgement Fund.
       McAlpine Lock and Dam, IN & KY.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $16,000,000. The Committee 
     understands that

[[Page 725]]

     this is considerably less than the Corps capability for this 
     important navigation project that contributes to the Nation's 
     economic security, but in a constrained budget environment, 
     it is an increase over the budget request.
       Kentucky Lock and Dam, Tennessee River, KY.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $31,000,000. The Committee 
     understands that this is considerably less than the Corps 
     capability for this important navigation project that 
     contributes to the Nation's economic security, but in a 
     constrained budget environment, it is an increase over the 
     budget request.
       Inner Harbor Navigation Canal Lock, LA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $15,000,000. The Committee 
     understands that this is considerably less than the Corps 
     capability for this important navigation project, but in a 
     constrained budget environment, it is an increase over the 
     budget request.
       J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, LA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $17,000,000 to continue construction 
     of necessary navigation channel refinements, land purchases 
     and development for mitigation of project impacts, and 
     construction of project recreation and appurtenant features.
       Ouachita River Levees, LA.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $1,500,000 to continue construction of the project.
       Southeast Louisiana, LA.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $40,000,000. While this is a significant increase 
     over the budget request, it is still far below the amount 
     needed to fund the project at an optimum level.
       Chesapeake Bay Environmental Restoration and Protection, 
     MD, PA, and VA.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $2,000,000 for continuation of the Taylor's Island Marsh 
     Creation Project, and the Baltimore Harbor Middle Branch 
     Wetland Creation Project.
       Cumberland, MD.--The Committee has provided $5,000,000 to 
     continue this flood control project.
       Sault Ste. Marie (Replacement Lock), MI.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $2,000,000 to continue construction 
     of the replacement lock.
       Breckenridge, MN.--$2,000,000 is included to continue 
     construction of this vital flood control project.
       Mississippi Environmental Infrastructure (Section 592), 
     MS.--The Committee recommendation includes $12,000,000. 
     Within the funds provided the Corps should continue on-going 
     work at Pearlington, Hancock County, MS; Jefferson County, 
     MS; Picayune, Pearl River County, MS; Gulfport, Harrison 
     County, MS and is directed to give priority for initiation of 
     assistance to Helena, Jackson County, MS; City of Macon, MS; 
     and City of Tupelo, MS.
       Fort Peck Fish Hatchery, MT.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $8,000,000 for continuation of construction.
       Rural Montana, MT.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $3,500,000 to continue the Rural Montana Project. Within the 
     funds provided, the Corps should give consideration to Grant 
     Creek, Missoula County, and the cities of Belgrade, Helena, 
     and Conrad.
       Stanly County Wastewater, NC.--The Committee has provided 
     $1,000,000 for continued construction of this project.
       Wilmington Harbor, NC.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $38,000,000. The Committee understands that this is 
     considerably less than the Corps capability for this 
     important harbor project that contributes to the Nation's 
     economic security, but in a constrained budget environment, 
     it is an increase over the budget request.
       Devils Lake, ND.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $5,000,000 for construction of the Devils Lake outlet subject 
     to certain conditions. The Committee also recognizes that the 
     Corps has authority to use up to an additional $10,000,000 of 
     previously appropriated funds for construction if the 
     conditions mandated by Congress are met.
       Grafton, Park River, ND.--The Committee recommendation has 
     included $1,000,000 to continue construction of this flood 
     control project.
       Grand Forks, ND.--East Grand Forks, MN.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $40,000,000. While this is an 
     increase over the budget request, it is still far below the 
     amount needed to fund the project at an optimum level.
       Antelope Creek, NE.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $2,000,000 to continue construction of the project.
       Delaware Main Channel, NJ, PA, & DE.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $2,000,000 for construction of this 
     project. However, the Committee has serious concerns about 
     the project due to concerns raised in the General Accounting 
     Office's review of the project's economic analysis. It is the 
     Committee's understanding that the Corps is currently 
     conducting an entirely new economic analysis to address the 
     concerns that were raised in the GAO report and that this 
     analysis will be subject to two independent peer reviews. The 
     Committee believes this is a prudent action, however, until 
     the project is shown to be technically sound, environmentally 
     sustainable, and economically viable, the Committee directs 
     that none of the funds provided should be used to award 
     construction contracts. Further, the Secretary is required to 
     provide written notification to the Committee that these 
     requirements have been met before funds can be used for this 
     purpose.
       Rural Nevada, NV.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $13,000,000 to continue the Rural Nevada project. Within the 
     funds provided, the Corps is directed to give consideration 
     to projects at Boulder City, Lyon County (Carson River 
     Regional Water System), Gerlach, Incline Village, Round Hill, 
     Mesquite, Moapa, Spanish Springs, Battle Mountain, Virgin 
     Valley, Lawton-Verdi, and Esmeralda County.
       Tropicana and Flamingo Washes, NV.--The Committee has 
     provided $45,000,000 to continue construction of the project. 
     The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for 
     reimbursement of work performed by the project non-Federal 
     sponsor in accordance with Section 211 of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1996.
       Holes Creek, West Carrollton, OH.--The Committee 
     recommendation has included $3,900,000 to continue 
     construction of the project.
       Columbia River Channel Improvements, OR & WA.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for continuation 
     of the project.
       Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration, OR & WA.--In 
     keeping with the Committee's decision to not initiate any 
     construction ``new starts'' in the fiscal year 2003 Committee 
     recommendation, no funding has been provided.
       Locks and Dams 2, 3 and 4, Monongahela River, PA.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $43,000,000. The Committee 
     understands that this is considerably less than the Corps 
     capability for this important navigation project that 
     contributes to the Nation's economic security, but in a 
     constrained budget environment, it is an increase over the 
     budget request.
       Presque Isle Peninsula, PA.--The Committee has provided 
     $1,080,000 for the beach nourishment project at Presque Isle 
     for both annual periodic nourishment and for construction of 
     modifications to the North Pier to facilitate the stockpiling 
     of sand.
       Charleston Harbor (Deepening/Widening), SC.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $6,500,000 for continued construction 
     of the project.
       Myrtle Beach, SC.--The Committee has provided $400,000 for 
     dune restoration work at Surfside Beach/Garden City 
     authorized as a part of the Myrtle Beach Project but not 
     constructed at the time of sand placement due to funding 
     constraints.
       Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux, SD.--The 
     Committee notes that Title VI of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999, as amended, authorizes funding to 
     pay administrative expenses, implementation of terrestrial 
     wildlife plans, activities associated with land transferred 
     or to be transferred, and annual expenses for operating 
     recreational areas. Within the funds provided, the Committee 
     directs that not more than $1,000,000 shall be provided for 
     administrative expenses, and that the Corps is to distribute 
     remaining funds as directed by Title VI to the State of South 
     Dakota, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Lower Brule Sioux 
     Tribe.
       Dallas Floodway Extension, TX.--The Committee has provided 
     $9,744,000 to continue the overall project, including the 
     Cadillac Heights feature, generally in accordance with the 
     Chief of Engineers Report dated December 7, 1999.
       North Padre Island, Packery Channel, TX.--The Committee is 
     aware that design and environmental studies have been 
     completed and construction initiated to ensure the project 
     meets provisions of Section 556 of WRDA 99. To that end, the 
     Committee has provided $5,000,000 to continue construction of 
     the project.
       Red River Basin Chloride Control, TX.--The Committee has 
     provided $2,000,000 to complete the reevaluation effort, 
     initiate plans and specifications, and continue monitoring 
     for the Wichita River Basin portion of the project. Further, 
     the Committee urges budgeting for this critical project that 
     improves Red River water quality.
       Sandbridge Beach, VA.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $1,400,000 to continue the project.
       Columbia River Fish Mitigation, WA, OR, and ID.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $85,500,000 to continue 
     efforts associated with Columbia River Fish Mitigation. This 
     is an $12,500,000 reduction from the budget request, but 
     should in no way be considered any diminution of interest or 
     support for these vitally important mitigation projects by 
     the Committee. Rather it reflects the fiscal constraints with 
     which the Committee is faced with.
       Within the funds provided, the Committee recommendation 
     includes $300,000 for a reconnaissance level investigation of 
     Columbia River flood control operations to determine what 
     changes, if any, would benefit endangered species, 
     particularly salmon. Evaluation beyond the reconnaissance 
     phase is subject to agency review and congressional 
     notification.
       Mud Mountain Dam, WA.--The Committee has provided 
     $2,500,000 to continue work on dam safety measures and the 
     fish passage facility.
       Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big Sandy River and Upper 
     Cumberland River, WV, KY, & VA.--

[[Page 726]]

     The Committee has provided $16,900,000 for continuation of 
     the project. Within the funds provided, the Committee 
     recommendation includes $500,000 for Buchanan County, VA; 
     $500,000 for Dickenson County, VA; and $10,400,000 for 
     Grundy, VA. Further, the Committee recommendation includes 
     $800,000 for Kermit, Lower Mingo County, WV; $3,800,000 for 
     McDowell County, WV; $700,000 for Upper Mingo County, WV; and 
     $200,000 for Wayne County, WV.
       Aquatic Plant Control Program.--The Committee has provided 
     $5,000,000 for the Aquatic Plant Control Program, the 
     Nation's only Federally authorized research program for 
     technology that focuses on the management of non-indigenous 
     aquatic species. The Committee is aware of the growing 
     problem of invasive plant infestation around the country and 
     supports the Corps' and industries efforts to develop new 
     management and control technologies. The Committee believes 
     that success in management of these invasive species is 
     dependent upon the research and development activities of 
     this program. In an effort to maximize limited funding for 
     eradication and harvesting, the Committee strongly recommends 
     that these efforts be undertaken only where a local sponsor 
     agrees to provide 50 percent of the cost of the work. Within 
     the funds provided, $300,000 is for a cost shared effort with 
     the State of South Carolina and $400,000 is for a cost shared 
     effort with the State of Vermont.
       Dam Safety and Seepage/Stability Correction Program.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 for the 
     program. Within the funds provided, $5,000,000 is provided 
     for the Corps to continue work on Waterbury Dam in Vermont.
       Idaho Dam Safety, ID.--The Committee encourages the Corps 
     to provide assistance, within the authorities available to 
     it, to the State of Idaho as it evaluates the need for 
     maintenance of these deteriorating structures as well as the 
     need for increased security.
       Ability to pay.--Section 103(m) of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1986, as amended, requires that all 
     project cooperation agreements for flood damage reduction 
     projects, to which non-Federal cost sharing applies, will be 
     subject to the ability of non-Federal sponsors to pay their 
     shares. Congress included this section in the landmark 1986 
     Act to ensure that as many communities as possible would 
     qualify for Federal flood damage reduction projects, based 
     more on needs and less on financial capabilities. The 
     Secretary published eligibility criteria in 33 CFR 241, which 
     requires a non-Federal sponsor to meet an ability-to-pay 
     test. However, the Committee believes that the Secretary's 
     test is too restrictive and operates to exclude most 
     communities from qualifying for relief under the ability-to-
     pay provision. For example, 33 CFR 241.4(f) specifies that 
     the test should be structured so that reductions in the level 
     of cost-sharing will be granted in ``only a limited number of 
     cases of severe economic hardship,'' and should depend not 
     only on the economic circumstances within a project area, but 
     also on the conditions of the state in which the project area 
     is located. While within the letter of the law, the 
     Secretary's policies do not appear to be keeping the spirit 
     of the law. The Secretary is directed to report to the 
     Appropriations Committees within 90 days of enactment of this 
     Act on a proposal intended to be published in the Federal 
     Register to revise 33 CFR 241 eligibility criteria to allow a 
     more reasonable and balanced application of the ability-to 
     pay provision.


                     Continuing Authorities Program

       The continuing project authorities listed below, allow the 
     Corps great flexibility to respond to various, limited-scope, 
     water resource problems facing communities throughout the 
     Nation. This program has proven to be remarkably successful 
     in providing a quick response to serious local problems. 
     These problems range from flood control and navigation to 
     bank stabilization and environmental restoration. The 
     Committee has provided funds in excess of the budget request 
     for virtually all of these accounts. As a general rule, once 
     a project has received funds for the initial phases of any of 
     these authorities, the project will continue to be funded as 
     long as it proves to be environmentally sound, technically 
     feasible, and economically justified, as applicable. With 
     this in mind, the Committee has chosen to limit explicit 
     direction of these project authorities.
       The Committee is aware that there are funding requirements 
     for ongoing, continuing authorities projects that may not be 
     accommodated within the funds provided for each program. It 
     is not the Committee's intent that ongoing projects be 
     terminated. If additional funds are needed to keep ongoing 
     work in any program on schedule, the Committee urges the 
     Corps to reprogram the necessary funds.
        Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration (Section 206).--The 
     Committee has provided $20,000,000 for the Section 206 
     Program. Within the amount provided, the recommendation 
     includes:
       $250,000 for the Arroyo Mocho, Ecosystem Restoration, CA, 
     for the preliminary restoration plan; $185,000 for the 
     Sweetwater Ecosystem Restoration, CA, for the preliminary 
     restoration plan; $100,000 for a preliminary restoration plan 
     and planning and design analysis for the St. Joseph River, 
     South Bend, IN; $400,000 for the Chariton River/Rathbun Lake 
     Watershed, IA, to continue feasibility study and initiate 
     plans and specifications; $114,000 for the Duck Creek-
     Fairmont Park Wetland Restoration, IA for planning and design 
     analysis; $250,000 for developing the plans and 
     specifications for the Squaw Creek, IL, Ecosystem Restoration 
     project; $285,000 to complete feasibility studies for the 
     Lake Killarney, LA, restoration; $150,000 to complete the 
     feasibility study for the Mill Creek, Littleton Pond, MA, 
     restoration; $161,000 for plans and specifications and 
     construction of the Belle Isle Piers, MI restoration; 
     $100,000 for feasibility studies for controlling Eurasian 
     watermilfoil in Clearwater Lake, MI; $250,000 to conduct a 
     feasibility study of alternatives to control Eurasian 
     watermilfoil in Houghton Lake, MI; $40,000 for the Little 
     Sugar Creek, NC, restoration; $200,000 to prepare a 
     preliminary restoration plan for the West Cary Stream 
     Restoration, NC; $100,000 for the preliminary restoration 
     plan and planning and design analysis for the Mason's Point 
     Dike, NJ; $380,000 for Bottomless Lakes, NM; $233,000 for 
     Jemez River, NM; $1,600,000 to initiate planning, design, and 
     implementation of various restoration projects for Tillamook 
     Bay, OR; $50,000 for the preliminary restoration plan for 
     Roaring Branch, VT; $240,000 to complete plans and 
     specifications and to initiate construction for the Lake 
     Poygan, WI restoration; $140,000 to complete feasibility 
     studies and initiate plans and specifications for the 
     Menomonee River Watershed, WI; and $100,000 to initiate the 
     planning and design analysis for the Trinity Creek, Mequon, 
     WI, restoration.
       Navigation Projects (Section 107).--The Committee has 
     provided $9,100,000 for the Section 107 Program. Within the 
     amount provided, the recommendation includes:
       $40,000 to complete the detailed project report for the 
     Oyster Point Marina, CA, project; $300,000 to complete the 
     feasibility study for the Short Cut Canal project in 
     Terrebonne Parish, LA; $125,000 to complete feasibility 
     studies for the Rouge River, MI, navigation project; $100,000 
     to complete the feasibility study for the Tri State Commerce 
     Park navigation Project in Iuka, MS; and $100,000 to initiate 
     studies for the navigation project at Charlestown Breachway 
     and Ninigret Pond, RI.
       Tatilik Harbor, AK.--Given concerns over the safety and 
     security of port and maritime harbors in the wake of 
     terrorist attacks on the United States, the Committee 
     recognizes the importance of ensuring there is an adequate 
     response in the case of a major oil spill near the Valdez 
     terminal facility in Valdez, Alaska. The Committee also 
     recognizes that nearly 20 percent of the domestic oil supply 
     of the United States flows via tanker from Valdez terminal to 
     the Lower 48 States, and that a terrorist attack on the 
     facility, or a natural or man-made disaster around the 
     terminal could temporarily suspend the flow of Alaska oil to 
     the Lower 48 market. Further the Committee acknowledges that 
     Tatitlik, Alaska is strategically located and designated as 
     the primary alternate response site to stage an oil spill 
     clean up effort if the port of Valdez is inaccessible. To 
     this end, the Committee authorizes and directs the Corps of 
     Engineers to take whatever steps necessary with existing 
     funds authorized and appropriated under section 107 to begin 
     and finalize construction of a small boat harbor at Tatitlik, 
     Alaska.
       Navigation Mitigation Projects (Section 111).--The 
     Committee has provided $2,000,000 for the Section 111 
     Program. Within the amount provided, the recommendation 
     includes:
       $1,220,000 to initiate construction of the Saco River and 
     Camp Ellis Beach, ME project to mitigate shoreline damages 
     caused by the Federal navigation project.
       Project Modifications for Improvement of the Environment 
     (Section 1135).--The Committee has provided $23,000,000 for 
     the Section 1135 Program. Within the amount provided, the 
     recommendation includes:
       $130,000 for feasibility studies for restoration of Ditch 
     28, Mississippi County, AR; $25,000 for feasibility studies 
     for modifications to Big Creek Spilllway, IA; $90,000 to 
     complete the planning design analysis for the Honey Creek 
     Wetlands project in IA; $25,000 for the Trail Creek, IN, for 
     the planning and design analysis for a sea lamprey barrier; 
     $30,000 for the Black Mallard Creek, MI, for the planning and 
     design analysis for a sea lamprey barrier; $100,000 to 
     complete the feasibility studies for the project at Hennepin 
     Marsh, MI; $70,000 for the planning and design analysis for a 
     sea lamprey barrier at Rapid River, Delta County, MI; 
     $451,000 to complete the analysis and for construction of the 
     Lemay Wetlands Restoration, MO; $740,000 to complete 
     feasibility studies and plans and specifications for the Pine 
     Mountain Creek, (Cohansey River), NJ; project; $150,000 to 
     complete feasibility studies of the Middle Harbor Restoration 
     at East Harbor State Park, Marblehead, OH; $150,000 to 
     continue a feasibility study for the Sheldon's Marsh, OH 
     project; $450,000 for construction of the Boyd's Marsh 
     restoration project in Portsmouth, RI; and $1,351,000 for 
     construction of Phase I of Drakes Creek, Hendersonville, TN 
     project and initiation of Phase II.
       Emergency Streambank & Shoreline Protection Projects 
     (Section 14).--The Committee has

[[Page 727]]

     provided $9,000,000 for the Section 14 Program. Within the 
     amount provided, the recommendation includes:
       $185,000 for construction of the Baker Canal, East Baton 
     Rouge, LA project; $100,000 for the planning and design 
     analysis for the Bell Isle South Shore, Detroit, MI project; 
     $800,000 for completion of design and construction of the 
     Detroit River Shoreline, Detroit, MI, project; $500,000 to 
     initiate construction on the St. Cloud, MN project; $687,000 
     for I-40 Rio Puerco, NM; $167,000 Paseo del Norte, NM; 
     $415,000 for Unnamed Arroyo, NM; and $600,000 for 
     construction of the Cincinnati Waterworks, Hamilton County, 
     OH project.
       Flood Control Projects (Section 205).--The Committee has 
     provided $45,000,000 for the Section 205 Program. Within the 
     amount provided, the recommendation includes:
       $100,000 for feasibility studies of flooding problems at 
     Grubbs, AR; $200,000 for feasibility studies of flood 
     protection measures for the Santa Venetia Flood Control Zone 
     7, CA; $4,500,000 to continue construction of the project for 
     Van Bibber Creek at Arvada, CO; $100,000 to complete 
     feasibility studies and initiate plans and specifications for 
     Mosquito Creek at Council Bluffs, IA; $100,000 to initiate 
     feasibility studies of flooding problems along the Cedar 
     River in Waverly, IA; $1,000,000 to investigate flooding 
     problems along Bayou Choupique in the vicinity of the 
     Chitimacha Reservation in St. Mary Parish, LA; $1,000,000 to 
     complete plans and specifications and initiate construction 
     for the Braithwaite Park, Plaquemines Parish, LA, project; 
     $300,000 to complete plans and specifications and initiate 
     construction for the Dawson, MN, project; $100,000 to 
     continue feasibility studies of flooding problems at Jordan, 
     MN; $100,000 to initiate feasibility studies for Tchula Lake 
     in Tchula, MS; $2,000,000 for continued construction of the 
     Wahpeton, ND, flood control project. The Committee is aware 
     of the close hydraulic connection between this project and 
     the Breckenridge, MN, project and encourages the Corps to 
     coordinate these projects closely; $1,600,000 for Little 
     Puerco Wash, Gallup, NM; $300,000 to initiate studies for the 
     Spanish Springs Valley, NV flood prevention project; 
     $3,000,000 to complete plans and specifications for the 
     nonstructural flood damage reduction project for Little Duck 
     Creek, Cincinnati and Fairfax, OH; $100,000 for plans and 
     specifications for the Beaver Creek, Bristol TN and VA, 
     project; and $100,000 for feasibility studies for a flood 
     damage reduction project along Richland Creek, Nashville, TN.
       Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material (Section 204).--The 
     Committee has provided $1,500,000 for the Section 204 
     Program. Within the amount provided, the recommendation 
     includes $25,000 to initiate the feasibility phase for the 
     Blackhawk Bottoms, Des Moines County, IA, project.
       Shoreline Protection Projects (Section 103).--The Committee 
     has provided $5,000,000 for the Section 103 Program. Within 
     the amount provided, the recommendation includes $100,000 to 
     complete feasibility and initiate plans and specifications 
     for the Luna Pier, MI, project and $250,000 to continue 
     design and plans and specifications for the Chesapeake Bay 
     Shoreline, Hampton, VA, project.
       Tribal Partnership Program.--The Committee acknowledges the 
     serious impacts of coastal erosion and flooding due to 
     continued climate change and other factors in the following 
     communities in Alaska: Bethel, Dillingham, Shishmaref, 
     Kakatovik, Kivalina, Unalakleet, and Newtok. The Committee 
     directs the Corps to perform an analysis of the costs 
     associated with continued erosion of these communities, 
     potential costs associated with moving the affected 
     communities to new locations (including EIS work on only the 
     collocation of villages with existing communities), and to 
     identify the expected time line for a complete failure of the 
     useable land associated with each community. An additional 
     $2,000,000 above the President's request has been provided 
     for this work, of which $1,000,000 is for Shishmaref, AK.
       Due to rapid erosion occurring at Shishmaref, AK, the 
     Committee directs the Corps to expedite all necessary 
     environmental studies to document the impacts of this severe 
     and continuing erosion.


 Flood Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries Arkansas, Illinois, 
       Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$345,992,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................280,671,000
Committee recommendation....................................346,437,000

       This appropriation funds planning, construction, and 
     operation and maintenance activities associated with water 
     resource projects located in the lower Mississippi River 
     Valley from Cape Girardeau, Missouri to the Gulf of Mexico.
       The budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 
     shown on the following table:

                      CORPS OF ENGINEERS--FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                 Project title                                  Budget estimate   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS
 
ALEXANDRIA TO THE GULF, LA....................................................             420              420
BAYOU METO BASIN, AR..........................................................  ...............           1,633
SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, AR........................................................  ...............             900
DONALDSONVILLE TO THE GULF, LA................................................             780              780
SPRING BAYOU, LA..............................................................             505              505
COLDWATER RIVER BASIN BELOW ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS................................             180              180
GERMANTOWN, TN................................................................             345              345
MEMPHIS METRO AREA, TN AND MS.................................................              25   ...............
MILLINGTON AND VICINITY, TN...................................................             150              150
MORGANZA TO THE GULF, LA......................................................           2,880            2,880
WOLF RIVER, MEMPHIS, TN.......................................................             123              123
COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA............................................             600              600
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS........................................           6,008            8,516
 
                                 CONSTRUCTION
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO AND TN............................          36,690           36,690
FRANCIS BLAND FLOODWAY DITCH (EIGHT MILE CREEK), AR...........................             750              750
HELENA AND VICINITY, AR.......................................................             660              660
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO AND TN.......................          42,360           49,885
ST FRANCIS BASIN, AR AND MO...................................................           1,970            4,200
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA........................................           7,010            7,010
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA.........................................................          18,873           19,173
LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY LEVEE, LA........................................           2,449            2,449
MISSISSIPPI AND LOUISIANA ESTUARINE AREAS, LA AND MS..........................              25               25
MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA..................................................           3,500            3,500
HORN LAKE CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES (INCL COW PEN CREEK), MS......................             300              300
YAZOO BASIN...................................................................         (10,550)         (52,500)
    BACKWATER PUMPING PLANT, MS...............................................             250           15,000
    BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS...................................................             200            1,200
    MISSISSIPPI DELTA HEADWATERS PROJECT......................................  ...............          21,000
    MAIN STEM, MS.............................................................              25               25
    REFORMULATION UNIT, MS....................................................              25               25
    TRIBUTARIES, MS...........................................................             200              200
    UPPER YAZOO PROJECTS, MS..................................................           9,850           15,050
ST JOHNS BAYOU AND NEW MADRID FLOODWAY, MO....................................             100            1,000
NONCONNAH CREEK, TN AND MS....................................................             605            1,605
WEST TENNESSEE TRIBUTARIES, TN................................................             100              100
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION..................................................         125,942          179,847
 
                                  MAINTENANCE
 
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO AND TN............................          66,465           66,465
HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR............................................             490              490
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR.............................................             441              441
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR..........................................             105              105
LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR..........................................             135              135
MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO AND TN.......................           7,185            8,130

[[Page 728]]

 
ST FRANCIS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, AR AND MO...................................          10,580           11,180
TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR AND LA..............................           2,463            3,713
WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR.....................................................           1,250            1,250
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL.............................................              50               50
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY.............................................              35               35
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA........................................           2,095            2,095
ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA.........................................................          12,512           14,320
BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA...........................................             210              210
BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA............................................              75               75
BONNET CARRE, LA..............................................................           3,105            3,105
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA.............................................             510              510
LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA........................................             125            2,375
MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA..................................................             860              860
OLD RIVER, LA.................................................................          11,520           11,520
TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA.........................................           3,145            3,145
GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS.........................................................             340              340
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS.............................................             286              286
VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS..........................................................             330              330
YAZOO BASIN...................................................................         (26,910)         (37,470)
    ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS........................................................           5,380            8,380
    BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS...................................................             115            3,115
    ENID LAKE, MS.............................................................           4,920            5,660
    GREENWOOD, MS.............................................................             825              825
    GRENADA LAKE, MS..........................................................           5,700            6,120
    MAIN STEM, MS.............................................................           1,265            1,265
    SARDIS LAKE, MS...........................................................           5,905            8,905
    TRIBUTARIES, MS...........................................................           1,265            1,265
    WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS...........................................             450              450
    YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS..................................................             280              680
    YAZOO CITY, MS............................................................             805              805
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO.............................................             167              167
WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO...........................................................           6,730            6,730
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN.............................................              96               96
MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN.............................................           1,750            1,750
FACILITY PROTECTION...........................................................           1,000            1,000
MAPPING.......................................................................           1,170            1,170
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL, MAINTENANCE...................................................         162,135          179,548
 
REDUCTION FOR ANTICIPATED SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE................................         -13,085          -21,474
ADJUSTMENT FOR ACTUAL RETIREMENT ACCRUALS.....................................            -329   ...............
                                                                               =================================
      TOTAL, FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES.................         280,671          346,437
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee believes that it is essential to provide 
     adequate resources and funding to the Mississippi River and 
     Tributaries program in order to protect the large investment 
     in flood control facilities. Although much progress has been 
     made, considerable work remains to be done for the protection 
     and economic development of the rich national resources in 
     the Valley. The Committee expects the additional funds to be 
     used to advance ongoing studies, initiate new studies, and 
     advance important construction and maintenance work. In 
     conjunction with efforts to optimize use of the additional 
     funding provided, the Committee expects the Corps to make the 
     necessary adjustments in lower priority activities and non-
     critical work in order to maximize the public benefit within 
     the Mississippi River and Tributaries program.
     General investigations
       Bayou Meto Basin, AR.--The Committee has included 
     $1,633,000 to complete preconstruction engineering and 
     design.
     Construction
       Channel Improvement, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, & TN.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $36,690,000 for 
     continuation of construction of various bank stabilization 
     and river training measures to ensure an efficient flood 
     control channel as well as to provide a safe and reliable 
     navigation alignment.
       Mississippi River Levees, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, and TN.--
     The Committee has provided $49,885,000 for continued 
     construction of the various elements of the Mississippi River 
     Levee Project. Within the funds provided, $500,000 is 
     provided to continue engineering and design of the Lower 
     Mississippi River Museum and Interpretive Site.
       Yazoo Basin, Mississippi Delta Headwaters Project, MS.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $21,000,000 to continue 
     construction of the Mississippi Delta Headwaters Project, a 
     joint effort of the Corps of Engineers and the Natural 
     Resources Conservation Service. The Committee expects the 
     Corps to continue design work, acquire real estate, monitor 
     results for all watersheds, and initiate continuing contracts 
     as required for completion of the total program.
       Yazoo Basin, Yazoo Backwater Pumping Plant, MS.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $15,000,000 to complete 
     design, continue real estate activities and to initiate the 
     pump supply contract.
     Maintenance
       Mississippi River Levees, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO, and TN.--
     The Committee recommendation includes $8,130,000 and includes 
     $945,000 to provide gravel surfacing to selected locations on 
     levee roads in Mississippi.
       St. Francis River and Tributaries, AR & MO.--An additional 
     $600,000 has been provided above the budget request for 
     maintenance items in Missouri.
       Atchafalaya Basin, LA.--An additional $1,808,000 has been 
     provided above the budget request for dewatering and major 
     lock repairs to Berwick Lock.
       Lower Red River, South Bank Levees, LA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $2,375,000 for completion of the 
     Bayou Rapides Pumping Plant and to continue routine operation 
     and maintenance activities of the project.
       Yazoo Basin, (Bogue Phalia), Big Sunflower River, MS.--The 
     Committee has provided $3,000,000 above the budget request to 
     continue channel maintenance items.


                   operation and maintenance, general

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,874,803,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,913,760,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,956,182,000

       The budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 
     shown on the following table:

                             CORPS OF ENGINEERS--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, GENERAL
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      Budget         Committee
                                  Project title                                      estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     ALABAMA
 
ALABAMA-COOSA COMPREHENSIVE WATER STUDY, AL.....................................             500             500
ALABAMA-COOSA RIVER, AL.........................................................           2,974           3,174
BAYOU LA BATRE, AL..............................................................           2,000           2,000
BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL..........................................          24,201          25,951
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL..................................................           4,963           4,963
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AL...............................................             100             100
MILLERS FERRY LOCK AND DAM, WILLIAM ``BILL'' DANNELLY LA........................           7,094           7,644
MOBILE HARBOR, AL...............................................................          18,610          22,500

[[Page 729]]

 
PERIDO PASS CHANNEL, AL.........................................................  ..............           1,200
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL...................................................             350             350
ROBERT F HENRY LOCK AND DAM, AL.................................................           5,558           5,858
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AL.............................................             100             100
TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL AND MS.........................................          23,083          26,800
WALTER F GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL AND GA.........................................           6,912           6,912
 
                                     ALASKA
 
ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK............................................................           3,616           4,200
CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK...........................................................           2,889           2,889
COOK INLET NAVIGATION CHANNEL, AK...............................................  ..............           1,000
DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK...........................................................             459             684
HOMER HARBOR, AK................................................................             363             488
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK...............................................              40              40
KETCHIKAN HARBOR, BAR POINT, AK.................................................             500             500
ST HERMAN (KODIAK) HARBOR, AK...................................................  ..............             750
NAKNEK RIVER, AK................................................................             215             215
NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK............................................................             232             232
NOME HARBOR, AK.................................................................             410             410
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK...................................................             543             543
ST PAUL HARBOR, AK..............................................................              75              75
 
                                     ARIZONA
 
ALAMO LAKE, AZ..................................................................           1,282           1,282
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ...............................................              79              79
PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ............................................................           1,269           1,269
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ.............................................              32              32
WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ...........................................................             168             168
 
                                    ARKANSAS
 
BEAVER LAKE, AR.................................................................           5,064           5,064
BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR...............................................           9,444           9,444
BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR..........................................................           1,162           1,162
BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR............................................................           5,675           5,675
DARDANELLE LOCK AND DAM, AR.....................................................           5,699           5,699
DEGRAY LAKE, AR.................................................................           4,620           4,620
DEQUEEN LAKE, AR................................................................             931             931
DIERKS LAKE, AR.................................................................             959             959
GILLHAM LAKE, AR................................................................             861             861
GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR...........................................................           5,445           5,445
HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR..............................................              23             340
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR...............................................             147             147
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR.............................          23,925          25,925
MILLWOOD LAKE, AR...............................................................           1,257           1,257
NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR...................................................           7,440           7,440
NIMROD LAKE, AR.................................................................           1,409           1,409
NORFORK LAKE, AR................................................................           4,368           4,368
OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR..............................................................              21             610
OUACHITA/BLACK NAVIGATION PROJECT, AR AND LA....................................           6,491           8,325
OZARK-JETA TAYLOR LOCK AND DAM, AR..............................................           4,152           4,152
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AR...................................................               6               6
WHITE RIVER, AR.................................................................             195           2,200
YELLOW BEND PORT, AR............................................................              10             147
 
                                   CALIFORNIA
 
BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA............................................................           2,034           2,034
BODEGA BAY, CA..................................................................           1,750           1,750
BUCHANAN DAM, H V EASTMAN LAKE, CA..............................................           1,796           1,796
CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA......................................................           3,622           3,622
COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA...........................................           3,334           3,334
DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE AND CHANNEL, CA...................................           4,338           4,338
FARMINGTON DAM, CA..............................................................             308             308
HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA....................................................           1,751           1,751
HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA.....................................................           3,426           4,926
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA...............................................           1,130           1,130
ISABELLA LAKE, CA...............................................................           1,227           1,227
LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH HARBOR MODEL, CA.........................................             170             170
LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH HARBORS, CA..............................................             320             320
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA............................................           4,424           7,584
MARINA DEL REY, CA..............................................................              60              60
MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA.......................................................             313             313
MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA............................................................             259             259
MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA............................................................           1,280           1,280
MOSS LANDING HARBOR, CA.........................................................  ..............           1,125
NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA..............................................................           2,006           2,006
NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA........................................           1,651           1,651
NEWPORT BAY HARBOR, CA..........................................................             120             120
OAKLAND HARBOR, CA..............................................................          11,204          11,204
OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA............................................................           1,240           1,240
PETALUMA RIVER, CA..............................................................  ..............           1,000
PINE FLAT LAKE, CA..............................................................           2,500           2,500
PORT HUENEME, CA................................................................              60              60
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA...................................................           1,148           1,148
RICHMOND HARBOR, CA.............................................................           4,381           4,381
SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA..........................................           2,189           2,189
SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA...........................           1,271           1,271
SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA......................................             145             145
SAN DIEGO HARBOR, CA............................................................             150             150
SAN DIEGO RIVER AND MISSION BAY, CA.............................................              60              60
SAN FRANCISCO BAY, DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA....................................           1,181           1,181
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY (DRIFT REMOVAL), CA................................           2,072           2,072
SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA........................................................           1,920           1,920
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, CA...........................................................           2,122           2,872
SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA.......................................................           3,395           3,395
SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA........................................................           1,800           1,800
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA.............................................           1,415           1,415
SUCCESS LAKE, CA................................................................           1,992           1,992
SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA..........................................................           2,815           4,000
TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA...................................................           1,770           1,770
VENTURA HARBOR, CA..............................................................           2,590           3,890
YUBA RIVER, CA..................................................................              63              63
 
                                    COLORADO
 
BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO.............................................................             315             315

[[Page 730]]

 
CHATFIELD LAKE, CO..............................................................           1,225           1,725
CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO...........................................................             894           1,394
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO...............................................             136             136
JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO.......................................................           2,148           2,148
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO.............................................             242             242
TRINIDAD LAKE, CO...............................................................           1,309           1,809
 
                                   CONNECTICUT
 
BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT.............................................................             364             364
COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT........................................................             506             506
HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT..........................................................             284             284
HOP BROOK LAKE, CT..............................................................             906             906
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT...............................................              35              35
MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT.......................................................             447             447
NEW HAVEN HARBOR, CT............................................................           4,546           4,546
NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT.......................................................             337             337
NORWALK HARBOR, CT..............................................................  ..............             200
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT...................................................           1,185           1,185
STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT..................................................             349             349
THOMASTON DAM, CT...............................................................             565             565
TREATMENT OF MATERIAL FROM LONG ISLAND SOUND, CT................................  ..............             250
WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT..........................................................             506             506
 
                                    DELAWARE
 
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE R TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE AND MD..................          12,853          12,853
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY TO DELAWARE BAY, DE AND MD..................              45              45
MISPILLION RIVER, DE............................................................             275             275
MURDERKILL RIVER, DE............................................................             310             310
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE...................................................              50              50
WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE...........................................................           4,966           4,966
 
                              DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC...............................................               7               7
POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS (DRIFT REMOVAL), DC................................           1,110           1,110
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC...................................................              33              33
WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC...........................................................              50              50
 
                                     FLORIDA
 
CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL............................................................           3,960           3,960
CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL................................................           9,347           9,347
FERNANDINA HARBOR, FL...........................................................           3,030           3,030
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL...............................................             200             200
INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL................................             322           2,500
JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL.........................................................           4,040           4,040
JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL AND GA.........................           6,050           6,050
MANATEE HARBOR, FL..............................................................           2,780           2,780
MIAMI HARBOR, FL................................................................           1,508           1,508
MIAMI RIVER, FL.................................................................           5,550           5,550
OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL.........................................................           2,695           2,695
PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL...........................................................           2,018           2,018
PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL..........................................................           1,000           1,000
PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL......................................................           2,350           2,350
PORT ST JOE HARBOR, FL..........................................................           1,000           1,000
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL...................................................             780             780
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL...................................................           3,911           3,911
TAMPA HARBOR, FL................................................................           8,559           8,559
 
                                     GEORGIA
 
ALLATOONA LAKE, GA..............................................................           6,456           6,456
APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL.......................           1,444           4,709
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA..............................................             178           2,500
BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA............................................................           3,993           3,993
BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA...........................................           8,060           8,060
CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA........................................................           9,958           9,958
HARTWELL LAKE, GA AND SC........................................................          12,896          12,896
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA...............................................              41              41
J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA AND SC................................................          13,553          13,553
RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA AND SC.......................................           7,548           7,548
SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA.............................................................          12,540          12,540
SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA................................................             134             134
WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA AND AL..............................................           5,587           5,587
 
                                     HAWAII
 
BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI........................................................             354             354
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI...............................................             275             275
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI...................................................             544             544
 
                                      IDAHO
 
ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID............................................................           1,677           1,677
DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID..................................................           3,951           3,951
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID...............................................              81              81
LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID.............................................................           1,488           1,488
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID.............................................             371             371
 
                                    ILLINOIS
 
CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL AND IN.............................................           3,190           3,190
CARLYLE LAKE, IL................................................................           4,856           4,856
CHICAGO HARBOR, IL..............................................................           2,616           2,616
CHICAGO RIVER, IL...............................................................             362             362
FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL.......................................................             204             204
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVR PORTION), IL AND IN......................................          25,154          25,154
ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVS PORTION), IL AND IN......................................           1,683           1,683
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL...............................................             428             428
KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL..................................................           1,386           1,386
LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL.....................................................           1,037           1,037
LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL............................................................           5,073           5,073
MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR PORTION)..........................          41,820          42,320
MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS PORTION)..........................          15,443          15,443
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL...................................................              30              30
REND LAKE, IL...................................................................           4,520           4,520
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL....................................             111             111
WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL.............................................................           1,270           1,270
 

[[Page 731]]

 
                                     INDIANA
 
BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN.............................................................             732             732
BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN.......................................................           3,427           3,427
BURNS WATERWAY SMALL BOAT HARBOR, IN............................................           1,606           1,606
CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN............................................................             634             634
CECIL M HARDEN LAKE, IN.........................................................             704             704
INDIANA HARBOR, IN..............................................................              64              64
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN...............................................             168             168
J EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN.........................................................           1,108           1,108
MICHIGAN CITY HARBOR, IN........................................................           1,132           1,132
MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN...........................................................             853             853
MONROE LAKE, IN.................................................................             759             759
PATOKA LAKE, IN.................................................................             727             727
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN...................................................              55              55
SALAMONIE LAKE, IN..............................................................             649             649
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN....................................             130             130
 
                                      IOWA
 
CORALVILLE LAKE, IA.............................................................           3,097           3,097
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA...............................................              78              78
MISSOURI RIVER-KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SIOUX CITY, IA..............................             147             147
MISSOURI RIVER-RULO TO MOUTH, IA, NE, KS AND MO.................................           5,613           6,113
MISSOURI RIVER-SIOUX CITY TO RULO, IA AND NE....................................           3,075           3,075
RATHBUN LAKE, IA................................................................           2,189           2,189
RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, IA..............................................           3,609           4,409
SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA............................................................           4,088           4,088
 
                                     KANSAS
 
CLINTON LAKE, KS................................................................           1,934           2,300
COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS..........................................................           1,491           1,991
EL DORADO LAKE, KS..............................................................             460             460
ELK CITY LAKE, KS...............................................................             552             552
FALL RIVER LAKE, KS.............................................................           1,204           1,204
HILLSDALE LAKE, KS..............................................................             752             752
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS...............................................              48              48
JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS..............................................           1,144           1,144
KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS..............................................................           1,521           1,521
MARION LAKE, KS.................................................................           1,621           1,621
MELVERN LAKE, KS................................................................           2,034           2,034
MILFORD LAKE, KS................................................................           1,997           1,997
PEARSON-SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS...............................................           1,052           1,052
PERRY LAKE, KS..................................................................           2,111           2,111
POMONA LAKE, KS.................................................................           1,897           1,897
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS.............................................             194             194
TORONTO LAKE, KS................................................................             424             424
TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS...........................................................           2,106           2,106
WILSON LAKE, KS.................................................................           1,846           1,846
 
                                    KENTUCKY
 
BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE BARKLEY, KY AND TN.........................................           8,171           8,171
BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY...........................................................           2,074           2,074
BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY............................................................              35           1,135
BUCKHORN LAKE, KY...............................................................           1,703           1,703
CARR CREEK LAKE, KY.............................................................           1,343           1,343
CAVE RUN LAKE, KY...............................................................             833             833
DEWEY LAKE, KY..................................................................           1,555           1,555
ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY................................................              19              19
FISHTRAP LAKE, KY...............................................................           1,927           1,927
GRAYSON LAKE, KY................................................................           1,259           1,259
GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY.....................................................           1,081           1,081
GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY............................................................           1,769           1,769
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY...............................................             181             181
KENTUCKY RIVER, KY..............................................................             400             400
LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY...........................................................           1,542           1,542
LICKING RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY.............................................              28              28
MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY...........................................................             623             623
MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY..........................................              52              52
NOLIN LAKE, KY..................................................................           1,992           1,992
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN AND OH....................................          30,969          30,969
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN AND OH.................................           5,577           5,577
PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY............................................................             982             982
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, KY...................................................               6               6
ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY............................................................           2,120           2,120
TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY...........................................................             913             913
WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY.............................................           7,162           8,362
YATESVILLE LAKE, KY.............................................................           1,156           1,156
 
                                    LOUISIANA
 
ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF AND BLACK, LA.........................          14,681          15,681
BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA......................................................  ..............           2,000
BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA......................................................             794             794
BAYOU LACOMBE, LA...............................................................  ..............             315
BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP WATERWAY, LA.................................           1,085           1,085
BAYOU PIERRE, LA................................................................              40              40
BAYOU SEGNETTE, LA..............................................................  ..............             740
BAYOU TECHE, LA.................................................................  ..............           2,000
CADDO LAKE, LA..................................................................             166             166
CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA....................................................          15,852          15,852
FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA............................................................           1,443           1,443
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA..................................................          19,129          19,500
HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA......................................................           3,223           3,223
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA...............................................             772             772
J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA.................................................           7,297          12,224
LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA......................................................              20             441
MADISON PARISH PORT, LA.........................................................               5             105
MERMENTAU RIVER, LA.............................................................           1,280           1,280
MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA.........................................              80              80
MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA........................          57,482          57,482
MISSISSIPPI RIVER, GULF OUTLET, LA..............................................          13,061          13,061
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, LA...................................................              80              80
REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA...................................................           2,000           2,000
WALLACE LAKE, LA................................................................             180             180
WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA............................................  ..............             280
 

[[Page 732]]

 
                                      MAINE
 
BELFAST HARBOR, ME..............................................................           1,305           1,505
CAMDEN HARBOR MAINTENANCE DREDGING, ME..........................................  ..............             470
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME...............................................              16              16
NARRAGUAGUS RIVER, MILBRIDGE, ME................................................  ..............              50
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME...................................................           1,720           1,720
ROCKLAND HARBOR, ME.............................................................           1,110           1,110
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME....................................              17              17
 
                                    MARYLAND
 
BALTIMORE HARBOR (DRIFT REMOVAL), MD............................................             500             500
BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS).......................             663             663
BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50 FOOT), MD.....................................          18,444          18,444
CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV.................................................             168             168
FISHING CREEK, MD...............................................................  ..............             492
HONGA RIVER AND TAR BAY, MD.....................................................             930           1,330
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD...............................................              34              34
JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD AND WV...............................................           1,653           1,653
OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD..............................           1,627           1,627
POCOMOKE RIVER, MD..............................................................             619             619
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD...................................................             323             323
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD.............................................              91              91
TOLCHESTER CHANNEL, MD..........................................................             180             180
TWICH COVE AND BIG THOROFARE RIVER, MD..........................................  ..............             950
WICOMICO RIVER, MD..............................................................             604           2,000
 
                                  MASSACHUSETTS
 
AUNT LYDIA'S COVE, CHATHAM, MA..................................................             418             418
BARRE FALLS DAM, MA.............................................................             533             533
BIRCH HILL DAM, MA..............................................................             498             498
BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA............................................................             431             431
CAPE COD CANAL, MA..............................................................           7,659           7,659
CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA...................................             260             260
CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA...........................................................             174             174
CUTTYHUNK HARBOR, MA............................................................             174             174
EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA.........................................................             313             313
GREEN HARBOR, MA................................................................             418             418
HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA..........................................................             416             416
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA...............................................             112             112
KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA.............................................................             483             483
LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA............................................................             441             441
NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA........................             322             322
PLYMOUTH HARBOR, MA.............................................................           1,000           1,000
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA...................................................           1,197           1,197
SCITUATE HARBOR, MA.............................................................           2,950           2,950
TULLY LAKE, MA..................................................................             486             486
WEST HILL DAM, MA...............................................................             657             657
WESTVILLE LAKE, MA..............................................................             406             406
 
                                    MICHIGAN
 
ALPENA HARBOR, MI...............................................................             222             222
ARCADIA HARBOR, MI..............................................................             107             107
BAY PORT HARBOR, MI.............................................................             299             299
BLACK RIVER HARBOR, MI..........................................................              12              12
BLACK RIVER, PORT HURON, MI.....................................................              14             500
CHANNELS IN LAKE ST CLAIR, MI...................................................             128             128
CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MI...........................................................             124             124
CHEBOYGAN HARBOR, MI............................................................              12              12
CLINTON RIVER, MI...............................................................              10              10
DETROIT RIVER, MI...............................................................           3,192           3,192
FRANKFORT HARBOR, MI............................................................             177             177
GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI..........................................................           1,250           1,250
GRAND TRAVERSE BAY HARBOR, MI...................................................             227             227
HOLLAND HARBOR, MI..............................................................             505             505
INLAND ROUTE, MI................................................................              33              33
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI...............................................             154             154
KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI...........................................................             450             450
LAC LA BELLE, MI................................................................             102             102
LELAND HARBOR, MI...............................................................             174             174
LEXINGTON HARBOR, MI............................................................             704             704
LITTLE LAKE HARBOR, MI..........................................................             462             462
LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI............................................................              95              95
MANISTEE HARBOR, MI.............................................................             247             247
MANISTIQUE HARBOR, MI...........................................................              50              50
MARQUETTE HARBOR, MI............................................................             193             193
MENOMINEE HARBOR, MI AND WI.....................................................             281             281
MONROE HARBOR, MI...............................................................             792             792
MUSKEGON HARBOR, MI.............................................................             387             387
NEW BUFFALO HARBOR, MI..........................................................             156             156
ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI............................................................           1,745           1,745
PENTWATER HARBOR, MI............................................................              25              25
PORT SANILAC HARBOR, MI.........................................................             501             501
PORTAGE LAKE HARBOR, MI.........................................................              21              21
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI...................................................             234             234
ROUGE RIVER, MI.................................................................             933             933
SAGINAW RIVER, MI...............................................................           2,351           2,351
SAUGATUCK HARBOR, MI............................................................           2,803           2,803
SEBEWAING RIVER (ICE JAM REMOVAL), MI...........................................              12              12
SOUTH HAVEN HARBOR, MI..........................................................              54              54
ST CLAIR RIVER, MI..............................................................             694             694
ST JOSEPH HARBOR, MI............................................................             996             996
ST MARYS RIVER, MI..............................................................          18,181          18,181
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI....................................           2,507           2,507
WHITE LAKE HARBOR, MI...........................................................              67              67
 
                                    MINNESOTA
 
BIGSTONE LAKE WHETSTONE RIVER, MN AND SD........................................             274             274
DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN AND WI...............................................           4,506           4,506
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN...............................................             207             207
LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN........................................           1,031           1,031
MINNESOTA RIVER, MN.............................................................             130             130
MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVP PORTION), MN......................          45,405          45,405
ORWELL LAKE, MN.................................................................             481             481

[[Page 733]]

 
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN...................................................              72              72
RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN..........................................................             126             126
RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN...............................           4,513           4,513
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN....................................             306             306
TWO HARBORS, MN.................................................................             167             167
 
                                   MISSISSIPPI
 
BILOXI HARBOR, MS...............................................................  ..............           1,500
CLAIBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS.......................................................               8             113
EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS..................................................             170             170
GULFPORT HARBOR, MS.............................................................           2,002           3,402
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS...............................................               7               7
MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS........................................................              25             106
OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS..............................................................           1,618           1,618
PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS...........................................................           3,401           5,001
PEARL RIVER, MS AND LA..........................................................             288             288
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS...................................................               5               5
ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS.............................................................              15             613
WOLF AND JORDAN RIVERS..........................................................  ..............           1,500
YAZOO RIVER, MS.................................................................              15             105
 
                                    MISSOURI
 
CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO.......................................................              21             240
CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO.....................................           5,959           5,959
CLEARWATER LAKE, MO.............................................................           1,860           1,860
HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO............................................          10,253          10,253
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO...............................................           1,043           1,043
LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO.....................................................             935             935
LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO............................................................             980             980
MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO..........................          13,878          19,378
NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO...........................................................              16             290
POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO.........................................................           2,168           2,168
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MO...................................................               6               6
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO.............................................             296             296
SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MO.....................................................  ..............             400
SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO.............................................................           1,070           1,070
STOCKTON LAKE, MO...............................................................           4,268           4,268
TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO.............................................................           6,261           6,261
UNION LAKE, MO..................................................................              10              10
 
                                     MONTANA
 
FT PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT........................................................           7,354           7,354
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT...............................................              40              40
LIBBY DAM, LAKE KOOCANUSA, MT...................................................           1,505           1,505
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT.............................................             100             100
 
                                    NEBRASKA
 
GAVINS POINT DAM, LEWIS AND CLARK LAKE, NE AND SD...............................           7,199           7,199
HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE..........................................................           2,025           2,025
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE...............................................              78              78
MISSOURI R MASTER WTR CONTROL MANUAL, NE, IA, KS, MO............................             500             500
MISSOURI RIVER BASIN COLLABORATIVE WATER PLANNING, NE (NWO).....................              45              45
PAPILLION CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES LAKES, NE.......................................             669             669
SALT CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, NE..................................................             925             925
 
                                     NEVADA
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV...............................................              39              39
MARTIS CREEK LAKE, NV AND CA....................................................             556             556
PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV..............................................             194             194
 
                                  NEW HAMPSHIRE
 
BLACKWATER DAM, NH..............................................................             454             454
COCHECO RIVER, NH...............................................................              50             500
EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH.......................................................             490             490
FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH..........................................................             496             496
HOPKINTON-EVERETT LAKES, NH.....................................................           1,074           1,074
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH...............................................              11              11
LITTLE HARBOR, NH...............................................................             200             200
OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH............................................................             577             577
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH...................................................             273             273
SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH.........................................................             575             575
 
                                   NEW JERSEY
 
BARNEGAT INLET, NJ..............................................................           1,750           1,750
COLD SPRING INLET, NJ...........................................................             425             425
DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ....................................................              20              20
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA AND DE..........................          19,245          19,745
DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ.................................           3,470           3,470
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ...............................................              65              65
NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ............................................           2,586           2,586
NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ...................................              75              75
PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEMS, NJ.........................................             425             425
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ...................................................             782             782
RARITAN RIVER, NJ...............................................................              80              80
SHARK RIVER, NJ.................................................................             590             590
 
                                   NEW MEXICO
 
ABIQUIU DAM, NM.................................................................           1,949           3,449
COCHITI LAKE, NM................................................................           2,124           2,124
CONCHAS LAKE, NM................................................................           2,032           2,032
GALISTEO DAM, NM................................................................             510             510
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM...............................................             175             175
JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM............................................................             497           1,000
SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM.....................................................           1,400           1,400
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM.............................................             112             112
TWO RIVERS DAM, NM..............................................................             369             369
UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL, NM.....................................              55           2,050
 
                                    NEW YORK
 
ALMOND LAKE, NY.................................................................             457             457
ARKPORT DAM, NY.................................................................             246             246
BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY.....................................           1,041           1,041

[[Page 734]]

 
BUFFALO HARBOR, NY..............................................................             643             643
BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY..........................................................             300             300
CAPE VINCENT HARBOR, NY.........................................................              11              11
CATTARAUGUS CREEK HARBOR, NY....................................................              50              50
DUNKIRK HARBOR, NY..............................................................             480             480
EAST RIVER, NY..................................................................              80              80
EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY.........................................................           2,100           2,100
EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY............................................................             501             501
FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY............................................             175             175
FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY......................................................              80              80
GLEN COVE CREEK, NY.............................................................              80              80
GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY.............................................................              80              80
HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY........................................................              80              80
HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT)........................................................           2,245           2,245
HUDSON RIVER, NY (O&C)..........................................................           3,170           3,170
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY...............................................             639             639
IRONDEQUOIT BAY HARBOR, NY......................................................              10              10
JAMAICA BAY, NY.................................................................           1,420           1,420
JONES INLET, NY.................................................................             100             100
LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY.........................................................              80              80
LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY...........................................           1,284           1,284
MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY............................................................              80              80
MORICHES INLET, NY..............................................................             600             600
MT MORRIS LAKE, NY..............................................................           2,040           2,040
NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY............................................           3,835           3,835
NEW YORK HARBOR (DRIFT REMOVAL), NY AND NJ......................................           5,300           5,300
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS)........................             750             750
NEW YORK HARBOR, NY.............................................................           3,720           3,720
OAK ORCHARD HARBOR, NY..........................................................              15              15
OLCOTT HARBOR, NY...............................................................              10              10
PLATTSBURGH HARBOR, NY..........................................................             590             590
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY...................................................           2,595           2,595
ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY............................................................              35              35
SAG HARBOR, NY..................................................................           2,500           2,500
SHINNECOCK INLET, NY............................................................           1,346           1,346
SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY....................................             760             760
STURGEON POINT HARBOR, NY.......................................................              20              20
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY....................................             595             595
WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY..........................................................             705             705
WILSON HARBOR, NY...............................................................              20              20
 
                                 NORTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC..............................................             806           4,000
B EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC...............................................           1,829           1,829
BEAUFORT HARBOR, NC.............................................................             400             400
BOGUE INLET AND CHANNEL, NC.....................................................             867             867
CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC............................................             587             587
CAROLINA BEACH INLET, NC........................................................           1,060           1,060
FALLS LAKE, NC..................................................................           2,281           2,281
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC...............................................              32              32
LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER, NC.......................................................             455             455
MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC.....................................................           4,732           4,732
MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC.....................................              45              45
MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC........................................................           5,100           5,400
NEW RIVER INLET, NC.............................................................             815             815
NEW TOPSAIL INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC...................................             640             640
PAMLICO AND TAR RIVERS, NC......................................................             139             139
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC...................................................              73              73
ROANOKE RIVER, NC...............................................................             100             100
W KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC..............................................           3,480           3,480
WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC...........................................................           8,213           8,213
 
                                  NORTH DAKOTA
 
BOWMAN-HALEY LAKE, ND...........................................................             177             177
GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND................................................          11,939          12,239
HOMME LAKE, ND..................................................................             281             281
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND...............................................              15              15
LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND.............................................           1,354           1,354
PIPESTEM LAKE, ND...............................................................             395             395
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND.............................................              68              68
SOURIS RIVER, ND................................................................             370             370
 
                                      OHIO
 
ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH.............................................................             775             775
ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH............................................................           1,915           1,915
BERLIN LAKE, OH.................................................................           1,857           1,857
CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH...........................................................           1,234           1,234
CLARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH........................................................             773             773
CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH............................................................           3,520           3,520
CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH.............................................................             585             585
DEER CREEK LAKE, OH.............................................................             711             711
DELAWARE LAKE, OH...............................................................             932             932
DILLON LAKE, OH.................................................................             576             576
FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH.............................................................           1,090           1,090
HURON HARBOR, OH................................................................             860             860
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH...............................................             233             233
LORAIN HARBOR, OH...............................................................           3,400           3,400
MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH..........................................              25              25
MICHAEL J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH..........................................             789             789
MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH.........................................................           1,036           1,036
MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH.......................................................           6,133           6,133
NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH............................................             319             319
PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH............................................................             778             778
PORT CLINTON HARBOR, OH.........................................................           1,275           1,275
PORTSMOUTH HARBOR, OH...........................................................             150             150
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH...................................................              90              90
ROCKY RIVER, OH.................................................................              30              30
ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH..........................................              30              30
SANDUSKY HARBOR, OH.............................................................           1,010           1,010
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH....................................             175             175
TOLEDO HARBOR, OH...............................................................           3,525           3,525
TOM JENKINS DAM, OH.............................................................             240             240
TOUSSAINT RIVER, OH.............................................................             520             520
VERMILION HARBOR, OH............................................................             205             205

[[Page 735]]

 
WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH................................................             461             461
WEST HARBOR, OH.................................................................              30              30
WILLIAM H HARSHA LAKE, OH.......................................................             992             992
 
                                    OKLAHOMA
 
ARCADIA LAKE, OK................................................................             451             451
BIRCH LAKE, OK..................................................................             602             602
BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK.............................................................           1,627           1,627
CANDY LAKE, OK..................................................................              19             399
CANTON LAKE, OK.................................................................           1,620           1,620
COPAN LAKE, OK..................................................................             821           1,521
EUFAULA LAKE, OK................................................................           5,546           5,546
FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK............................................................           4,352           4,352
FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK............................................................             924             924
GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK......................................................             209             209
HEYBURN LAKE, OK................................................................             600             600
HUGO LAKE, OK...................................................................           1,732           1,732
HULAH LAKE, OK..................................................................             426           1,076
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK...............................................              94              94
KAW LAKE, OK....................................................................           1,931           1,931
KEYSTONE LAKE, OK...............................................................           4,647           4,647
MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK.............................           3,923           3,923
OOLOGAH LAKE, OK................................................................           2,360           2,360
OPTIMA LAKE, OK.................................................................              59              59
PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK..................................              34              34
PINE CREEK LAKE, OK.............................................................           1,187           1,187
ROBERT S KERR LOCK AND DAM AND RESERVOIRS, OK...................................           4,648           4,648
SARDIS LAKE, OK.................................................................             912             912
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK.............................................             389             389
SKIATOOK LAKE, OK...............................................................           1,488           1,488
TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK........................................................           3,690           3,690
WAURIKA LAKE, OK................................................................           1,498           1,498
WEBBERS FALLS LOCK AND DAM, OK..................................................           4,178           4,178
WISTER LAKE, OK.................................................................             580             580
 
                                     OREGON
 
APPLEGATE LAKE, OR..............................................................             729             729
BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR.............................................................             220             220
BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR AND WA..............................................           5,043           5,443
CHETCO RIVER, OR................................................................  ..............             390
COLUMBIA AND LWR WILLAMETTE R BLW VANCOUVER, WA AND PORTLA......................          14,770          17,770
COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR AND WA..........................................           6,632          10,702
COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA AND THE DALLES, O..........................             526             526
COOS BAY, OR....................................................................           5,494           5,494
COQUILLE RIVER, OR..............................................................  ..............             330
COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR..........................................................             842             842
COUGAR LAKE, OR.................................................................             732             732
DEPOT BAY, OR...................................................................  ..............           3,200
DETROIT LAKE, OR................................................................             588             588
DORENA LAKE, OR.................................................................             635             635
FALL CREEK LAKE, OR.............................................................             419             419
FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR.............................................................             989             989
GREEN PETER-FOSTER LAKES, OR....................................................           1,122           1,122
HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR............................................................             401             401
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR...............................................             172             172
JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR AND WA................................................           3,416           5,000
LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR..........................................................           1,613           1,613
LOST CREEK LAKE, OR.............................................................           3,028           3,028
MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, OR AND WA..................................................           4,626           4,626
PORT ORFORD, OR.................................................................             606             606
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR...................................................             200             200
ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR...................................................  ..............             450
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR.............................................              71              71
SIUSLAW RIVER, OR...............................................................             466             466
SKIPANON CHANNEL, OR............................................................               5             325
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OR....................................             134             134
TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR, OR.......................................................              15             315
UMPQUA RIVER, OR................................................................             963             963
WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR........................................             344             344
WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR............................................              67              67
WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR...........................................................             714             714
YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR......................................................  ..............           1,450
YAQUINA RIVER, DEPOT SLOUGH, OR.................................................  ..............             100
 
                                  PENNSYLVANIA
 
ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA.............................................................           4,070           4,070
ALVIN R BUSH DAM, PA............................................................             630             630
AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA.......................................................             270             270
BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA.............................................................           1,171           1,171
BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA.............................................................           2,513           2,513
CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA........................................................             898             898
COWANESQUE LAKE, PA.............................................................           1,915           1,915
CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA..........................................................           1,746           1,746
CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA...........................................................             722             722
EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA..............................................           1,318           1,318
ERIE HARBOR, PA.................................................................              60              60
FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA....................................................             775             775
FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA........................................................             782           4,282
GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA......................................             341             341
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA...............................................             170             170
JOHNSTOWN, PA...................................................................           1,243           1,243
KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA..........................................           1,231           1,231
LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA.............................................................             957             957
MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA.........................................................             848             848
MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA...........................................................          14,357          14,357
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH AND WV........................................          18,589          18,589
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH AND WV.....................................             488             488
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA...................................................              18              18
PROMPTON LAKE, PA...............................................................             506             506
PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA................................................................              13              13
RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA...............................................................           3,941           3,941
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA.............................................              60              60
SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA............................................................              50              50
SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA.........................................................           2,734           2,734

[[Page 736]]

 
STILLWATER LAKE, PA.............................................................             392             392
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA....................................              72              72
TIOGA-HAMMOND LAKES, PA.........................................................           2,542           2,542
TIONESTA LAKE, PA...............................................................           2,032           2,032
UNION CITY LAKE, PA.............................................................             245             245
WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA.........................................................             761             761
YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA........................................................             543             543
YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA AND MD..............................................           1,895           1,895
 
                                  RHODE ISLAND
 
BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI...............................................             502             502
POINT JUDITH POND AND HARBOR OF REFUGE, RI......................................  ..............             120
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI...............................................               6               6
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI...................................................           2,330           2,330
PROVIDENCE RIVER AND HARBOR, RI.................................................           8,220          20,000
 
                                 SOUTH CAROLINA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC..............................................             264           3,598
CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC...........................................................          10,516          10,516
COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC.............................................           3,140           7,050
FOLLY RIVER, SC.................................................................  ..............             257
GEORGETOWN HARBOR, SC...........................................................           3,073           4,373
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC...............................................              26              26
PORT ROYAL HARBOR, SC...........................................................  ..............           2,222
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC...................................................              69              69
SHIPYARD RIVER, SC..............................................................             816             816
TOWN CREEK, SC..................................................................  ..............             396
 
                                  SOUTH DAKOTA
 
BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD...................................................           9,137           9,137
CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX, SD...............................  ..............           5,000
COLD BROOK LAKE, SD.............................................................             211             211
COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD.....................................................             184             184
FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD.........................................           9,016           9,016
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD...............................................              24              24
LAKE TRAVERSE, SD AND MN........................................................             504             504
MISSOURI R BETWEEN FORT PECK DAM AND GAVINS PT, SD, MT..........................             500             500
OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD AND ND..................................................          12,885          12,885
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD.............................................              69              69
 
                                    TENNESSEE
 
CENTER HILL LAKE, TN............................................................           6,031           6,031
CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN.......................................................           6,257           6,257
CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TN............................................................           1,025           1,025
CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN..............................................           6,407           6,407
DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN............................................................           5,720           5,720
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN...............................................             129             129
J PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN............................................           2,954           2,954
OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN....................................................           6,598           6,598
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TN...................................................               6               6
TENNESSEE RIVER, TN.............................................................          15,794          15,794
WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN...........................................................              19             440
 
                                      TEXAS
 
AQUILLA LAKE, TX................................................................             743             743
ARKANSAS-RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL--AREA VI.............................           1,373           1,373
BARBOUR TERMINAL CHANNEL, TX....................................................             606             606
BARDWELL LAKE, TX...............................................................           1,574           1,574
BAYPORT SHIP CHANNEL, TX........................................................           2,389           2,389
BELTON LAKE, TX.................................................................           2,707           2,707
BENBROOK LAKE, TX...............................................................           2,011           2,011
BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX........................................................           2,143           2,143
BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX...............................................           3,126           3,126
CANYON LAKE, TX.................................................................           2,498           2,498
CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX.................................................           5,669           5,669
DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX....................................................           6,132           6,732
ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX......................................               5               5
FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O' THE PINES, TX......................................           2,682           2,682
FREEPORT HARBOR, TX.............................................................           7,298           7,298
GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX................................................           4,887           4,887
GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX........................................................           1,612           1,612
GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX..............................................................           2,602           2,602
GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX..................................................          20,829          20,829
HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX............................................................           1,250           1,250
HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX........................................................           8,254          13,300
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX...............................................             498             498
JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX............................................................           1,248           1,248
JOE POOL LAKE, TX...............................................................             823             823
LAKE KEMP, TX...................................................................             150             150
LAVON LAKE, TX..................................................................           2,609           2,609
LEWISVILLE DAM, TX..............................................................           3,134           3,134
MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX......................................................           1,748           1,748
MOUTH OF THE COLORADO RIVER, TX.................................................           2,604           2,604
NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX..........................................................           1,676           1,676
NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX...................................           1,835           1,835
O C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX.....................................................             872             872
PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX..............................................................           1,116           1,116
PROCTOR LAKE, TX................................................................           1,623           1,623
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX...................................................              50              50
RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX............................................................             862             862
SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX......................................................          14,986          14,986
SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX...............................................           4,559           4,559
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX.............................................             255             255
SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX.............................................................           2,683           2,683
STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX.......................................................           1,805           1,805
TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ASSESSMENT, TX...........................................             300             500
TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX.........................................           2,135           2,135
WACO LAKE, TX...................................................................           2,270           2,270
WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX............................................................             999             999
WHITNEY LAKE, TX................................................................           5,205           5,205
WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX..................................................           2,742           2,742
 
                                      UTAH
 
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT...............................................              81              81

[[Page 737]]

 
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT.............................................             364             364
 
                                     VERMONT
 
BALL MOUNTAIN LAKE, VT..........................................................             705             780
BURLINGTON HARBOR BREAKWATER, VT................................................           2,150             800
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT...............................................              26              26
NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT AND NY............................................              95              95
NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT.........................................................             576             576
NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT......................................................             647             722
TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT..............................................................             687             762
UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT...........................................................             538             613
 
                                    VIRGINIA
 
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--ACC, VA.........................................           2,035           2,035
ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY--DSC, VA.........................................           1,159           1,159
CHINCOTEAGUE HARBOR OF REFUGE, VA...............................................             155             155
CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA..........................................................           1,124           1,124
DAVIS CREEK, VA.................................................................             350             350
DEEP CREEK, NEWPORT NEW, VA.....................................................  ..............           1,300
GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA...............................................           1,612           1,612
HAMPTON RDS, NORFOLK AND NEWPORT NEWS HBR (DRIFT REMOVAL........................           1,200           1,200
HORN HARBOR, VA.................................................................             270             270
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA...............................................             111             111
JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA.........................................................           3,801           4,800
JOHN H KERR LAKE, VA AND NC.....................................................           9,890           9,890
JOHN W FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA..........................................           1,334           1,334
LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA.............................................................             225             225
NORFOLK HARBOR (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSITS), VA.........................             200             200
NORFOLK HARBOR, VA..............................................................           8,679           8,679
NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA..............................................             297             297
PHILPOTT LAKE, VA...............................................................           4,377           4,377
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA...................................................             749             749
QUINBY CREEK, VA................................................................             400             400
RUDEE INLET, VA.................................................................           1,030           1,030
WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA...........................................           1,150           1,150
WHITINGS CREEK, MIDDLESEX CO, VA................................................             350             350
 
                                   WASHINGTON
 
CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA............................................................             853             853
COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA.................................................  ..............             764
EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA..........................................           1,355           1,355
GRAYS HARBOR AND CHEHALIS RIVER, WA.............................................           8,781          12,281
HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA...........................................................           1,777           1,777
ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, WA.....................................................           5,065           5,065
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA...............................................             257             257
LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA..................................................           7,479           7,479
LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, WA...................................................           1,268           1,268
LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, WA..................................................           5,244           5,244
LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA...............................................           3,291           3,291
MILL CREEK LAKE, WA.............................................................             947             947
MT ST HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA...............................................             321             321
MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA............................................................           2,075           2,075
NEAH BAY, WA....................................................................  ..............             750
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA...................................................             253             253
PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA............................................             999             999
QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA............................................................             975             975
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA.............................................             439             439
SEATTLE HARBOR, WA..............................................................             640             640
STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA.........................................................             247             247
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA....................................              60              60
TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA......................................................             127             127
THE DALLES LOCK AND DAM, WA AND OR..............................................           2,264           2,514
WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA....................................................             492             492
 
                                  WEST VIRGINIA
 
BEECH FORK LAKE, WV.............................................................           1,167           1,167
BLUESTONE LAKE, WV..............................................................           1,149           1,149
BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV.............................................................           1,555           1,555
EAST LYNN LAKE, WV..............................................................           1,832           1,832
ELK RIVER HARBOR, WV............................................................             440             440
ELKINS, WV......................................................................              16              16
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV...............................................             131             131
KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV................................................           7,544          13,394
OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY AND OH........................................          18,991          18,991
OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY AND OH.....................................           3,260           3,260
R D BAILEY LAKE, WV.............................................................           1,431           1,431
STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV......................................................             905             905
SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV...........................................................           1,603           1,603
SUTTON LAKE, WV.................................................................           1,777           1,777
TYGART LAKE, WV.................................................................           5,546           5,546
 
                                    WISCONSIN
 
ASHLAND HARBOR, WI..............................................................             180             180
EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI........................................................             820             820
FOX RIVER, WI...................................................................           1,372           1,372
GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI............................................................           1,924           2,424
INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI...............................................              31              31
KENOSHA HARBOR, WI..............................................................           1,315           1,315
KEWAUNEE HARBOR, WI.............................................................              75              75
MANITOWOC HARBOR, WI............................................................             278             278
MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI............................................................             789             789
OCONTO HARBOR, WI...............................................................              13              13
PORT WASHINGTON HARBOR, WI......................................................             261             261
PORT WING HARBOR, WI............................................................               6               6
PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI...................................................              56              56
SAXON HARBOR, WI................................................................              45              45
SHEBOYGAN HARBOR, WI............................................................           1,603           1,603
STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WI............................           1,578           1,578
SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI....................................             498             498
TWO RIVERS HARBOR, WI...........................................................             471             471
 
                                     WYOMING
 
JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY.........................................................           1,233           1,233

[[Page 738]]

 
SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY.............................................             101             101
 
                                  MISCELLANEOUS
 
AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH...............................................             725             725
AUTOMATED BUDGET SYSTEM (WINABS)................................................             285             285
COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM..................................................           2,750           2,750
CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/CURATION)............................................           1,545           1,545
DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE....................................................           8,000           8,000
DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM............................           1,180           1,180
DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (DOER)...........................           6,755           6,755
DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (DOTS) PROGRAM............................           1,545           1,545
EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS PROGRAM FOR BUILDINGS AND LIFELINES..........................             300             300
FACILITY PROTECTION.............................................................          64,000          35,000
GREAT LAKES SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODELS...........................................           1,000           1,000
HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION..........................................             675             675
INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION PROJECTS.............................................           4,120           4,120
MONITORING OF COASTAL NAVIGATION PROJECTS.......................................           1,750           1,750
NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM.....................................................              45              45
NATIONAL DAM SECURITY PROGRAM...................................................              30              30
NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS (NEPP).................................           4,120           4,120
NATIONAL LEWIS AND CLARK COMMEMORATION COORDINATOR..............................             310             310
PERFORMANCE BASED BUDGETING SUPPORT PROGRAM.....................................             815             815
PROTECTING, CLEARING AND STRAIGHTENING CHANNELS(SEC 3...........................              50              50
RECREATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM (RMSP)....................................           1,545           1,545
REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM..............................           1,545           1,545
RELIABILITY MODELS PROGRAM FOR MAJOR REHABILITATION.............................             675             675
REMOVAL OF SUNKEN VESSELS.......................................................             500             500
WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (WOTS) PROGRAM...............................             725             725
WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS..................................................           4,745           4,745
HYDROPOWER MAINTENANCE..........................................................  ..............         -49,000
REDUCTION FOR ANTICIPATED SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE..................................         -19,091         -50,213
ADJUSTMENT FOR ACTUAL RETIREMENT ACCRUALS.......................................            -240  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE..........................................       1,912,310       1,956,182
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee continues to believe that it is essential to 
     provide adequate resources and attention to operation and 
     maintenance requirements in order to protect the large 
     Federal investment. Yet, current and projected budgetary 
     constraints require the Committee to limit the amount of work 
     that can be accomplished in the fiscal year. In order to cope 
     with the current situation, the Corps has had to defer or 
     delay scheduled maintenance activities.
       Maintenance backlogs continue to grow, with much of the 
     backlog being essential maintenance dredging needed to keep 
     the Nation's ports, harbors, and waterways open and able to 
     efficiently handle important national and international trade 
     activities. Yet, the Committee is aware that out-year budget 
     planning guidance for the Corps of Engineers projects that 
     the current appropriations for their critical operation and 
     maintenance activities will continue to decline for the 
     foreseeable future. If additional resources are not made 
     available, the Committee will be forced to cut back on 
     services, and begin to terminate and close many projects and 
     activities.
       The Committee is aware of the Corps' efforts to stretch the 
     limited resources to cover all of its projects and to effect 
     savings through a variety of means. With an increasing number 
     of projects entering the inventory, and budgetary constraints 
     increasing, it is clear that the Corps will have to find 
     innovative ways of accomplishing required maintenance work, 
     while reducing operational and other costs. Adjustments in 
     lower-priority programs and noncritical work should optimize 
     limited resources while maximizing the public benefit.
       The budget request has proposed that no navigation project 
     with less than one billion ton-miles of cargo be eligible for 
     maintenance dredging. The Committee believes that this is in 
     direct conflict with the way projects are analyzed. Project 
     analysis is based upon Economic and Environmental Principles 
     and Guidelines for Water and Related Land Resources 
     Implementation Studies (1983), the Corps of Engineers 
     Planning Guidance Notebook (2000), and other polices and 
     procedures. For navigation studies, the analysis centers on 
     transportation savings to the Nation considering the ultimate 
     origins and destinations of commodities to be moved. 
     Operation and maintenance costs are considered as a part of 
     this analysis and are figured into the benefit to cost ratio 
     utilized to make the investment decision. By applying an 
     arbitrary ton-mile figure to determine O&M funding decisions, 
     the budget request has essentially obviated the need for any 
     of the previous studies undertaken to determine the 
     investment decision.
       The Committee is concerned about the annual proposals for 
     reductions of maintenance funding for ``low use waterways and 
     ports''. These tributary waterways naturally do not enjoy the 
     same level of relative efficiencies as mainstem waterways. 
     The Mississippi and Ohio Rivers handle tremendous volumes of 
     traffic over long distances and so generate impressive ton-
     mile statistics. Tributaries, by nature, provide generally 
     short, smaller channels with lower traffic densities. 
     Consequently, ``ton-mile'' statistics for tributary waterways 
     are dwarfed by statistics for the mainstem waterways. It is 
     important to recognize that the commerce on the tributaries 
     is usually only a small part of the total journey between 
     producer and consumer. When these statistics are compared on 
     a system basis, nearly all of these waterways appear to ``pay 
     their way'' and are performing as the economic analysis 
     indicated when they were originally authorized.
       Uncertainties in maintenance funding for lower use 
     projects, seriously impact their abilities to compete and 
     become higher use facilities. Without funding to provide a 
     stable channel and authorized depths and widths, industries 
     and shippers are reluctant to make the necessary investments 
     in using these projects. The Committee believes that proposed 
     elimination of maintenance funding for authorized projects is 
     not only a serious disservice to the public, but is 
     demonstrates a profound lack of respect for the congressional 
     oversight committees that have jurisdiction for authorization 
     and deauthorization of such projects.
       The Committee is not in favor of funding projects that are 
     no longer economically viable or environmentally sustainable 
     however, we believe that they should be proposed for 
     deauthorization through the proper congressional oversight 
     committees. Therefore, the Committee has restored funding to 
     most of the low use waterways and port projects not included 
     in the budget request and encourages the administration to 
     budget accordingly.
       Alabama Coosa River, AL.--The Committee has provided 
     $200,000 above the budgeted amount for implementation of a 
     systemwide geographic information system for the Alabama-
     Coosa River.
       Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, AL & MS.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $26,800,000. Within the funds 
     provided, $2,000,000 is provided for to maintain mitigation 
     on State managed lands and $1,717,000 is provided to 
     accomplish additional dredging of navigation channels.
       McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System, AR.--The 
     Committee has provided $2,000,000 above the budget request to 
     perform advance maintenance dredging to assure the authorized 
     depth of 9 feet is maintained.
       Ouachita/Black Navigation Project, AR & LA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $8,325,000. Funds provided above the 
     budget request are for yearly maintenance dredging, and 
     backlog maintenance.
       White River, AR.--The Committee has provided $2,200,000 for 
     routine operation and maintenance activities and for minimum 
     expected dredging and snagging requirements.
       Humboldt Harbor and Bay, CA.--The Committee has provided an 
     additional $1,500,000 to the administration's budget request 
     of $3,426,000 for Humboldt Bay, California, for advanced 
     maintenance dredging to remove the source of shoaling that 
     has impeded navigational safety in the entry channel to the 
     harbor. The shoaling has caused loss of life, property, oil 
     spills and interruptions in the flow of commerce to and from 
     Humboldt Bay.
       Los Angeles County Drainage Area, CA.--Within the funds 
     provided, $3,160,000 is for the Hansen Dam unit of the 
     project. The Committee urges the Corps to work with the

[[Page 739]]

     Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, or its local designee, 
     concerning development and management of the natural areas 
     within the Hansen Dam Recreation Area.
       Ventura Harbor, CA.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     an additional $1,300,000 for the repair of the weir at 
     Ventura Harbor.
       Cherry Creek, Chatfield, and Trinidad Lakes, CO.--An 
     appropriations request of $1,500,000 over the budget for 
     these three lakes has been provided. Frequent inundation of 
     recreation areas are causing health and safety concerns 
     requiring repair or replacement of the facilities. A total of 
     $1,500,000 above the budget request has been provided for 
     these three lakes. This action in no way is intended to alter 
     the Corps of Engineers' lease and property accountability 
     policies. It is the Committee's understanding that the State 
     of Colorado has agreed to cost share this project on a 50-50 
     basis. It is also the understanding of the Committee that the 
     Secretary is not to assume, nor share in the future cost of 
     the operation and maintenance of these recreation facilities.
       Treatment of Dredged Material from Long Island Sound, NY.--
     $250,000 is provided to initiate a demonstration program for 
     the use of innovative technologies for the treatment of 
     dredged materials from Long Island Sound.
       Intracoastal Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, DE 
     & MD.--The Committee recommendation is $12,853,000. Funds are 
     provided for routine operation and maintenance activities and 
     for immediate reimbursement to the State of Delaware for 
     normal operation and maintenance costs incurred by the State 
     for the SR-1 Bridge, from station 58+00 to station 293+00, 
     between October 1, 2002 and September 30, 2003. The 
     reimbursable costs include electric lighting and associated 
     late fees, power sweeping, drainage cleaning, snow removal, 
     surface deicing, and periodic bridge inspections. The Corps 
     shall initiate necessary repairs to the SR-1 bridge once 
     repair recommendations from the bridge inspections are 
     received.
       Intracoastal Waterway, Jacksonville to Miami, FL.--The 
     Committee has provided $2,500,000 for maintenance activities 
     along the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway.
       Apalachicola, Chattahoochee and Flint Rivers, GA, FL, & 
     AL.--The Committee recommendation includes $4,709,000 which 
     includes annual dredging of the river channel, annual 
     operations and maintenance of the George W. Andrews Lock, 
     spot dredging of shoals continue and routine operations and 
     maintenance of the project. With funds previously provided, 
     the Committee expects the Corps to continue restoration 
     efforts in the Corley Slough reach.
       Missouri River--Rulo to the Mouth, IA, NE, KS, & MO.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $500,000 above the budget 
     request to continue implementation of actions related to the 
     U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biological opinion.
       Red Rock Dam and Lake Red Rock, IA.--The Committee has 
     provided $800,000 above the budget request to complete 
     repairs to the SE Des Moines Remedial Works Levee.
       Mississippi River between Missouri River and Minneapolis, 
     IL, IA, MN, MO, & WI.--The Committee has provided $500,000 
     above the budget request for ongoing major maintenance items 
     and initiation of major maintenance activities at Lock and 
     Dam 11.
       Clinton Lake, KS.--An additional $366,000 has been provided 
     above the budget request for Lewis and Clark Commemoration 
     events.
       Big Sandy Harbor, KY.--$1,135,000 has been provided by the 
     Committee for annual dredging requirements.
       Wolf Creek Dam, Lake Cumberland, KY.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $1,200,000 above the budget request 
     for the Corps to make safety and other necessary improvements 
     to the boat ramps at Old Fall Creek, Tate Access, Camp 
     Attrahunt and Ramsey Point.
       J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, LA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $12,224,000. Within the funds 
     provided, $1,000,000 is provided for bank stabilization 
     repairs, $408,000 is provided for dredging entrances to oxbow 
     lakes, with the remainder provided for routine operation and 
     maintenance activities, annual dredging requirements, and 
     backlog maintenance items.
       Narraguagus River, Milbridge, ME.--The Committee has 
     provided $50,000 for the Corps to complete necessary 
     environmental documentation and plans and specifications for 
     restoring the project to authorized widths and depths.
       Black River, Port Huron, MI.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $500,000 to complete plans and specifications and 
     initiate maintenance dredging of the project.
       Morehead City Harbor, NC.--$300,000 has been provided above 
     the budget request to complete the Section 933 study 
     concerning placement of maintenance material on the beaches 
     of Bogue Banks.
       Garrison Dam, Lake Sakakawea, ND.--The Committee has 
     provided $300,000 above the budget request for mosquito 
     control and continued improvements to low water lake 
     accessibility.
       Cocheco River, NH.--$500,000 has been provided for needed 
     maintenance dredging of the authorized project.
       Upper Rio Grande Water Operations Model, NM.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $2,050,000 for the daily water 
     operations model for the Upper Rio Grande Basin.
       Cochiti Partnering Initiative, Cochiti Pueblo, NM.--The 
     Committee is aware of the joint efforts made by both the 
     Corps of Engineers and the Cochiti pueblo in an attempt to 
     resolve residual differences regarding the construction of 
     the Cochiti dam and encourages both sides to continue to 
     build further on this relationship.
       Delaware River, Philadelphia to the Sea, NJ, PA, & DE.--The 
     Committee has provided $500,000 above the budget request to 
     continue restoration work at Pea Patch Island.
       Copan Lake, OK.--The Committee is aware of the need to 
     complete a study of the need to determine the feasibility of 
     reallocating available storage at Copan Lake, OK to meet the 
     future water supply needs for the city of Bartlesville, OK. 
     Therefore the Committee has provided $1,521,000 for routine 
     operations and maintenance and the reallocation study.
       Bonneville Lock and Dam, OR & WA.--The Committee has 
     provided $400,000 above the budget request for continue 
     actions to implement the Federal Columbia River Power System 
     Biological Opinion.
       Columbia River at the Mouth, OR & WA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $10,702,000. Funds provided are for 
     routine operations and maintenance, increased dredging costs, 
     jetty evaluation, studies of alternate dredged material 
     disposal and a dredged material disposal demonstration 
     project at Benson Beach.
       John Day Lock and Dam, OR & WA.--The Committee has provided 
     $1,584,000 above the budget request for significant safety 
     repairs to the navigation lock, to continue the major 
     rehabilitation evaluation report to address significant 
     foundation problems, and to continue actions to implement the 
     Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion.
       Francis E. Walter Dam, PA.--The Committee has provided 
     $3,500,000 above the budget request to complete the 
     relocation of the frequently inundated access road.
       Point Judith Pond and Harbor of Refuge, RI.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $120,000 to survey the breakwaters 
     and determine if repairs are warranted.
       Providence River and Harbor, RI.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $20,000,000 to initiate dredging of 
     the authorized project.
       Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, SC.--The Committee has 
     provided $7,050,000 for the Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, 
     SC project. Within the funds provided, $3,750,000 is provided 
     to make a lump sum payment to the South Carolina Department 
     of Natural Resources to perform all future operation of the 
     fish lift at St. Stephen, South Carolina.
       Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux, SD.--The 
     Committee notes that Title VI of the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 1999, as amended, requires that funding to 
     inventory and stabilize cultural and historic sites along the 
     Missouri River in South Dakota, and to carry out the 
     terrestrial wildlife habitat programs, shall be provided from 
     the Operation and Maintenance account. The Committee has 
     provided $5,000,000 to protect cultural resource sites and 
     provide funding to the State and Tribes for approved 
     restoration and stewardship plans and in compliance with the 
     requirements of Title VI, directs the Corps to contract with 
     or reimburse the State of South Dakota and affected Tribes to 
     carry out these duties.
       Texas Water Allocation Assessment, TX.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $500,000 for the Texas Water 
     Allocation Assessment for the Corps to work with the Texas 
     regional planning groups in the evaluation of technologies 
     and the exploration of water supply opportunities in the 
     State including (where appropriate) water reuse, aquifer 
     storage and recovery, and development of new multi-purpose 
     facilities.
       Burlington Harbor Breakwater, VT.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $800,000 to complete repairs to the 
     south breakwater.
       Connecticut River Basin Master Plans, VT.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $300,000 to complete master plans for 
     Ball Mountain, North Springfield, Townshend, and Union 
     Village Reservoirs in Vermont.
       Grays Harbor and Chehalis River, WA.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $12,281,000 for routine operation and 
     maintenance, to complete the North Jetty rehabilitation 
     contract, to continue entrance channel study, for maintenance 
     of the South Jetty.
       Facility Protection.--The Committee has provided 
     $35,000,000. The Committee has been informed that this is the 
     average annual cost for guards at critical facilities.


                           regulatory program

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$127,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................144,252,000
Committee recommendation....................................144,252,000

       An appropriation of $144,252,000 is recommended for the 
     regulatory program of the Corps of Engineers.
       This appropriation provides for salaries and costs incurred 
     administering regulation of activities affecting U.S. waters, 
     including wetlands, in accordance with the Rivers and Harbors 
     Act of 1899, the Clean Water Act of 1977, and the Marine 
     Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972.

[[Page 740]]

       The appropriation helps maintain program performance, 
     protects important aquatic resources, and supports 
     partnerships with States and local communities through 
     watershed planning efforts.


            formerly utilized sites remedial action program

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$140,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................140,298,000
Committee recommendation....................................140,298,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $140,298,000 
     to continue activities related to the Formerly Utilized Sites 
     Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) in fiscal year 2003.
       The responsibility for the cleanup of contaminated sites 
     under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program was 
     transferred to the Army Corps of Engineers in the Fiscal Year 
     1998 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, Public 
     Law 105-62.
       FUSRAP is not specifically defined by statute. The program 
     was established in 1974 under the broad authority of the 
     Atomic Energy Act and, until fiscal year 1998, funds for the 
     cleanup of contaminated defense sites had been appropriated 
     to the Department of Energy through existing appropriation 
     accounts. In appropriating FUSRAP funds to the Corps of 
     Engineers, the Committee intended to transfer only the 
     responsibility for administration and execution of cleanup 
     activities at eligible sites where remediation had not been 
     completed. It did not intend to transfer ownership of and 
     accountability for real property interests that remain with 
     the Department of Energy.
       The Corps of Engineers has extensive experience in the 
     cleanup of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive wastes through 
     its work for the Department of Defense and other Federal 
     agencies. The Committee always intended for the Corps' 
     expertise be used in the same manner for the cleanup of 
     contaminated sites under FUSRAP. The Committee expects the 
     Corps to continue programming and budgeting for FUSRAP as 
     part of the Corps of Engineers--Civil program.
       The Committee notes that portions of the Iowa Army 
     Ammunition Plant in Middleton, Iowa, have recently been 
     deemed eligible for inclusion into the FUSRAP program. The 
     Committee encourages the Corps to reprogram available FUSRAP 
     funds to initiate work on this site as soon as practicable 
     and to budget for this site in future budget submissions.

                            general expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$153,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................155,651,000
Committee recommendation....................................155,651,000

       This appropriation finances the expenses of the Office, 
     Chief of Engineers, the Division Offices, and certain 
     research and statistical functions of the Corps of Engineers.
       Executive direction and management.--The Office of the 
     Chief of Engineers and eight division offices supervise work 
     in 38 district offices.
       Humphreys Engineer Center Support Activity.--This support 
     center provides administrative services (such as personnel, 
     logistics, informatino management, and finance and 
     accounting) for the Office of the Chief of Engineers and 
     other separate field operating activities.
       Institute for Water Resources.--This institute performs 
     studies and analyses amd develops planning techniques for the 
     management and development of the Nation's water resources.
       United States Army Corps of Engineers Finance Center.--This 
     center provides centralizes support for all Corps finance and 
     accounting sites.
       The Committee has included statutory language for the past 
     several years prohibiting any funds from being used to fund 
     an Office of Congressional Affairs within the executive 
     office of the Chief of Engineers. The Committee believes that 
     an Office of Congressional Affairs for the Civil Works 
     Program would hamper the efficient and effective coordination 
     of issues with the Committee staff and Members of Congress. 
     The Committee believes that the technical knowledge and 
     managerial expertise needed for the Corps headquarters to 
     effectively address Civil Works authorization, appropriation, 
     and Headquarters policy matters resides in the Civil Works 
     organization. Therefore the Committee strongly recommends 
     that the office of Congressional Affairs not be a part of the 
     process by which information on Civil Works projects, 
     programs, and activities is provided to Congress.
       The Committee reminds the Corps that the General Expenses 
     Account is to be used exclusively for executive oversight and 
     management of the Civil Works Program.
       In 1998, The Chief of Engineers issued a Command Directive 
     transferring the oversight and management of the General 
     Expenses account, as well as the manpower associated with 
     this function, from the Civil Works Directorate to the 
     Resource Management Office. General Expense funds are 
     appropriated solely for the executive management and 
     oversight of the Civil Works Program under the direction of 
     the Director of Civil Works. This Committee continues to be 
     concerned about the priority setting and decision making 
     process being employed by the Corps for the usage of General 
     Expense funds. A number of the general expense funded items 
     seem to be only remotely associated with the direct 
     management and oversight of the Civil Works Program. 
     Accordingly, the Committee is establishing some guidelines by 
     which non-labor discretionary general expense dollars 
     appropriated are to be allocated within the Corps of 
     Engineers.
       These guidelines include: any allocation of discretionary, 
     non-labor General Expense dollars exceeding $100,000 for a 
     specific activity in any one fiscal year, needs to obtain 
     prior approval of the Senate Appropriations Committee before 
     obligating funds. Within 60 days of enactment of this Act, 
     the Corps of Engineers is directed to submit to the 
     Committee, for approval, a written procedure for setting 
     priorities and allocating General Expense dollars assuring 
     that General Expense dollars will be managed consistent with 
     this direction.
       The Committee has further determined that the allocation of 
     General Expense funds will be provided through the following 
     line items and funds can only be moved between these line 
     items with the concurrence of the Committee: labor, travel, 
     congressionally mandated studies, improving the technical 
     capability of the Corps of Engineers, implementing the 
     Project Management Business Process, and updating and 
     maintaining current regulations and procedures for 
     implementing Civil Works projects.
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $155,651,000.


                 flood control and coastal emergencies

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
  Recissions...............................................-$25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................20,227,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,227,000

       This account provides funds for preparedness activities for 
     natural and other disasters, response, and emergency flood 
     fighting and rescue operations, hurricane response, and 
     emergency shore protection work. It also provides for 
     emergency supplies of clean water where the source has been 
     contaminated or where adequate supplies of water are needed 
     for consumption.
       The Committee is aware of the successful testing of the 
     Rapid Deployment Flood Wall at the Engineering Research and 
     Development Center in Vicksburg, Mississippi. This technology 
     has proven to be promising in the effort to fight floods, 
     cost-effective, quick to deploy and successful in protecting 
     property from flood damage, damages which total millions each 
     year.
       The Committee is aware that the Corps of Engineers intends 
     to revise 33 CFR 203.82 and implement cost-sharing conditions 
     for emergency response and recovery activities funded by the 
     Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies (FCCE) account. Public 
     Law 8499 provides the Secretary of the Army, acting through 
     the Chief of Engineers, with broad discretionary authority to 
     respond to disasters, preserve human life, and protect 
     critical infrastructure. Appropriations to the FCCE account 
     allow the Corps to provide assistance to distressed areas 
     before, during and after natural disasters--events that 
     usually require rapid response and extract heavy tolls on 
     community resources. Under such urgent and extreme 
     circumstances, Federal cost-sharing should not impose delay 
     and unreasonable financial burdens on state and local 
     governments trying to rebuild their communities. The 
     Committee expects the Secretary to administer the FCCE 
     program in accordance with the terms and conditions of Public 
     Law 84-99 in a fair, reasonable and balanced manner, and to 
     inform the Appropriations Committees of any specific cost 
     sharing required in law for the FCCE program and to modify 33 
     CFR 203.82 accordingly. Further, the Appropriations 
     Committees shall be informed of any Corps of Engineers 
     proposal intended to be published in the Federal Register.


             General Provisions--Corps of Engineers--Civil

       Language included under Section 101 restates language 
     contained in the Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
     Act, 2000, Public Law 106-60 which places a limit on credits 
     and reimbursements allowable per project and annually.
       The bill includes language in Section 102 which directs 
     that none of the funds made available in fiscal year 2002 may 
     be used to carry out any activity relating to closure or 
     removal of the St. Georges Bridge across the Intracoastal 
     Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware and 
     Maryland.
       Sec. 103. The Committee has included language to make 
     changes to Sec. 595(h)(1) of Public Law 106-53.
       Sec. 104. The Committee has included language concerning 
     private sector contracting percentages.
       Sec. 105. The Committee has included language making 
     technical corrections to the St. Paul Harbor, Alaska project.
       Sec. 106. The Committee has included language making 
     technical corrections to the Abiquiu Dam Emergency gate 
     project.
       Sec. 107. The Committee has included language concerning 
     relocations credit for the Tropicana Flamingo project.
       Sec. 108. The Committee has included language concerning 
     rehabilitation of the dredge McFARLAND. The Committee 
     believes that a determination for how the

[[Page 741]]

     dredge is to be utilized following this rehabilitation should 
     be deferred until after the GAO report requested in Public 
     Law 107-66 has been received and has undergone a thorough 
     review by the appropriate Committees.
       Sec. 109. The Committee has included a new provision 
     regarding the AIWW bridge replacement.
       Sec. 110. The Committee has included a provision regarding 
     the Corps Civil Works missions.
       Sec. 111. The Committee has included a new provision 
     regarding the American and Sacramento Rivers, CA project.
       Sec. 112. The Committee has included a new provision 
     regarding the Terminus Dam, CA project.

                  TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                Central Utah Project Completion Account

Appropriations, 2002........................................$36,228,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................36,228,000
Committee recommendation.....................................36,228,000

       The Committee recommendation for fiscal year 2003 to carry 
     out the provisions of the Central Utah Project Completion Act 
     totals $36,228,000. An appropriation of $23,643,000 has been 
     provided for Central Utah project construction; $11,259,000 
     for fish, wildlife, and recreation, mitigation and 
     conservation. The Committee recommendation provides 
     $1,326,000 for program administration and oversight.
       The Central Utah Project Completion Act (titles II-VI of 
     Public Law 102-575) provides for the completion of the 
     central Utah project by the Central Utah Water Conservancy 
     District. The Act also authorizes the appropriation of funds 
     for fish, wildlife, recreation, mitigation, and conservation; 
     establishes an account in the Treasury for the deposit of 
     these funds and of other contributions for mitigation and 
     conservation activities; and establishes a Utah Reclamation 
     Mitigation and Conservation Commission to administer funds in 
     that account. The Act further assigns responsibilities for 
     carrying out the Act to the Secretary of the Interior and 
     prohibits delegation of those responsibilities to the Bureau 
     of Reclamation.

                         Bureau of Reclamation


                      Water and Related Resources

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$762,531,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................726,147,000
Committee recommendation....................................816,147,000

       An appropriation of $816,147,000 is recommended by the 
     Committee for general investigations of the Bureau of 
     Reclamation. The water and related resources account supports 
     the development, management, and restoration of water and 
     related natural resources in the 17 Western States. The 
     account includes funds for operating and maintaining existing 
     facilities to obtain the greatest overall level of benefits, 
     to protect public safety, and to conduct studies on ways to 
     improve the use of water and related natural resources. Work 
     will be done in partnership and cooperation with non-Federal 
     entities and other Federal agencies.
       The Committee is aware the Bureau has undertaken an 
     investigation into the extent to which Alkali Silica 
     Reactivity (ASR) effects projects within the Bureau's domain. 
     The Committee commends the Bureau for this initiative. The 
     Committee requests that information from the investigations 
     be provided to the relevant Senate and House authorizing and 
     appropriating subcommittees within 6 months of enactment of 
     this Act, along with recommendations for a course of action 
     to prevent and mitigate ASR in the future.
       The amounts recommended by the Committee are shown on the 
     following table along with the budget request.

                               BUREAU OF RECLAMATION--WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Budget estimate                Committee
                                                             --------------------------      recommendation
                        Project title                                                  -------------------------
                                                               Resources    Facilities   Resources    Facilities
                                                               management      OM&R      management      OM&R
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           ARIZONA
 
AK CHIN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT.................  ...........        6,200  ...........        6,200
CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT, COLORADO RIVER BASIN...............       34,709           74       34,709           74
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT, TITLE I......          731       10,240          731       10,240
COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM..................        3,450  ...........        4,450  ...........
FORT MCDOWELL SETTLEMENT ACT................................          500  ...........          500  ...........
NORTHERN ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.....................          422  ...........          422  ...........
PHOENIX METROPOLITAN WATER REUSE PROJECT....................          250  ...........          250  ...........
SALT RIVER PROJECT..........................................           39  ...........           39  ...........
SOUTHERN ARIZONA WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJ- ECT......        4,825  ...........        4,825  ...........
SOUTH/CENTRAL ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM................          797  ...........          797  ...........
TRES RIOS WETLANDS DEMONSTRATION............................          200  ...........          500  ...........
TUCSON AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE STUDY...............          100  ...........          100  ...........
YUMA AREA PROJECTS..........................................        1,658       19,107        1,658       19,107
 
                         CALIFORNIA
                                                              ...........
CACHUMA AREA PROJECTS.......................................          778          557          778          557
CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...........................          417  ...........          417  ...........
CALLEGUAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT RECYCLING PLANT..........        1,000  ...........        1,000  ...........
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT:
    AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION.................................        2,043        9,658        2,043        9,658
    AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT................................        7,707           44        7,707           44
    DELTA DIVISION..........................................       11,095        5,323       20,845        5,323
    EAST SIDE DIVISION......................................        1,230        3,855        1,230        3,855
    FRIANT DIVISION.........................................        2,276        3,024        4,026        3,024
    MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS..........................       12,726        1,027       27,726        1,027
    REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY MAINT........  ...........       16,000  ...........       16,000
    SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION...............................        4,921        1,780        5,821        1,780
    SAN FELIPE DIVISION.....................................          519  ...........          519  ...........
    SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION....................................          249  ...........          249  ...........
    SHASTA DIVISION.........................................        1,543        8,042        4,543        8,042
    TRINITY RIVER DIVISION..................................        7,727        5,572        7,727        5,572
    WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS..............................        1,791        7,614        1,791        7,614
    WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT................        5,989        6,018        5,989        6,018
    YIELD FEASIBILITY INVESTIGATION.........................        1,000  ...........        1,000  ...........
LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL WETLANDS DEVELOPMENT....................          200  ...........        3,000  ...........
LONG BEACH AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJ- ECT.......        1,500  ...........        1,800  ...........
LONG BEACH DESALINATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT....  ...........  ...........        1,000  ...........
MISSION BASIN BRACKISH GROUNDWATER DESALTING DEMO...........  ...........  ...........          300  ...........
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY AREA WATER RECYCLING PROJ- ECT.......        1,800  ...........        2,500  ...........
ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT, PHAS......        1,800  ...........        1,800  ...........
ORLAND PROJECT..............................................           39          430           39          430
SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT.................................        1,000  ...........        1,000  ...........
SAN DIEGO AREA WATER RECLAMATION PROGRAM....................        6,000  ...........        6,000  ...........
SAN GABRIEL BASIN PROJECT...................................        1,800  ...........        1,800  ...........
SAN JOSE WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM................        2,000  ...........        2,000  ...........
SOLANO PROJECT..............................................        1,248        1,513        1,248        1,513
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..................          842  ...........          842  ...........
 
                          COLORADO
 
ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT, CRSP SECTION 5 AND 8...............       33,000  ...........       35,000  ...........
COLLBRAN PROJECT............................................          122        1,212          122        1,212
COLORADO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.............................           75  ...........           75  ...........
COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT...............................           12       10,265           12       10,265
COLORADO-BIG THOMPSON PROJECT--HORSETOOTH DAM...............  ...........       31,100  ...........       31,100
FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT....................................           41          118           41          118
FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT..................................  ...........        6,785  ...........        6,985
GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II.........................          224          612          224          612

[[Page 742]]

 
LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT...................          582        1,552          582        1,552
MANCOS PROJECT..............................................           28           50           28           50
PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II.......................           50        1,968           50        1,968
PINE RIVER PROJECT..........................................           58           65           58           65
SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT.....................................          399        4,066          399        4,066
UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT.........................................          143          113          143          113
 
                            IDAHO
 
BOISE AREA PROJECTS.........................................        2,714        3,192        2,714        3,192
COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT............       15,000  ...........       15,500  ...........
DRAIN WATER MANAGEMENT STUDY, BOISE PROJECT.................          100  ...........          100  ...........
IDAHO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM................................          578  ...........          578  ...........
MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS......................................        3,282        2,194        3,282        2,194
MINIDOKA NORTHSIDE DRAIN WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM...........          200  ...........          200  ...........
 
                           KANSAS
 
KANSAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...............................          235  ...........          235  ...........
WICHITA PROJECT.............................................  ...........          285  ...........          285
 
                           MONTANA
 
FORT PECK DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM....................  ...........  ...........        7,000  ...........
HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT........................................  ...........          300  ...........          300
MILK RIVER PROJECT..........................................          320          826          320          826
MONTANA INVESTIGATIONS......................................          475  ...........          475  ...........
ROCKY BOYS INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT...................        4,600  ...........        4,600  ...........
 
                          NEBRASKA
 
MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT........................................  ...........           78  ...........           78
NEBRASKA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.............................           71  ...........           71  ...........
 
                           NEVADA
 
HALFWAY WASH PROJECT STUDY..................................  ...........  ...........          390  ...........
LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT......................................        6,215        2,339        6,215        2,339
LAKE MEAD/LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM............................        1,000  ...........        2,000  ...........
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER RECYCLING PROJECT.....................  ...........  ...........        3,000  ...........
 
                         NEW MEXICO
 
ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA WATER AND RECLAMATION REUSE..........  ...........  ...........          400  ...........
CARLSBAD PROJECT............................................        1,644        1,126        1,644        1,126
CONCHAS PROJECT STUDY.......................................  ...........  ...........          100  ...........
EASTERN NEW MEXICO WATER SUPPLY.............................  ...........  ...........          250  ...........
MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT...................................        7,200        8,263       19,200       18,763
NAVAJO GALLUP WATER SUPPLY PROJECT..........................          300  ...........          300  ...........
NAVAJO NATION INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM........................          300  ...........          300  ...........
PECOS RIVER BASIN WATER SALVAGE PROJECT.....................  ...........           27  ...........          500
RIO GRANDE PROJECT..........................................        1,054        2,953        1,054        2,953
SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.................          243  ...........          243  ...........
SOUTHERN NEW MEXICO/WEST TEXAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.......          196  ...........          196  ...........
TUCUMCARI PROJECT...........................................           19  ...........           19  ...........
UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...............          165  ...........          165  ...........
 
                        NORTH DAKOTA
 
DAKOTAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..............................          239  ...........          239  ...........
DAKOTAS TRIBES INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.......................          400  ...........          400  ...........
GARRISON DIVERSION UNIT.....................................       20,662        4,577       24,000        4,577
 
                          OKLAHOMA
 
ARBUCKLE PROJECT............................................  ...........          193  ...........          193
MCGEE CREEK PROJECT.........................................  ...........          452  ...........          452
MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT.......................................  ...........          306  ...........          306
NORMAN PROJECT..............................................          225          208          225          208
OKLAHOMA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.............................          207  ...........          507  ...........
WASHITA BASIN PROJECT.......................................  ...........          742  ...........          742
W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT.........................................  ...........          293  ...........          293
 
                           OREGON
 
CROOKED RIVER PROJECT.......................................          301          546          301          546
DESCHUTES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT.....................          500  ...........          750  ...........
DESCHUTES PROJECT...........................................          382          152          382          152
DESCHUTES PROJECT-WICKUP DAM................................  ...........       12,300  ...........       12,300
DESCHUTES PROJECT, TUMALO, BEND FEED CANAL..................  ...........  ...........        1,300  ...........
EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS.....................................          308          275          308          275
GRANDE RONDE WATER OPTIMIZATION STUDY.......................          150  ...........          150  ...........
KLAMATH PROJECT.............................................       13,644          623       19,377          623
OREGON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...............................          333  ...........          333  ...........
ROUGE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, SAVAGE RAPIDS PUMPING PLANT......  ...........  ...........          250  ...........
ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION..................          454          169          454          169
TUALATIN PROJECT............................................          238          125          238          125
TUALATIN VALLEY WATER SUPPLY FEASIBILITY STUDY..............           25  ...........           25  ...........
UMATILLA BASIN PROJECT, PHASE III STUDY.....................           50  ...........          300  ...........
UMATILLA PROJECT............................................          408        2,363          408        2,363
WILLOW LAKE NATURAL TREATMENT SYSTEM........................  ...........  ...........          650  ...........
 
                        SOUTH DAKOTA
 
LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM..........................        2,000  ...........        7,000  ...........
MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT..............................       10,000           40       17,860           40
MNI WICONI PROJECT..........................................       23,292        8,228       30,772        8,228
PERKINS COUNTY RURAL WATER SALVAGE PROJECT..................  ...........  ...........        4,300  ...........
RAPID VALLEY PROJECT, DEERFIELD DAM.........................  ...........           27  ...........           27
 
                            TEXAS
 
BALMORHEA PROJECT...........................................  ...........           71  ...........           71
CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT......................................  ...........          109  ...........          109
LEON CREEK QUARRY/MITCHELL LAKE WATER REUSE PRO- JECTA......  ...........  ...........          500  ...........
LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCE CONSERVA- TION.......  ...........  ...........          500  ...........
NUECES RIVER................................................  ...........          392  ...........          392
SAN ANGELO PROJECT..........................................  ...........          307  ...........          307

[[Page 743]]

 
TEXAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM................................          217  ...........          217  ...........
 
                            UTAH
 
HYRUM PROJECT...............................................          120           24          120           24
MOON LAKE PROJECT...........................................           43           53           43           53
NAVAJO SANDSTONE AQUIFER RECHARGE STUDY.....................          100  ...........          100  ...........
NEWTON PROJECT..............................................           52           21           52           21
NORTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM........................          301  ...........          301  ...........
OGDEN RIVER PROJECT.........................................          350           44          350           44
PROVO RIVER PROJECT.........................................          677          493          677          493
SCOFIELD PROJECT............................................           97           27           97           27
SOUTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM........................          279  ...........          279  ...........
STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT...................................          107            7          107            7
WEBER BASIN PROJECT.........................................        1,455          399        1,455          399
WEBER RIVER PROJECT.........................................           52           71           52           71
 
                         WASHINGTON
 
COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT......................................        4,485        6,346        4,885        6,346
SALMON CREEK WATERSHED RESTORATION, WA......................  ...........  ...........          250  ...........
WASHINGTON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM...........................          518  ...........          518  ...........
YAKIMA PROJECT..............................................          598        6,156          598        6,156
YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT................       11,900  ...........       15,775  ...........
 
                           WYOMING
 
KENDRICK PROJECT............................................            4        2,568            4        2,568
NORTH PLATTE PROJECT........................................           10        1,324           10        1,324
SHOSHONE PROJECT............................................           10        1,232           10        1,232
WYOMING INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM..............................           37  ...........           37  ...........
 
                           VARIOUS
 
COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL, TITLE II: PROGRAM AND       10,087  ...........       10,087  ...........
 COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT...................
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT, SECTION 5...................        7,178        2,302        7,178        2,302
COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT, SECTION 8, R&F&WL...........        3,970           22        3,970           22
COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM............          150  ...........          150  ...........
DAM SAFETY PROGRAM:
    DEPARTMENT DAM SAFETY PROGRAM...........................  ...........        1,275  ...........        1,275
    INITIATE SOD CORRECTIVE ACTION..........................  ...........       21,910  ...........       21,910
    SAFETY EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS......................  ...........       14,315  ...........       14,315
    SAFETY OF DAMS CORRECTIVE ACTION STUDIES................  ...........           50  ...........           50
DEPARTMENTAL IRRIGATION DRAINAGE PROGRAM....................        2,600  ...........        3,350  ...........
DROUGHT EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE................................          899  ...........        5,399  ...........
EFFICIENCY INCENTIVES PROGRAM...............................        3,087  ...........        3,087  ...........
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM............  ...........          334  ...........          334
ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION..................       12,747  ...........       12,747  ...........
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION........................        1,706  ...........        1,706  ...........
ENVIRONMENTAL AND INTERAGENCY COORDINATION ACTIVIT- IES.....        1,890  ...........        1,890  ...........
EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES..........................  ...........        5,597  ...........        5,597
FEDERAL BUILDING SEISMIC SAFETY PROGRAM.....................  ...........        1,390  ...........        1,390
GENERAL PLANNING STUDIES....................................        2,195  ...........        2,195  ...........
LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM...........................        9,689  ...........        9,689  ...........
LOWER COLORADO RIVER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.................          275  ...........          275  ...........
LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM.....................       12,421  ...........       12,421  ...........
MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS......................  ...........          594  ...........          594
NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION.......................          850  ...........          850  ...........
NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM.............................        8,500  ...........        8,500  ...........
NEGOTIATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING...........        1,185  ...........        1,185  ...........
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT................          420          921          420          921
PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN--OTHER PROJECTS...................        2,828       30,759        2,828       30,759
POWER PROGRAM SERVICES......................................          969          244          969          244
PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM............................          420  ...........          420  ...........
RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION..............................        4,469  ...........        4,469  ...........
RECLAMATION RECREATION MANAGEMENT--TITLE XXVIII.............        2,800  ...........        2,800  ...........
RECREATION & FISH AND WILDLIFE PROGRAM ADMINISTRA- TION.....        2,292  ...........        2,292  ...........
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY:
    ADVANCED WATER TREATMENT DESALINATION PROGRAM...........        1,310  ...........        1,310  ...........
    APPLIED SCIENCE /TECHNOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT.............        3,490  ...........        3,490  ...........
    DESALINATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM...........          100  ...........        4,000  ...........
    HYDROELECTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION/ENHANCEMEN......          900  ...........          900  ...........
    TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT..................................          350  ...........          350  ...........
    WATERSHED/RIVER SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM..............        1,000  ...........        1,000  ...........
SITE SECURITY...............................................  ...........       28,440  ...........       28,440
SOIL AND MOISTURE CONSERVATION..............................          326  ...........          326  ...........
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO STATES..............................        1,942  ...........        1,942  ...........
TITLE XVI, WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM..............        1,500  ...........        3,500  ...........
UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES--TECHNICAL SUP- PORT.....           67  ...........           67  ...........
WATER MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION PROGRAM...................        6,581  ...........        7,081  ...........
WETLANDS DEVELOPMENT........................................        3,117  ...........        3,117  ...........
UNDISTRIBUTED REDUCTION BASED ON ANTICIPATED DELAYS.........      -37,942  ...........      -76,441  ...........
                                                             ===================================================
      TOTAL, WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES....................      381,164      344,983      459,991      356,156
                                                             ===================================================
                        LOAN PROGRAM
 
                         CALIFORNIA
 
CASTROVILLE IRRIGATION WATER SUPPLY PROJECT.................        1,239  ...........        1,239  ...........
SALINAS VALLEY WATER RECLAMATION............................          401  ...........          401  ...........
SAN SEVAINE CREEK WATER PROJECT.............................        5,575  ...........        5,575  ...........
 
                           VARIOUS
 
LOAN ADMINISTRATION.........................................          280  ...........          280  ...........
                                                             ===================================================
      TOTAL, LOAN PROGRAM...................................        7,495  ...........        7,495  ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Colorado River Front Work and Levee System, AZ.--The 
     Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 for the 
     Bureau of Reclamation to continue design and Environmental 
     compliance activities for water management

[[Page 744]]

     reservoirs to be constructed along the All American Canal.
       Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, CO.--The Committee has provided 
     an additional $200,000 for the reevaluation report.
       Central Valley Project, CA.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides an additional $30,000,000 for this project for 
     activities in support of the California Bay-Delta 
     Restoration. These activities are more fully described under 
     the heading for the California Bay-Delta Restoration.
       CVP, Sacramento River Division, CA.--The Committee has 
     provided $400,000 above the budget request to continue the 
     Colusa Basin Integrated Resource Management Plan.
       Lake Tahoe Regional Wetlands Development, CA.--The 
     Committee has provided $3,000,000 to continue the 
     environmental restoration projects in the vicinity of Lake 
     Tahoe, California and Nevada.
       The Bureau of Reclamation is authorized hereafter to 
     negotiate and enter into financial assistance agreements with 
     public and private agencies, organizations, and institutions 
     for activities under the Lake Tahoe Regional Wetlands 
     Development Program. Costs associated with such activities 
     will be non-reimbursable.
       Animas La-Plata Project, CO and NM.--The bill contains 
     $35,000,000 for the Animas La-Plata, Colorado Project. The 
     Committee recognizes that with constrained resources it will 
     be difficult to maintain the schedule established by the 
     Colorado Ute Settlement Act Amendments of 2000.
       Arrowrock Dam, ID.--The Committee expects continued and 
     full compliance by the Bureau with Section 206 of Public Law 
     107-066, with regard to the Valve Rehabilitation Project at 
     the Arrowrock Dam on the Arrowrock Division of the Boise 
     Project in Idaho, for the full period of recovery of expenses 
     prescribed in that Section.
       Columbia and Snake River Salmon Recovery Project, ID, OR, 
     and WA.--The Committee has provided $500,000 above the budget 
     request for continued fishery habitat improvements in the 
     John Day River Subbasin Project, OR.
       Lucky Peak, ID.--The Committee is aware of the Bureau 
     collecting from water users for NEPA compliance work 
     associated with the Lucky Peak water service contract 
     renewals. The Committee believes that, with respect to these 
     water service contracts, the Bureau of Reclamation should 
     incur these costs as part of its regular activities and shall 
     report to the Committee within 180 days within enactment of 
     this bill on how it intends to address this situation.
       Halfway Wash, NV.--The Committee recommendation has 
     provided $390,000 to studies of Halfway Wash in Mesquite, 
     County, NV.
       Conchas Project Study, NM.--The Committee has included 
     $100,000 to conduct a yield and seepage study.
       Middle Rio Grande Project, NM.--The Committee is aware of 
     the pending biological opinion in effect on the Rio Grande. 
     When combined with the drought conditions facing New Mexico, 
     and municipalities, farmers and the silvery minnow all 
     competing for the same scarce resource, water, a delicate 
     balance must be maintained. The recommendation includes 
     funding for the following activities: $5,100,000 for 
     modifications to river habitat; $2,180,000 for silvery minnow 
     population management; $1,100,000 for monitoring of stream 
     effects on the silvery minnow; $130,000 to combat non-native 
     species endangering the silvery minnow; $650,000 for Bureau 
     of Reclamation's repayment obligations under the agreement; 
     $950,000 for water quality studies and improvements; and 
     $2,500,000 for the Bureau of Reclamation's purchase of water. 
     In addition, the Committee directs the Bureau of Reclamation 
     to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service on silvery 
     minnow monitoring and habitat efforts. Finally, the Committee 
     has included statutory language which requires the Bureau to 
     submit a report on the status and results of fiscal year 2002 
     funding and, to submit to the Committee for approval, a 
     detailed spending plan for fiscal year 2003 within 60 days of 
     enactment.
       Middle Rio Grande Levees, NM.--The Committee is very 
     concerned about the state of disrepair of the Middle Rio 
     Grande levees due to the lack of sufficient and regular 
     maintenance within the river bed, including both the levees 
     and the low-flow channel. The Committee has included an 
     additional $10,000,000 to address this problem and expects 
     the Bureau to expedite its work in order to begin the repair 
     of the project in order to address the life and safety 
     issues. Additionally, the Committee expects that the Bureau 
     will take all steps necessary to maintain the project in a 
     responsible manner such that additional levees will not be at 
     risk. Finally the Commissioner is directed to submit an 
     annual report to the Senate Appropriations Committee on the 
     status of the levee repairs.
       Pecos River Basin Water Supply Salvage Project, NM.--The 
     Committee is aware that the Bureau of Reclamation carries out 
     the Pecos River Basin Water Supply Salvage project in 
     collaboration with the State of New Mexico. The Committee 
     directs the Bureau of Reclamation, within funds appropriated 
     for the Facility Maintenance and Rehabilitation, not to 
     provide less than $500,000 for this eradication effort.
       Garrison Diversion Unit, ND.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $24,000,000. While this is an increase over the 
     budget request, it is still far below the amount needed to 
     fund the project at an optimum level.
       Bandon Cranberry Water Control District, OR.--The Committee 
     is aware that over the last several years, the Bureau of 
     Reclamation has been working with the Bandon Cranberry Water 
     Control District on several proposals for water storage 
     capacity and reservoir upgrades. The Committee encourages the 
     Bureau of Reclamation to continue its work in an effort to 
     determine the Federal interest in these projects and the 
     needs of the water district.
       Klamath Project, OR.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $19,377,000. The additional funds are for continued 
     construction of the A-Canal fish screen.
       Mni Wiconi Project, SD.--The Committee has provided 
     $30,772,000 for the Mni Wiconi Project. While this is an 
     increase over the budget request, it is still far below the 
     amount needed to fund the project at an optimal level.
       Columbia Basin Project, WA.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $400,000 above the president's request for design 
     documents, plans and specifications for stream habitat 
     restoration along Icicle Creek, WA.
       Salmon Creek Watershed Restoration Feasibility Study, WA.--
     The Committee has provided $250,000 for feasibility studies 
     to improve fisheries habitat in the Salmon Creek Watershed.
       Departmental Irrigation Drainage Program.--The Committee 
     has provided $750,000 above the budget request for the 
     Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association Selenium 
     Remediation Demonstration Project.
       Drought Emergency Assistance.--The Committee has provided 
     $5,399,000. Within the funds provided, $3,500,000 is for a 
     regional weather damage modification program and $1,000,000 
     is for assistance to the State of Montana, now in its fourth 
     year of drought.
       The Committee is concerned about the impact of the current 
     drought on farmers, municipalities, and other water users. 
     Unfortunately, being that this issue was unanticipated, the 
     President's budget did not contain any significant funds to 
     address drought. Therefore, the Committee expects that the 
     Bureau will utilize its drought emergency assistance program 
     which enables the Bureau to construct temporary facilities 
     and provide assistance in the form of contingency planning 
     for communities in an effort to minimize the impacts of 
     drought.
       From the funds appropriated for drought emergency 
     assistance, the Committee urges the Bureau to provide full 
     and fair consideration of the request for drought assistance 
     from the State of Hawaii and fund, if meritorious.
       Science and Technology, Desalination Research and 
     Development Program.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $4,000,000 for desalination research and development of 
     which, $3,000,000 is provided for desalination laboratory 
     research, pilot, and demonstration projects to continue 
     efforts for an additional 2 years as originally established 
     by Public Law 104-298, Water Desalination Act of 1996. The 
     Committee recommends that funding shall be subject to the 
     guidelines identified in Section 7 of the Water Desalination 
     Act of 1996. To that end, the Committee wishes to ensure that 
     the Bureau of Reclamation continue as the lead Federal entity 
     responsible for identifying the most cost effective and 
     technologically efficient means by which usable water can be 
     produced from saline or water otherwise impaired or 
     contaminated. As such, the Committee directs that the 
     Secretary of the Interior to collaborate on research 
     activities managed or conducted by the National Laboratories.
       The Committee has included $3,000,000 for the continuation 
     of the collaborative process with regard to the Bureau of 
     Reclamation and Sandia National Lab on desalination. It is 
     the Committee's intent that these funds will not be obligated 
     until the progress plan is submitted for approval by the 
     Senate Committee on Appropriations. It is the understanding 
     of the Committee that the design review of the project is 
     approximately 90 percent complete. With the funds provided, 
     the Bureau of Reclamation, shall implement the technology 
     progress plan developed in conjunction with Sandia National 
     Laboratories during fiscal year 2002. The Committee 
     recognizes that effective desalination cost reduction is the 
     key to wider use of desalination for improving the quality of 
     life in water-scarce regions. Within the funds provided, the 
     Commissioner is also directed to assess the potential use of 
     advanced water treatment technologies as a resource to create 
     net new water supplies and to evaluate project benefits, 
     economic values and environmental effects. Further, the 
     Commissioner should identify resource needs that can be met 
     through these technologies and interparty transfers and to 
     identify obstacles to be overcome (physical, financial, 
     institutional, and regulatory). The assessment should include 
     an assessment of life cycle cost effectiveness and validate 
     new technology and practices.
       Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program.--The 
     Committee recognizes the progress the WateReuse Foundation 
     program has accomplished in providing important research into 
     the science and technological aspects of water reclamation 
     and public

[[Page 745]]

     health. The Committee is further aware that the Foundation 
     has continued to meet its cost share is requirement as 
     directed. Accordingly, the Committee provides that within 
     funds provided, the Bureau of Reclamation is to provide 
     $2,000,000 to support the WateReuse Foundation in its 
     research activities. A high priority of this research shall 
     be related to aquifer storage and recovery.
       Within funds provided for the Title XVI Program, the Bureau 
     is directed to undertake feasibility studies of the potential 
     for water reclamation and reuse in North Las Vegas, NV in 
     cooperation with the Southern Nevada Water Authority.
       Water Management and Conservation Program.--The Committee 
     has provided $500,000 above the President's budget for urban 
     water conservation programs within the service area of the 
     Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.
       Nonreimbursability of Security Funding.--Funds made 
     available in Public Law 107-117 for Water and Related 
     Resources to respond to the September 11, 2001 terrorist 
     attacks on the United States and sums appropriated under this 
     heading for increased site security/counter-terrorism 
     activity shall be nonreimbursible.


                   Budget Limitations and Reductions

       Constrained spending limits have made it difficult for the 
     Committee to formulate a balanced Energy and Water 
     Development appropriations bill for fiscal year 2003. In 
     order to adhere to the subcommittee's allocations, address 
     the critical ongoing activities, correct program imbalances 
     contained in the President's fiscal year 2003 budget, and 
     respond to the numerous requests of the Members, the 
     Committee finds it necessary to recommend numerous 
     adjustments to funding levels proposed in the budget. 
     Finally, the Committee regrets that many worthwhile projects 
     could not be recommended for funding because of the lack of 
     authorization and the shortfall in resources.
       The Committee received numerous requests to include project 
     authorizations in the Energy and Water Development 
     appropriations bill. However, in an effort to support and 
     honor the congressional authorizing committees' jurisdiction, 
     the Committee has not included new project authorizations.


                central valley project restoration fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$55,039,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................48,904,000
Committee recommendation.....................................48,904,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $48,904,000, 
     the same as the budget request for the Central Valley Project 
     Restoration Fund.
       The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund was authorized 
     in the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, title 34 of 
     Public Law 102-575. This fund was established to provide 
     funding from project beneficiaries for habitat restoration, 
     improvement and acquisition, and other fish and wildlife 
     restoration activities in the Central Valley project area of 
     California. Revenues are derived from payments by project 
     beneficiaries and from donations. Payments from project 
     beneficiaries include several required by the Act (Friant 
     Division surcharges, higher charges on water transferred to 
     non-CVP users, and tiered water prices) and, to the extent 
     required in appropriations acts, additional annual mitigation 
     and restoration payments.


                    california bay-delta restoration

                     (Including Transfer of Funds)

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$15,000,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       This account funds activities that are consistent with the 
     CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a collaborative effort involving 18 
     State and Federal Agencies and representatives of 
     California's urban, agricultural, and environmental 
     communities. The goals of the program are to improve fish and 
     wildlife habitat, water supply reliability, and water quality 
     in the San Francisco Bay-San Joaquin River Delta, the 
     principle hub of California's water distribution system.
       The CALFED Program was established in May 1995, for the 
     purpose of developing a comprehensive, long-term solution to 
     the complex and inter-related problems in the San Francisco 
     Bay-Delta area of California. The program's focus is on the 
     health of the ecosystem and improving water management. In 
     addition, this program addresses the issues of uncertain 
     water supplies, aging levees, and threatened water quality.
       The Committee is aware that legislation has been introduced 
     in the House and Senate to reauthorize the comprehensive 
     program. Absent this legislation, the Committee has 
     recommended no funding under the California Bay-Delta 
     Ecosystem Restoration Project. In order to support the 
     efforts of the State of California to provide a safe, clean 
     water supply and improve the environment, the Committee has 
     provided funds for previously authorized studies under the 
     Central Valley Project. These studies will support and 
     further the goals of the overall CALFED Program until such 
     time as the California Bay-Delta Ecosystem Restoration 
     Project is reauthorized.
       The Committee has provided an additional $30,000,000 over 
     the budget request for the Central Valley Project. Additional 
     funds to support the goals of CALFED are provided as follows:


                         CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

                      ENVIRONMENTAL WATER ACCOUNT

       Miscellaneous Project Programs.--$15,000,000 to acquire 
     water and ground water storage.


                   PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

       Delta Division Oversight.--$2,500,000 to continue 
     coordination, administration, planning, performance tracking 
     and science activities in coordination with CALFED Program 
     Implementation Plan.


                                STORAGE

       Delta Division.--$250,000 to continue evaluations of the 
     Delta Wetlands project and other in-delta storage proposals. 
     $2,000,000 for Reclamation to continue participating in 
     planning activities associated with enlarging Los Vaqueros 
     reservoir.
       Friant Division.--$1,750,000 to continue developing a plan 
     of study for a feasibility level investigation for storage in 
     the Upper San Joaquin Watershed.
       Sacramento River Division.--$500,000 to continue planning 
     activities as agreed to in the Sites MOU.
       Shasta Division.--$3,000,000 to continue evaluating the 
     potential impacts of the proposed Shasta raise.


                               CONVEYANCE

       Delta Division.--$5,000,000 to construct the Tracy Test 
     Fish Facility.


                       policy and administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$52,968,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................54,870,000
Committee recommendation.....................................54,870,000

       The Committee recommendation for general administrative 
     expenses is $54,870,000. This is the same as the budget 
     request.
       The policy and administrative expenses program provides for 
     the executive direction and management of all reclamation 
     activities, as performed by the Commissioner's offices in 
     Washington, DC, Denver, CO, and five regional offices. The 
     Denver office and regional offices charge individual projects 
     or activities for direct beneficial services and related 
     administrative and technical costs. These charges are covered 
     under other appropriations.


             General Provisions--Department of the Interior

       Section 201 of the bill includes language that States 
     requirements for purchase or lease of water from the Middle 
     Rio Grande or Carlsbad Projects, New Mexico.
       Section 202 of the bill includes language concerning 
     Drought Emergency Assistance.
       Section 203 of the bill includes language concerning 
     natural desert terminal lakes.
       Section 204 of the bill includes language concerning 
     private sector contracting percentages.
       Section 205 of the bill includes language directing the 
     Bureau to undertake studies for the North Central Montana 
     Rural Water Supply project using prior appropriated funds.
       Section 206 of the bill includes language to make changes 
     to Section 8 of Public Law 104-298.
       Section 207 of the bill includes language regarding the San 
     Luis Unit and the Kesterson Reservoir in California.

                    TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

       Title III provides for the Department of Energy's defense 
     and nondefense functions, the power marketing 
     administrations, and the Federal Energy Regulatory 
     Commission.


                           contractor travel

       The Committee believes that earlier statutory restrictions 
     on contractor travel established new appreciation by 
     contractors for propriety and cost effectiveness in their 
     travel expenditures. For fiscal year 2003, no statutory 
     travel restrictions are included. Nevertheless, the Committee 
     directs the Department to maintain contractor travel 
     summaries adequate for periodic reviews of programmatic 
     relevance and costs of contractor travel.

                             Energy Supply

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$666,726,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................693,934,000
Committee recommendation....................................815,306,000


                       renewable energy resources

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$396,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................407,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................448,062,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $448,062,000, for 
     renewable energy resources.
       The recommendation for Renewable Energy Resources reflects 
     the Committee's strong belief that only a balanced portfolio 
     of production and distribution technologies and strategies 
     will fulfill our Nation's long-term needs and goals for both 
     energy and the environment. For that reason, the Committee 
     recommendation includes substantial investments in renewable 
     energy resources above the Administration's request.
       The Committee has modified the request for low emission 
     energy technologies, including hydro, renewable, and nuclear, 
     with the view toward post 2010 application of new 
     technologies. As a result, with few exceptions, the Committee 
     recommends basic research that will provide significant 
     improvements over existing technologies.

[[Page 746]]

       Each year the Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
     Conference Report contains a handful of ``Congressionally-
     directed activities'' (to use the Department's description). 
     To date, the Renewable Energy Resources Office has funded 
     fifteen of these Congressionally-mandated activities for 
     fiscal year 2002. This is an unacceptable rate at this point 
     in the fiscal year. These activities are not optional and are 
     to be given the same priority as the rest of the fiscal year 
     spending program. The Committee fully expects the Department 
     to address this situation before the Conference Committee 
     completes action on the final Energy and Water funding bill.
       Although the Renewable Energy Resources Office is currently 
     undergoing a reorganization, it is not yet complete. It is 
     both unwise and impractical to appropriate funds to accounts 
     that may or may not exist at the start of the fiscal year. 
     For that reason, the Committee recommendation appropriates 
     funds generally in accordance with the Administration's 
     fiscal year 2003 budget request. If the reorganization is 
     complete when the Conference Committee convenes, the 
     Committee will consider re-aligning the accounts.
       Solar energy.--The Committee recommendation for solar 
     energy programs is $95,000,000. This account is broken up 
     into three sub-accounts, each of which is described below.
       Solar building technology research.--The Committee 
     recommends $12,000,000 to fund solar building technology 
     development, including enhanced support to the zero energy 
     building program.
       Photovoltaic energy systems.--The Committee recommends 
     $77,000,000 for photovoltaic energy systems. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $3,000,000 for continuation of the 
     Million Solar Roofs program at current year levels and 
     $2,500,000 for the Southeast and Southwest photovoltaic 
     experiments stations. Additionally, the Committee recommends 
     $3,000,000 for the Navajo electrification project.
       Concentrating solar power.--The Committee recommends 
     $6,000,000 for concentrating solar power. The Department is 
     directed to begin implementation of a program to deploy 1000 
     MW of new solar capacity supplying the Southwestern United 
     States by the year 2006.
       Biomass/biofuels--energy systems.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $100,000,000 for biomass/biofuels 
     energy systems. The final Energy and Water Development 
     Conference Report for fiscal year 2002 combined the power 
     systems and transportation subaccounts to increase the 
     programmatic flexibility available to the Department. Thus 
     far, the Committee is encouraged with the results of this 
     consolidation and has maintained the new program structure.
       Not less than $27,000,000 shall be used for a competitive 
     solicitation for Biomass Integrated Biorefinery Process 
     Development which shall be funded from within the totals 
     available under the biomass/biofuels energy account.
       The Department has indicated a desire to end direct support 
     to the Regional Biomass Energy Program (RBEP). The Committee 
     believes that the RBEP has been a successful partnership with 
     the five distinct regions it has served. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $5,000,000 and directs the Department 
     to work with regional governors' organizations to make RBEP 
     even more successful. The Committee recommendation also 
     includes $2,500,000 for the Consortium for Plant 
     Biotechnology Research, a successful consortium of 34 
     universities and 33 agribusinesses and trade associations.
       Wind.--The Committee recommendation includes $50,000,000 
     for wind. The Committee expects the Department to utilize the 
     additional funds to accelerate development and deployment of 
     low wind speed turbines. The Wind Powering America initiative 
     is to be continued at last year's funding level. The 
     Committee continues to recognize the need for a set-aside for 
     small wind programs.
       Renewable energy production incentive.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $5,000,000 for the renewable energy 
     production incentive.
       Renewable program support.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $6,059,000 for technical analysis and assistance 
     within renewable program support. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $4,000,000 to continue the 
     collaboration and integration of multi-program activities by 
     the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to develop 
     renewable energy resources and address the electric power 
     needs of the Southwestern United States. NREL will provide 
     expertise through a virtual laboratory or site office in 
     Nevada that enables partnerships among universities, 
     researchers, technology developers, and those interested in 
     deployment.
       Departmental Energy Management.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $3,000,000 for departmental energy 
     management.
       International renewable programs.--The Committee strongly 
     supports the U.S. international joint implementation program 
     funded in this account and recommends $6,500,000 for that 
     purpose. The Committee supports efforts to increase 
     international market opportunities for the export and 
     deployment of advanced clean energy technologies--end-use 
     efficiency, fossil, renewable, and nuclear energy 
     technologies. The Committee is pleased that the 
     Administration has decided to expand its international 
     renewable energy activities.
       National Renewable Energy Laboratory.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $6,800,000, for capital equipment and 
     general plant projects at the National Renewable Energy 
     Laboratory. Of this amount, $1,000,000 is provided to reduce 
     the maintenance backlog and $800,000 is for construction.
       Geothermal.--The Committee recommends $37,000,000 for 
     geothermal technology development, including continued 
     funding (at current year levels) for GeoPowering the West. 
     The Committee is concerned that the Department appears to be 
     cutting funds for these important research efforts 
     prematurely. The decision to cut funds for geothermal 
     technology development flies in the face of the 
     recommendations of the President's Committee of Advisors on 
     Science and Technology (PCAST) made in 1997. The PCAST report 
     recommends an escalation of funding over a short period of 
     time to $50,000,000-$60,000,000. The Committee has provided a 
     substantial increase and expects the Department to use the 
     additional funds, in part, to foster university research and 
     public private partnerships.
       Hydrogen research.--The Committee strongly supports 
     research and development of hydrogen technology and 
     recognizes it to be a highly promising and cost effective 
     energy carrier. The Committee recommends $45,000,000.
       The Committee continues to encourage demonstration of a 
     dedicated fleet of vehicles, including buses, powered by 
     hydrogen.
       Industrial consumption of hydrogen, especially by the 
     petro-chemical and fertilizer communities is large and 
     growing. The rate of petro-chemical hydrogen consumption 
     necessary for gasoline-powered vehicles will accelerate as 
     global reserves of sweet crude oil diminish. The dominant 
     resource for hydrogen production today is natural gas whose 
     reformation into hydrogen and carbon dioxide contributes 
     significantly to atmospheric greenhouse gases. Moreover, 
     natural gas reserves are insufficient to service 
     simultaneously domestic heating and electricity requirements, 
     industrial hydrogen consumption, and future demands by 
     hydrogen powered vehicles and other fuel cell applications 
     that would accompany the future ``Hydrogen Economy.'' 
     Accordingly, the Committee supports investment in exploration 
     of feasible concepts for renewable production of hydrogen 
     with no greenhouse gas emissions and no other waste products 
     by adding $2,000,000 for an engineering study and evaluation 
     of solar-powered thermo-chemical production of hydrogen from 
     water.
       Hydropower.--The Committee recommends $7,489,000 for 
     hydropower.
       Renewable Indian energy resources.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $9,307,000 for Indian renewable 
     energy resource development. The Committee expects these 
     funds to be administered as competitively awarded grants to 
     federally-recognized tribes throughout the United States. 
     Within available funds, the Committee recommendation includes 
     $1,000,000 for the Council of Renewable Energy Resource 
     Tribes (CERT) to provide technical expertise and training of 
     Native Americans in renewable energy resource development and 
     electric generation facilities management.
       Electric energy systems and storage.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $75,000,000 for electric energy 
     systems and storage.
       This program provides funding for transmission reliability, 
     energy storage systems and high temperature superconductivity 
     research and development.
       The Committee strongly supports the activities of the high 
     temperature superconductor development program, which will 
     revolutionize the way electric power is generated, 
     transmitted and ultimately used by the consumer, and 
     therefore urges the Department of Energy to submit as part of 
     future budgets an independent funding request for HTS 
     research and development, as it does for programs such as 
     wind, solar and geothermal power.
       The Committee recommendation includes $50,000,000 for high 
     temperature superconductor research and development and 
     $25,000,000 for distributed energy systems. The Committee 
     recommendation includes the budget request of $9,000,000 for 
     the effort jointly led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory and 
     Los Alamos National Laboratory to develop high-performance, 
     low-cost, second-generation, high-temperature superconducting 
     wire.
       Renewable program direction.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $16,907,000 for program direction within this 
     account.
       Use of prior year balances.--The recommendation includes 
     the use of $15,000,000 of prior year funds to be carried over 
     from fiscal year 2002 to offset the fiscal year 2003 funding 
     requirements. The Department may not cut congressionally 
     directed activities to implement this offset.


                        nuclear energy programs

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$226,773,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................249,798,000

[[Page 747]]

Committee recommendation....................................324,108,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $324,108,000 for 
     nuclear energy.
       Nuclear energy presently contributes about 21 percent of 
     our nation's electrical power and emits no atmospheric 
     pollutants, although disposal of spent fuel remains a major 
     technical and social challenge. While the Committee supports 
     continued nuclear power research and development activities 
     as part of a balanced approach to meeting our Nation's energy 
     needs, industry and the Department are strongly encouraged to 
     focus their research efforts on a broader array of disposal 
     options, including reprocessing, transmutation, and dry cask 
     storage, all of which reduce or eliminate the need for a 
     geologic repository. The Committee recommendation includes 
     enhanced funding for the advanced accelerator applications 
     program as described below.
       University reactor fuel assistance and support.--The 
     Committee recommends $19,500,000 for university reactor fuel 
     assistance and support. University nuclear engineering 
     programs and university research reactors represent a 
     fundamental and key capability in supporting our national 
     policy goals in health care, materials science and energy 
     technology.
       The Committee strongly supports both the University Reactor 
     Fuel Assistance and Support program's efforts to provide 
     fellowships, scholarships, and grants to students enrolled in 
     science and engineering programs at U.S. universities, as 
     well as efforts to provide fuel assistance and reactor 
     upgrade funding for university-owned research reactors.
       The Committee notes the progress of the Department in 
     carrying out congressional direction to establish and support 
     regional university reactor consortia. Although progress is 
     visible, the Committee remains concerned about the ability of 
     the Nation to respond to the growing demand for trained 
     experts in nuclear science and technology in the face of 
     financial and other challenges affecting engineering programs 
     and research reactor facilities at American universities. The 
     Committee recommendation includes an increase of $3,000,000 
     over the request to fund additional consortia and strongly 
     encourages the Department to request sufficient funding in 
     future years to fund all meritorious proposals.
       Nuclear energy plant optimization.--The Committee 
     recommends a total of $5,000,000, an increase of $5,000,000 
     over the budget request. The Department is encouraged to 
     continue this cost-shared research and development program to 
     improve the reliability, availability, and productivity of 
     existing nuclear power plants.
       Nuclear Energy Research Initiative.--The Committee 
     recommends a total of $29,000,000, an increase of $4,000,000 
     over the budget request. The Department's budget request 
     would not allow for any new NERI projects in the coming year. 
     The proposed increase is necessary to continue to grow the 
     scope of the technology and the people for a growing nuclear 
     industry.
       Nuclear Energy Technologies.--The Committee recommends a 
     total of $48,500,000. The Committee directs the Department to 
     prepare a report by March 31, 2003, regarding how it intends 
     to carry out the results of the Generation IV Roadmap.
       To further the introduction of advanced reactors, 
     especially those that are not conventional, it is important 
     to establish a process by which research/demonstration 
     reactors can be built and tested in a manner that will allow 
     a regulatory process to focus on the safety of the 
     technologies for which there is not a large regulatory 
     history. Therefore, $1,000,000 is provided for a joint DOE 
     and NRC development of a licensing process employing ``risk 
     information'' that would be technology neutral for future 
     licensing of advanced reactors that would lead to eventual 
     certification.
       The Committee supports the Department's efforts to 
     establish the fuels resource and infrastructure ultimately 
     essential to the realization of the President's vision for 
     the future ``Hydrogen Economy.'' Accordingly, the Committee 
     provides an additional $3,000,000 for the purpose of 
     accelerating the engineering evaluation of an integrated 
     sulfur/iodine thermo-chemical water-splitting cycle for 
     coupling with a high temperature nuclear reactor power 
     source. Of the additional $3,000,000, the Committee directs 
     that $1,000,000 be provided to the Research Foundation of the 
     University of Nevada, Las Vegas for the purpose of 
     establishing a public-private partnership to develop and 
     evaluate innovative high temperature heat exchangers.
       The Committee remains interested in the potential use and 
     application of small modular reactors with attractive 
     characteristics for remote communities that otherwise must 
     rely on shipments of relatively expensive and environmentally 
     undesirable fuels for their electric power. To be acceptable, 
     such a reactor would have to be inherently safe, be 
     relatively cost effective, contain intrinsic design features 
     which would deter sabotage or diversion, require infrequent 
     refuelings, and be primarily factory constructed and 
     deliverable to remote sites. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $3,000,000 to begin design work for a plant to 
     demonstrate the viability of such small modular reactors.
       Radiological facilities management.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $92,699,000, $9,600,000 above the 
     request, for radiological facilities management.
       The Committee funding recommendation includes $600,000 in 
     additional funding for, the Cyclotron Isotope Research 
     Center. Within available funds the Department is also 
     directed to provide $7,000,000 for hot cell upgrades/
     establishment of the Bethel Valley Hot Cell Complex; and 
     $5,000,000 for Pu238 production and Np237 storage. 
     Construction projects are funded at the level of the 
     administration's request.
       Production of Medical Isotopes.--The Committee commends the 
     Department for issuing a request for proposal to dispose of 
     U233 in building 3019 at the Oak Ridge Reservation and to 
     process that material to produce medical isotopes. The 
     Committee's long support of this effort is a matter of 
     record, and the Committee again emphasizes the importance of 
     this project for the treatment of cancer. Initial human 
     trials utilizing thorium-229, which can be derived from the 
     uranium-233 stored in Building 3019, have yielded 
     tremendously encouraging results which indicate this radio-
     isotope may be able to effectively treat leukemia and other 
     cancers. The Committee also recognizes that an essential part 
     of this project is the disposition of the U233 at the Oak 
     Ridge Reservation. The Committee, cognizant that 1,800 people 
     in the United States die every month of leukemia, is 
     frustrated that the Department is now 2 years behind schedule 
     on this project and has proposed a schedule that includes 
     unusually long pauses between phases (such as the proposed 6 
     months between completion of phase I and initiation of phase 
     II). The Committee recommendation makes available $5,000,000 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003. The Department is 
     directed to fully fund the disposition of U233 and the 
     processing of the material to produce medical isotopes in 
     future years and proceed with this project as swiftly as 
     possible.
       Fast flux test facility.--The Committee has provided the 
     budget request of $36,100,000 for the FFTF. The Committee 
     expects the Department to move forward quickly on the 
     permanent deactivation of this facility.
       Advanced fuel cycles program.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $77,870,000 for the Advanced Fuel Cycle Program of 
     which $18,000,000 is allocated to EBR-II Spent Fuel 
     Treatment.
       This program subsumes the Advanced Accelerator Applications 
     program and its activities and will focus on the development 
     of advanced fuel cycles, including recycling or reprocessing 
     of spent fuel, and transmutation technologies. The Committee 
     intends the Department to use national laboratory, university 
     and industrial expertise to perform research in advanced 
     nuclear materials recycle technologies, proliferation-
     resistant nuclear fuels, and transmutation systems, including 
     both reactor- and accelerator-based approaches. The program 
     goals shall include enabling better utilization of uranium 
     resources and minimizing the amount and toxicity of final 
     waste products. The program shall begin pre-conceptual design 
     of an advanced recycling facility for performing research on 
     scalable recycling technologies that are proliferation 
     resistant, economical, and minimize environmental impact. The 
     program shall use international collaborations to provide 
     cost effective use of research funding and expand both 
     university collaborations and domestic industry 
     participation.
       The University of Nevada Las Vegas shall continue research 
     activities in the area of transmutation science and testing 
     of spallation target technology established under the 
     Advanced Accelerator Applications program. Funding of 
     $4,500,000 is provided for these efforts. The program shall 
     undertake evaluation and may initiate design and development 
     of a fuels and materials testing station using the LANSCE 
     accelerator facility.
       Finally, the program shall be coordinated with other 
     programs such as Generation IV and Nuclear Power 2010, but 
     shall maintain separate program and financial management. 
     Within the increased funding levels, the Department is 
     directed to continue the Advanced Accelerator Applications 
     program, including funding for the UNLV program at current 
     year levels and the Idaho Accelerator program at $3,500,000. 
     Additionally, the Department is directed to restore the 
     nuclear energy program funding to current year levels at 
     Argonne National Lab and ANL-West.
       Left unchecked, the administration's budget cut would 
     dismantle the last remaining nuclear development team in the 
     United States. Such an action is completely inconsistent with 
     the Administration's Nuclear Power 2010 goals. The Committee 
     is pleased that the Department has agreed that the Nuclear 
     Energy Program is an appropriate home for this robust 
     research and development effort.
       University Consortium for Transmutation Research.--As 
     discussed above, the right mix of treatment and transmutation 
     technologies must be found to reduce the amount of highly-
     toxic spent nuclear fuel and waste slated to be buried in a 
     geologic repository, and to avoid the need for more 
     repositories. High-energy accelerators could be central to a 
     future strategy to transmute spent nuclear fuel into less 
     toxic, shorter-lived materials.

[[Page 748]]

       Innovative transmutation technologies promise to be the 
     most cost-effective and proliferation-resistant means of 
     reducing nuclear waste toxicity. Accelerator-based research 
     on transmutation of radioactive waste would also supply 
     facilities for medical diagnostics and therapy and become a 
     national source of large-scale isotope production for radio-
     pharmaceuticals.
       The Department of Energy is urged to establish a consortium 
     of U.S. universities to develop accelerator-based 
     technologies for transmutation of radioactive waste. The 
     consortium should include, at a minimum, the University of 
     Nevada-Las Vegas, University of New Mexico, New Mexico State 
     University, Washington State University, Idaho State 
     University, the University of Texas, Texas A&M University, 
     and the University of California at Santa Barbara, Berkeley 
     and Davis.
       Program direction.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $23,439,000 for program direction, the amount of the request.


                    environment, safety, and health

Appropriations, 2002........................................$30,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................29,211,000
Committee recommendation.....................................19,211,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $19,211,000 for non-
     defense environment, safety, and health which includes 
     $13,871,000 for program direction.


                       energy support activities

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,770,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,925,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,925,000

       Technical information management.--The Committee 
     recommendation for the technical information management 
     program is $1,400,000.
       Program direction.--The Committee recommendation for 
     program direction is $5,525,000.


                      ENERGY SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation....................................$17,000,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $17,000,000 for 
     energy supply infrastructure.
       The Energy Supply Infrastructure program provides 
     assistance, technical support, and project funding to 
     specific energy projects. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $5,000,000 for the Upper Lynn Canal power supply 
     project, $5,000,000 to the Swan Lake-Lake Tyee segment of the 
     Southeastern Alaska Intertie System, and $2,000,000 to the 
     Tok to Chistochina transmission project. All funds made 
     available in this and prior year appropriations acts for the 
     Swan Lake-Lake Tyee segment of the Southeastern Alaska 
     Intertie System may be expended prior to the full Federal 
     project share being appropriated.
       The Committee recommendation also includes $1,000,000 for 
     the Unalaska grid renovation powerhouse upgrade which shall 
     be utilized from $1,000,000 previously made available for the 
     Pyramid Creek project in fiscal year 1999. The Department is 
     directed to terminate the Reynolds Creek hydro project and 
     utilize all available funds appropriated to date for that 
     project on the Swan Lake-Lake Tyee intertie
       The Committee recommendation also includes $5,000,000 for 
     the National Center on Energy Management and Building 
     Technologies.

                        Environmental Management


                              (nondefense)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$236,372,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................166,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................176,000,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $176,000,000 for non-
     defense environmental management.
       The non-defense Environmental Management program is 
     responsible for managing and addressing the environmental 
     legacy resulting from nuclear energy and civilian energy 
     research programs, primarily the Office of Science within the 
     Department of Energy. Research and development activities of 
     DOE and predecessor agencies generated waste and other 
     contaminants which pose unique problems, including 
     unprecedented volumes of contaminated soils, water and 
     facilities. The funding requested and provided here supports 
     the Department's goal of cleaning up as many of its 
     contaminated sites as possible by 2006 in a safe and cost-
     effective manner.
       Site Closure.--The Committee directs the Department to 
     continue to monitor the groundwater at the Weldon Springs, 
     Missouri, site and to immediately utilize whatever funds may 
     be necessary to completely remediate the site if the results 
     from the on-going monitoring or other studies indicate 
     additional treatment is required.
       Site completion.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $67,272,000 for site completion. The Committee recommendation 
     includes an additional $15,000,000 for the Brookhaven 
     National Laboratory; and $1,000,000 in additional funding for 
     the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
       Post 2006 completion.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides $123,887,000. The Committee recommendation includes 
     an additional $3,134,000 for the Department to prepare a 
     scientifically sound remediation plan for the Atlas site in 
     Moab, Utah. The Committee expects the Department to undertake 
     an objective evaluation of costs, benefits, and risks 
     associated with remediation alternatives of the site, 
     including removal and stabilization in place or variations on 
     these two options. The Committee recommendation also includes 
     an additional $3,000,000 for the Energy Technology 
     Engineering Center in California.
       West Valley.--The Committee recommendation includes an 
     additional $5,000,000 for the West Valley Demonstration 
     project. The Committee is concerned that the Department and 
     State of New York have not yet entered into an agreement 
     regarding the scope of the clean-up at the site.
       Excess Facilities.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $1,841,000 for the transfer of excess facilities at the 
     Brookhaven National Laboratory, Los Alamos National 
     Laboratory, and Oak Ridge from other DOE organizations.

             Uranium Facilities Maintenance and Remediation

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$418,425,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................382,154,000
Committee recommendation....................................471,154,000

       Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning.--
     The Committee recommendation provides $334,523,000 for the 
     Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund.
       The Committee provides a total of $134,048,000, an increase 
     of an additional $34,000,000 for clean-up at the Paducah 
     Gaseous Diffusion Plant to ensure compliance with applicable 
     State and Federal obligations. The Committee directs the 
     Department to fund the Kentucky Consortium for Energy and 
     Environment from within available funds.
       The Committee recommendation also includes $65,000,000 in 
     additional funding for the East Tennessee Technology Park.
       Other Uranium Activities.--The Committee recommends 
     $136,631,000. The Committee recommendation includes 
     $10,000,000 in support of preliminary environmental planning, 
     siting studies, and related activities for the Depleted 
     Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF-6) projects at that gaseous 
     diffusion plants at Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio, 
     consistent with the direction (ignored for many years by the 
     Department but reiterated legislatively by Congress this 
     year) of Section 1 of Public Law 105-204 (112 Stat. 681) as 
     amended.
       The Committee recommendation includes uranium program 
     activity funding of $16,381,000 for East Tennessee Technology 
     Park, $19,737,000 for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, 
     and $89,714,000 for the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant.

                      Nuclear Waste Disposal Fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$95,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................209,702,000
Committee recommendation.....................................56,000,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $336,000,000 for 
     nuclear waste disposal. Of that amount, $56,000,000 is 
     derived from the nuclear waste fund, and $280,000,000 shall 
     be available from the ``Defense nuclear waste disposal'' 
     account.
       The Committee has provided $6,000,000 for the State of 
     Nevada and $2,500,000 for affected units of local government 
     in accordance with the statutory restrictions contained in 
     the Nuclear Waste Policy Act.
       The Committee directs that $2,500,000 from within the 
     amount provided to Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal for Yucca 
     Mountain Site Characterization be provided to the Research 
     Foundation of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas for the 
     purpose of continuing and expanding its efforts in 
     groundwater characterization and research into the transport 
     and fate of radionuclides in the vicinity of the proposed 
     Yucca Mountain repository.

                                Science

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,233,100,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,279,456,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,329,456,000

       Investment in the physical sciences and engineering plays a 
     critical role in enabling U.S. technological innovation and 
     global economic leadership. It is essential to the 
     development of our energy resources and utilization as well 
     as our defense, environment, communications and information 
     technologies, health and much more. Over the past 50 years, 
     half of U.S. economic growth has come from prior investment 
     in science and technological innovation. Life expectancy has 
     grown from 55 years in 1900 to nearly 80 years today.
       The Department of Energy is the leading source of Federal 
     investment for R&D facilities and fundamental research in the 
     physical sciences. Yet investment in the Department's R&D has 
     declined in constant dollars from $11,200,000,000 in 1980 to 
     $7,700,000,000 in 2001. As a percentage of GDP, total Federal 
     investment in the physical sciences and engineering has been 
     cut roughly in half since 1970.

[[Page 749]]

       Shrinking investment in the physical sciences and 
     engineering poses serious risks to DOE's ability to perform 
     its mission. It also threatens the Nation's science and 
     technology enterprise. DOE faces a shortage of nearly 40 
     percent in its technical workforce over the next 5 years. To 
     meet its needs, DOE must compete with industry for a 
     shrinking pool of skilled workers, many of whose leaders also 
     report serious shortages of scientists and engineers.
       American educational institutions are failing to attract 
     sufficient numbers of U.S. students, especially women and 
     minorities, into undergraduate and graduate programs in the 
     physical sciences and engineering. For these skills we now 
     are more heavily dependent on foreign nations than ever 
     before. The H1-B visa has become a main element of U.S. 
     technology policy.
       As fewer foreign students choose to pursue their education 
     in the United States, and too few U.S. students enter these 
     fields, our vulnerability grows. NSF reports that between 
     1996 and 1999, the number of Ph.D.s in science and 
     engineering awarded to foreign students declined by 15 
     percent. Only 5 percent of U.S. students now earn bachelors 
     degrees in natural science or engineering. Since 1986, the 
     total number of bachelors degrees in engineering is down 15 
     percent. Between 1994 and 2000, the number of Ph.D.s awarded 
     in physics in the United States declined by 22 percent.
       These trends must be reversed. Many DOE user facilities do 
     not operate at their designed capacity. As a result, 
     opportunities and momentum are lost as researchers and 
     students encounter barriers to the pursuit of inquiry of 
     national importance, including promising research 
     opportunities at the boundaries of the life sciences, 
     physical sciences, engineering, and computer sciences. Future 
     U.S. global leadership and technological leadership will rely 
     upon today's investment in research in all the sciences and 
     engineering.
       The Committee strongly supports and encourages increased 
     investment in the research and education initiatives of the 
     DOE Office of Science.


                          high energy physics

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$716,100,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................724,990,000
Committee recommendation....................................729,980,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $729,980,000 for high 
     energy physics. The Committee has included an additional 
     $5,000,000 for operations and activities of the program. The 
     Committee recognizes that the High Energy Physics Advisory 
     Panel has recommended that the Next Linear Collider (NLC) 
     should proceed into design and construction.


                            nuclear physics

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$360,510,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................382,370,000
Committee recommendation....................................387,370,000

       The Committee recommends $387,370,000 for nuclear physics. 
     The Committee recommends that the additional funds be used to 
     enhance operation of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider 
     (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Laboratory and the Continuous 
     Electron Beam Accelerator Facility at the Thomas Jefferson 
     National Accelerator Facility in Virginia.


                 biological and environmental research

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$527,405,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................504,215,000
Committee recommendation....................................531,215,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $531,215,000 for 
     biological and environmental research. The recommendation 
     includes an additional $10,000,000 above the requested level 
     for the Genomes to Life program and $25,000,000 in total 
     funding for the low dose effects program. The recommendation 
     also continues the free air carbon dioxide experiments at the 
     current year level and $3,000,000 in additional funding for 
     the EMSL computer.
       The Committee strongly encourages the Department to budget 
     for additional resources for the Genomes to Life Program in 
     fiscal year 2004. This program shows tremendous potential and 
     deserves enhanced support.
       Environmental Remediation.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes an additional amount of $6,000,000 for a program to 
     evaluate improved technologies for removal of arsenic from 
     municipal water supplies, with a focus on minimization of 
     operating costs and reducing energy requirements. This 
     program shall include peer-reviewed research projects as well 
     as cost-shared demonstration projects conducted with 
     municipal water systems. Demonstration programs shall focus 
     on technologies applicable in the arid Southwestern United 
     States. The program shall be administered through contracts 
     with the American Water Works Association Research 
     Foundation, which shall utilize capabilities of WERC, A 
     Consortium for Environmental Education and Technology 
     Development, for evaluations of cost effectiveness of 
     alternative treatment methodologies.


                         basic energy sciences

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,003,705,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,019,600,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,044,600,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $1,044,600,000. For 
     purposes of reprogramming in fiscal year 2003, the Department 
     may allocate funding among all operating accounts within 
     basic energy sciences upon written notice to the appropriate 
     Congressional Committees.
       The Committee recommendation includes $12,000,000 for the 
     Department's Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive 
     Research and $4,500,000 in additional funding to complete 
     preliminary engineering and design (PED) and move to 
     construction at the Center for Integrated Nanotechnology. 
     Within available funds, the Committee recommendation includes 
     full funding for the operation of the National Synchrotron 
     Light Source, the Spallation Neutron Source, and the 
     Nanoscale Science Centers Initiative, including $24,000,000 
     for design and construction of the Center for Nanophase 
     Materials Sciences and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 
     Construction projects are all funded at the level of the 
     administration's request.
       The Committee is pleased with the progress of the 
     Department's Nanoscience Initiative. The Committee 
     understands the Department has recently announced its 
     intention to fund a Nanocenter at Brookhaven National 
     Laboratory. The Committee has included $1,000,000 to begin 
     preliminary engineering and design in fiscal year 2003 for 
     the Nanocenter at Brookhaven (Project 02-SC-2). The Committee 
     strongly supports the nanoscale science research centers.
       Additionally, the Committee recommends that the additional 
     funds be used to support the following important activities: 
     facility operations user support; completion of the 
     Nanoscience Research Center project engineering and design; 
     and additional work in computational sciences in materials 
     and chemistry.


                 Advanced Scientific Computing Research

       The Committee recommendation provides $169,625,000 for 
     advanced scientific computing research.


                  SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE

       The Committee recommends $42,735,000, the amount of the 
     request, for science energy laboratories infrastructure. The 
     program supports infrastructure activities at the five 
     national labs under the direction of the Office of Science.


                         fusion energy sciences

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$248,495,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................257,310,000
Committee recommendation....................................259,310,000

       The Committee recommendation for fusion energy sciences is 
     $259,310,000, an amount that is $2,000,000 above the budget 
     request. The Committee is aware of significantly increased 
     neutron yields from compressed fuel elements heated by an 
     extremely short pulse, high power laser beam. Such advances 
     promise significant acceleration of the schedule for 
     achieving ignition of compressed fusion pellets. Accordingly, 
     the Committee adds $2,000,000 to Fusion Energy Sciences for 
     the purpose of evaluating this so-called ``fast ignition'' 
     concept. The Department is directed to report back to the 
     Committee no later than August 1, 2003 with the results of 
     this evaluation along with any recommendations the Department 
     would make regarding the schedule and milestones of the High 
     Energy Density Physics Program.


                        Safeguards and Security

       The Committee recommendation provides $48,127,000 for 
     safeguards and security.


                       Science Program Direction

       The Committee recommendation provides $134,837,000 for 
     science program direction.

                      Departmental Administration


                                (gross)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$210,853,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................299,220,000
Committee recommendation....................................235,000,000


                        (miscellaneous revenues)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$137,810,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................137,524,000
Committee recommendation....................................137,524,000

       The Department recommends $235,000,000 for departmental 
     administration, a net appropriation of $97,476,000.
       The Committee has been underwhelmed by the timeliness and 
     level of detail in the Department's responses to the 
     Committee's requests for the additional budget information 
     required to evaluate the administration's requests to 
     Congress. The Department needs to focus on providing timely, 
     detailed, and transparent budget information to Congress when 
     making requests for appropriations.
       International affairs.--The Committee strongly urges the 
     Department of Energy, the Department of Commerce, U.S. AID, 
     and other Federal agencies associated with the Clean Energy 
     Technology Exports Program to finalize and implement the 
     strategic plan and establish the advisory board. The 
     strategic plan is a critical component of a broad range of 
     international and domestic policy interests, including those 
     promoting economic development, energy, trade, employment, 
     environmental, and climate change policies.

[[Page 750]]



                           Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$32,430,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................37,671,000
Committee recommendation.....................................37,671,000

       The Committee has provided $37,671,000 for the Office of 
     the Inspector General.


                         recommendation summary

       Details of the Committee's recommendations are included in 
     the table at the end of this title.

                    ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

       Atomic energy defense activities of the Department of 
     Energy are provided for in two categories--the National 
     Nuclear Security Administration and Other Defense Related 
     Activities. Appropriation accounts under the National Nuclear 
     Security Administration (NNSA) are weapons activities, 
     defense nuclear non-proliferation, naval reactors, and the 
     Office of the Administrator. Other defense related activities 
     include appropriation accounts for defense environmental 
     restoration and waste management, defense facilities closure 
     projects, defense environmental management privatization, 
     other defense activities, and defense nuclear waste disposal.

                National Nuclear Security Administration


                           Weapons Activities

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$5,429,238,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................5,867,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................6,108,959,000

       Weapons activities provide for the continuing assurance of 
     safety, reliability, and security of the nuclear weapons in 
     our enduring nuclear weapons stockpile while adhering to the 
     spirit of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Necessary 
     ingredients for success in this important mission include: a 
     highly skilled and motivated workforce; advanced experimental 
     and computational facilities and equipment; adequately 
     capitalized and maintained physical plants and supporting 
     infrastructure; and an exceptionally focused and dedicated 
     management.


                        directed stockpile work

       An appropriation of $1,234,467,000 is recommended for the 
     directed stockpile work of the NNSA.
       Directed stockpile work encompasses all activities that 
     directly support specific weapons in the nuclear stockpile as 
     directed by the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Plan. These 
     activities include current maintenance and day-to-day care of 
     the stockpile as well as planned refurbishments as outlined 
     by the stockpile life extension program (SLEP). This category 
     also includes research, development and certification 
     activities in direct support of each weapon system, and long-
     term future-oriented research and development to solve either 
     current or projected stockpile problems.
       Stockpile research and development.--The Committee 
     recommends $467,149,000, the same as the budget request. 
     Stockpile R&D provides for assessment, certification, 
     surveillance and maintenance research and development for 
     systems comprising our enduring nuclear weapons stockpile. 
     The additional $118,149,000 above the current year is meant 
     to support acceleration in stockpile life extension research 
     and development activities for the W80 and W76 systems, 
     necessary additional sub-critical experiments at the Nevada 
     Test Site for pit certification, and a vigorous program in 
     advanced concepts research and development.
       Stockpile maintenance.--The Committee recommends 
     $401,157,000 to provide for stockpile maintenance and 
     production and exchange of limited life components in the 
     enduring stockpile, as well as major refurbishment activities 
     to extend the stockpile life of the W87, W76, W80, and B61 
     weapons systems.
       Stockpile evaluation.--The Committee recommends 
     $197,184,000 to support new material laboratory tests, new 
     material flight tests, stockpile laboratory tests, stockpile 
     flight tests, quality evaluations, special testing, and 
     surveillance of weapons systems to support assessment of the 
     safety and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile, all 
     of which contributes to the Annual Certification to the 
     President.
       Dismantlement/disposal.--The Committee recommends 
     $24,378,000. The program includes all activities associated 
     with weapon retirement and disassembly. The slight decrease 
     below current year reflects reduced activity involving the W-
     56 at Y-12 and contractor efficiencies at Pantex.
       Production Support.--The Committee recommends $137,706,000.


                               campaigns

       An appropriation of $2,148,210,000 is recommended for the 
     campaigns of the NNSA, an increase of $80,376,000 over the 
     budget request.
       The stockpile stewardship campaigns program establishes and 
     applies a number of highly focused and integrated scientific 
     and technical capabilities to maintain indefinitely the 
     safety, security, and reliability of the Nation's nuclear 
     weapons stockpile without nuclear testing. The present 
     structure of the campaigns program reflects the current 
     investment in developing advanced facilities and capabilities 
     while simultaneously applying existing and developing 
     capabilities to important stewardship tasks.
       Primary certification.--The Committee recommends 
     $47,159,000 to support sub-critical experiments and other 
     activities necessary to support the required delivery date 
     for a certified pit.
       Dynamic materials properties.--The Committee recommends 
     $90,594,000. The Committee commends the administration for 
     its investment in the future through university grants, 
     partnerships and cooperative agreements. Using $5,000,000 of 
     the available funds, the Administration is directed to make 
     full use of existing and developing capabilities for 
     materials properties studies, including the subcritical 
     experiments at the U1a facility, Joint Actinide Shock Physics 
     Experimental Research facility and the Atlas facility at the 
     Nevada Test Site, and the High Pressure Collaborative Access 
     Team facility at the synchrotron light source at Argonne 
     National Laboratory. The Committee understands that this 
     materials work is essential to predicting the safety and 
     reliability of nuclear weapons in the absence of nuclear 
     weapons testing.
       The Committee recommendation includes $8,110,000 for 
     University Partnerships, a reduction of $5,000,000 from the 
     request.
       Advanced radiography.--The Committee recommends 
     $82,925,000, an increase of $30,000,000 over the request. The 
     recommendation includes $25,000,000 to continue research, 
     development, and conceptual design activities for an advanced 
     hydrodynamics test facility, including further development 
     and evaluation of proton radiography. It is the intent of the 
     Committee to continue this important effort even though any 
     decision on whether to proceed to construction is still 
     several years away. The additional $5,000,000 is provided to 
     fund other experiments that might be conducted in the 
     Contained Firing Facility, the U1a tunnel complex, or other 
     appropriate experimental facilities. The Committee also 
     directs the Department to fully support the DHART facility, 
     proton radiography, and radiation flow diagnostics.
       Secondary certification and nuclear systems margins.--The 
     Committee recommends $47,790,000 for radiation source 
     development, radiation, case dynamics studies radiation 
     transport and the effects of aging, and refurbishment on 
     secondary performance. From the funds available, the 
     administration is encouraged to continue, and expand as 
     appropriate, its investments in high energy density physics 
     research through university grants, partnerships and 
     cooperative agreements.
       Enhanced surety.--The Committee recommends $32,000,000, an 
     amount comparable to current year, to develop and demonstrate 
     advanced initiation concepts and enhanced use denial 
     concepts, and to enhance efforts to establish high precision, 
     micro system technologies for enhanced surety of future 
     weapon systems.
       Weapons systems engineering certification.--The Committee 
     recommends $27,007,000 to accelerate the acquisition of 
     experimental data necessary to validate new models and 
     simulation tools being developed in the Advanced Simulation 
     and Computing Campaign.
       Nuclear survivability.--The Committee recommends 
     $23,394,000 to develop and validate tools to simulate nuclear 
     environments for survivability assessments and certification; 
     restore the capability to provide nuclear-hardened 
     microelectronics and microsystem components for the enduring 
     stockpile; and accelerate the qualification and certification 
     of the neutron generator and the arming, fusing and firing 
     system for the refurbished W76.
       ICF ignition and high yield.--The Committee recommends 
     $487,293,000.
       The Committee recommendation includes $214,045,000 for 
     National Ignition Facility construction, Project 96-D-111, 
     and $273,248,000 is for the ICF ignition and high yield 
     program.
       The National Ignition Facility (NIF) was originally 
     justified as a way of attracting, training, and evaluating 
     the next generation of nuclear weapons scientists, who would 
     then help maintain the capabilities of our existing nuclear 
     stockpile. The Department of Energy has long maintained that 
     achieving ignition with this multibillion dollar facility was 
     a top priority for the Stockpile Stewardship and Management 
     Program, because the scientific and engineering challenges of 
     achieving ignition with the NIF could be used to induce 
     first-rate scientists to contribute to the nuclear weapons 
     program. It was the ignition objective that determined the 
     original size, performance criteria, and cost of the 
     multibillion dollar NIF construction project, and the 
     ignition objective that has justified continued support by 
     this Committee in spite of large cost overruns and long 
     delays.
       The Committee is therefore disturbed to see that the NNSA 
     has now changed the title of its campaign from ``Inertial 
     Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield'' to ``High Energy 
     Density Physics'', in other words, from a focus on achieving 
     the specific goal of ignition to a generalized physics 
     research program. Ignition is now only one of several 
     objectives for the NIF.
       The Committee is likewise concerned that the NNSA will 
     downgrade the NIF Project's long-standing ``Functional 
     Requirements and Primary Criteria'' into a set of ``eventual 
     goals'' and adopt new reduced performance criteria for 
     acceptance testing of the

[[Page 751]]

     NIF beams that are significantly below what is required to 
     support ignition experiments.
       The possibility of these various changes leaves the 
     Committee with the overall impression that NNSA is not 
     committed to the NIF Project and might down scope the project 
     to the point where laser performance that is needed to 
     evaluate ignition targets would never be realized. And that 
     would raise the question of the appropriate size for the NIF, 
     and its future funding level. This is an alarming prospect, 
     given NIF's estimated project cost of more than 
     $3,500,000,000, and the greater amounts that will eventually 
     be required to operate and maintain the facility for various 
     experiments.
       At this late stage in the construction project, the 
     Committee has every right to expect that the confidence in 
     achieving the ignition objective should be increasing, not 
     decreasing. The apparent retreat from ignition signified in 
     this budget request raises anew the question of the 
     appropriate size and role of the NIF Project within the 
     overall Stewardship Program, and its future level of funding.
       The Committee rejects this re-prioritization and down-
     scoping. Ignition is now and will remain the primary 
     objective for the National Ignition Facility. The Committee 
     fully expects the NIF to meet its original ``Functional 
     Requirements and Primary Criteria'' and to perform at the 
     levels required for ignition and directs the NNSA to maintain 
     the original scope of the project. Additionally, the 
     Committee rejects the proposed name change and expects the 
     fiscal year 2004 request to revert to Inertial Confinement 
     Fusion and High Yield.
       The Committee is disappointed that the administration, 
     while apparently committed to the construction of the multi-
     billion dollar National Ignition Facility (NIF), has not 
     requested funds that are essential to the achievement of the 
     ignition goal. Accordingly, the Committee adds $15,000,000 to 
     the administration's request for the NIF Director to support 
     the development of cryogenic targets and essential NIF 
     diagnostics. The Committee, recognizing the ``national'' 
     character of NIF, encourages the participation of appropriate 
     entities of the national technical community in these 
     activities.
       Petawatt lasers.--Short pulse, petawatt class lasers will 
     significantly increase the capabilities of the 
     administration's high energy density facilities such as the 
     Z-pinch pulsed power facility at Sandia National 
     Laboratories, the Trident Laser at Los Alamos National 
     Laboratory, the Omega Laser at the Laboratory for Laser 
     Energetics of the University of Rochester, and the National 
     Ignition Facility at the Lawrence Livermore National 
     Laboratory.
       The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
     $13,000,000 to realize the benefits of such laser technology. 
     Within this amount, $5,000,000 is provided to modify the 
     beamlet laser at Sandia National Laboratories; $3,000,000 is 
     provided to continue petawatt laser development at Lawrence 
     Livermore National Laboratory; $2,000,000 is provided for 
     technical community activities in developing critical short-
     pulse, high power laser technology, such as damage resistant 
     gratings; and $3,000,000 is provided for petawatt laser 
     development at the Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE) at 
     the University of Rochester. This funding will allow the LLE 
     to continue operations of the OMEGA laser at full capacity. 
     The Department should provide a report before May 31, 2003, 
     addressing the need for a new high energy OMEGA-EP (extended 
     performance). The Committee is concerned that the existing 
     facility will be unable to meet national science-based 
     stockpile stewardship requirements in light of the current 
     oversubscription of OMEGA.
       The Committee also includes an additional $4,500,000 for 
     university grants and other support. Within this amount, 
     $2,000,000 is provided for short pulse, high power laser 
     development at the University of Texas; and $2,500,000 is 
     provided to continue short pulse, high power laser 
     development and research at the University of Nevada, Reno.
       Advanced simulation and computing.--The Committee 
     recommends $704,335,000, an amount that is $20,527,000 below 
     the budget request.
       The Committee notes the intriguing development of the 
     Japanese vector-based Earth Simulator Computer which is now 
     several times faster than any current ASCI computer and 33 
     percent faster than the NNSA's newest platform, the Q 
     machine. The NNSA has put forth a credible case for their 
     decision to abandon custom-designed chips and vector 
     architecture for the much cheaper commodity chip-based, 
     massively parallel, scalar systems which are the foundation 
     of ASCI.
       However, the Committee is not convinced that the NNSA is 
     aggressively pursuing alternative hardware architectures or 
     software solutions that will result in better interconnection 
     and more efficient use of the NNSA's substantial computer 
     investment. The Committee requires more evidence that the 
     current ASCI approach is the most cost-effective and 
     efficient way of achieving the desired capability and 
     capacity when needed.
       While the Committee recognizes the central importance of 
     the ASCI program to the success of stockpile stewardship, the 
     Committee remains unconvinced that the NNSA's platform 
     acquisition strategy is driven by identified requirements, 
     rather than a well intentioned, but insufficiently justified, 
     desire to aggressively acquire larger and faster computing 
     assets on an accelerated time-scale. The NNSA procurements 
     represent a very small percentage of the U.S. supercomputing 
     market, and the Committee is not convinced that the NNSA's 
     acquisition strategy is taking full advantage of the steady 
     fall in the price per teraflop that characterizes this 
     market.
       The NNSA is directed to commission two related studies, the 
     first to be performed in collaboration with the Department's 
     Office of Science and the second focused solely on issues 
     relevant to the stockpile stewardship program. These studies 
     should address issues of alternative computer architectures 
     and the requirements that drive them.
       The first study, to address alternative architectures, 
     should be a joint venture with the Office of Science to 
     commission the National Academy of Science (NAS) to study the 
     appropriate computer architectures necessary to meet the 
     needs of the stewardship program, the broad scientific 
     community, and other elements of the national security 
     community, including, particularly, the National Security 
     Agency.
       The second study, to be performed by an independent study 
     group, should identify the distinct requirements of the 
     stockpile stewardship program and its relation to the ASCI 
     acquisition strategy. The report of this study should clearly 
     describe the linkage between the development of software 
     applications and the acquisition of hardware capability and 
     capacity, with consideration of the needs of the stockpile 
     life extension programs and the underlying weapons science 
     programs. Finally, this second report should include an 
     evaluation of the cost trade-offs between the dates on which 
     specific computing resources are required and reduced future 
     costs for computational power. The Committee expects the NNSA 
     to fully support these studies, including the provision of 
     expedited clearances to participants as necessary.
       The reports are due to the appropriate congressional 
     committees on August 1, 2003.
       The Committee recommends the following amounts for ASCI 
     construction projects:
       Project 01-D-101 Distributed information systems 
     laboratory, SNL, Livermore, CA.--The Committee recommends 
     $13,305,000.
       Project 00-D-103 Terascale simulation facility, LLNL, 
     Livermore, CA.--The Committee recommends $35,030,000.
       Project 00-D-107 Joint computational engineering 
     laboratory, SNL, Albuquerque, NM.--The Committee recommends 
     $7,000,000.
       Pit manufacturing and certification.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes a total of $246,000,000 for the Pit 
     Manufacturing and Certification Campaign, an increase of 
     $51,516,000 over the budget request. This amount includes 
     $242,000,000 to support the manufacturing and certification 
     of a W88 pit as the September, 2001, project baseline 
     indicated. The recommendation also includes the requested 
     amount of $2,000,000 for pit manufacturing capability and 
     $2,000,000 for the modern pit facility.
       The Committee remains greatly concerned about the NNSA's 
     refusal to request funds consistent with its own project plan 
     submitted less than 1 year ago. Although the Committee 
     acknowledges the NNSA is reporting substantial progress in 
     the effort, the NNSA has not revised its September, 2001, 
     project baseline to reflect a lower and presumably more 
     accurate cost projection.
       Instead, the Committee has been forced to reduce other 
     items in the budget request to fully fund a program both the 
     Congress and the NNSA have identified as one of the most 
     important tests of the success of the Stockpile Stewardship 
     and Management program. The Committee directs the NNSA to 
     revise as appropriate the pit production and certification 
     plan and submit the report to the relevant congressional 
     committees by March 31, 2003, and annually thereafter.
       Stockpile readiness campaign.--The Committee recommends 
     $61,027,000 for the stockpile readiness campaign. This 
     program, initiated in fiscal year 2001, enables the Y-12 
     National Security Complex to replace or restore production 
     capability and to modernize aging facilities. At present, the 
     critical manufacturing capabilities required for weapons 
     refurbishments at Y-12 do not exist. The Committee agrees 
     that ``stockpile readiness campaign'' is a more appropriate 
     and indicative program title than ``secondary readiness 
     campaign''.
       High explosives manufacturing and weapons assembly/
     disassembly readiness.--The Committee recommends $12,093,000 
     to establish production-scale high explosives manufacturing 
     and qualification; to deploy and validate technologies and 
     facilities for production re-qualification; and, to 
     demonstrate and validate Enterprise Integration and 
     Collaborative Manufacturing.
       Non-nuclear readiness.--The Committee recommends 
     $22,398,000 to deploy commercial products and processes for 
     components supporting the B61, W80, and W76 stockpile life 
     extension programs; to modify existing tritium loading and 
     cleaning facilities to support stockpile life extension 
     programs; and, to support neutron target loading and 
     detonator production.

[[Page 752]]

       Tritium readiness.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $112,899,000 for the tritium readiness campaign, including 
     the budget request of $70,165,000 for construction and 
     $42,734,000 for operations, a reduction of $13,400,000 from 
     the request. The NNSA has acknowledged that the Tritium 
     Extraction Facility construction project has experienced 
     serious cost-overruns and schedule delays. The NNSA has 
     proposed initiating the use of commercial reactors for the 
     irradiation of tritium producing rods in fiscal years 2004 
     and 2005. This schedule would have required the delivery of 
     fuel in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2003. However, the 
     delays in the construction of the Tritium Extraction Facility 
     and the resulting delays in start of facility operations will 
     necessitate a delay in the commercial light water reactor 
     tritium production program. As such the Committee recommends 
     a reduction of $13,400,000 from the budget request.
       Cooperative agreements.--The Committee recognizes that 
     cooperative agreements with universities are important 
     resources for developing essential technical data for 
     stockpile stewardship. Additionally, such long-term 
     relationships with universities allow considerable 
     opportunity for promoting advanced studies and recruiting the 
     future workforce in technical areas that are critical to the 
     continuing stewardship enterprise. The Committee understands 
     that the NNSA has established a new office to be responsible 
     for administering university partnerships, cooperative 
     agreements and/or other long-term university relationships. 
     The Committee remains supportive of this activity and directs 
     the administration to honor existing cooperative agreements 
     as this new office implements its responsibilities.


               readiness in technical base and facilities

       An appropriation of $1,849,812,000 is recommended for 
     readiness in technical base and facilities. Readiness in 
     technical base and facilities encompasses efforts to provide 
     for the physical infrastructure and operational readiness 
     required to conduct the directed stockpile work and campaign 
     activities at the laboratories, the test site and the 
     production plants.
       Operations of facilities.--The Committee recommends 
     $1,026,000,000 to maintain warm standby readiness for all 
     RTBF facilities with some allowance for inflation. Within 
     available funds, $6,000,000 is provided for full single shift 
     operations of Sandia National Laboratories' Z-pinch pulsed 
     power facility, and $56,725,000 is provided for continuing 
     operations of the Device Assembly Facility, the Joint 
     Actinide Shock Physics Experimental Research facility, 
     operations associated with the Atlas relocation project, U1a 
     operations, general plant projects and other NTS support 
     facilities.
       For continued facility upgrades, refurbishments, operations 
     and maintenance costs associated with and for the National 
     Center for Combating Terrorism, an additional $27,000,000 is 
     provided.
       The Committee recommendation also includes an additional 
     $10,000,000 for facility operations at Pantex and an 
     additional $10,000,000 for operation of facilities at Y-12.
       Technology transfer and industrial partnerships.--The 
     Committee recognizes that partnerships with industry may 
     enable the weapons complex to accomplish its mission more 
     efficiently. Such partnership can provide access to new 
     technologies, processes, and expertise that improve NNSA's 
     mission capabilities. One of the most successful technology 
     transfer and commercialization efforts in the Department of 
     Energy has occurred with the not-for-profit Technology 
     Ventures Corporation around Sandia National Laboratories, 
     resulting in over 30 start-up ventures and thousands of jobs 
     created. The Committee has included an additional $3,000,000 
     and directs the NNSA to use this successful public/private 
     partnership at the other interested NNSA laboratories and the 
     Nevada Test Site.
       Program readiness.--The Committee recommends $218,000,000, 
     an increase of $9,911,000 above the budget request, to 
     enhance readiness and maintain materials processing and 
     component manufacturing readiness.
       Within available funds, $64,201,000 is provided for test 
     site readiness including archiving, resumption planning, 
     activities required for enhanced test readiness planning 
     including test scenarios and cost/benefit trade offs. Funds 
     are also provided for Testing Drillback Borehole management, 
     as well as experimental and direct stockpile activities 
     included in DSW and campaigns which contribute to the test 
     readiness posture.
       Special projects.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $50,500,000 for special projects. Within available funds, 
     $600,000 is provided as the Federal contribution to the Oral 
     History of the Nevada Test Site; $6,900,000 is provided for 
     the New Mexico Education Enrichment Foundation; $2,500,000 is 
     provided for the National Museum of Nuclear Science and 
     History relocation project; $500,000 for the design, 
     fabrication, and installation of exhibits at the Atomic 
     Testing History Institute; and $1,000,000 is provided for the 
     UNLV Research Foundation, which is integrating the Nevada 
     community reuse organization during fiscal year 2003, for 
     operations in support of stockpile stewardship and homeland 
     security activities at the Nevada Test Site. The Los Alamos 
     County Schools Program is funded at the level of the 
     President's request.
       As a result of the events of September 11, 2001, which have 
     placed increased demands, and a heightened availability 
     requirement on the aircraft required for Aerial Measurements, 
     Sensing and Monitoring, the Committee is concerned that 
     assets deployed at NNSA facilities at Nellis Air Force Base 
     and Andrews Air Force Base may not be safely deployed due to 
     dated avionics. In order to assure the safety and reliability 
     of these assets under all conditions, the Committee 
     recommends $4,000,000 to update aircraft navigational and 
     other related avionics.
       The Committee encourages the Administration to support a 
     joint Air Force/NNSA research and development program in 
     physical security systems and technologies at the Sandia 
     National Laboratory.
       The National Laboratories have long served as test beds for 
     the development and deployment of advanced technologies. The 
     Committee is impressed with laboratory work designed to 
     protect critical U.S. transportation infrastructure and 
     encourages the Department to continue research and deployment 
     in this area. Within available funds, the Department is 
     directed to conduct a field installation of the truck 
     stopping device developed at Lawrence Livermore National 
     Laboratory and to build a prototype of a portable, remotely 
     controlled, truck stopping device for positive control of 
     trucks in critical areas. The Committee further directs the 
     Department to continue research regarding suspension bridges 
     and new techniques for scanning shipping containers.
       Material recycle and recovery.--The Committee recommends 
     $98,816,000, the amount of the budget request.
       Nuclear weapons incident response.--The Committee 
     recommends $96,000,000, to enhance the state of response 
     readiness at various locations, particularly in light of the 
     events of September 11, 2001. The Committee is very pleased 
     with the performance of DOE's Emergency Response assets in 
     the aftermath of September 11, 2001. These emergency response 
     teams have done remarkable work with relatively meager 
     resources. The Department is encouraged to maintain these 
     programs in a robust posture and provides $5,000,000 in 
     additional funding for this purpose.
       Construction projects.--The Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $328,182,000, for construction projects 
     under Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities.
       The following list details changes in appropriations for 
     construction projects under Readiness in Technical Base and 
     Facilities:
       Project 01-D-108 Microsystems and engineering science 
     applications, SNL.--The Committee recommends $123,000,000, an 
     increase of $48,100,000 above the budget request.
       Project 03-D-102 LANL administration building (SM-43) 
     replacement project, LANL.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $16,000,000, an increase of $16,000,000 above the 
     Administration's request.
       01-D-103 PED, Various locations, TA-18 relocation at 
     LANL.--As a result of the NNSA's announced preferred option 
     that this equipment and material be transferred to the Device 
     Assembly Facility, the Committee recommends the NNSA suspend 
     planning related to relocation of the facility at Los Alamos 
     and instead utilize previously appropriated funds to support 
     planning consistent with the eventual Record of Decision. The 
     Committee recommends no funding.


                     Facilities and infrastructure

       The Committee recommends $242,512,000, to support re-
     capitalization of existing operational facilities to halt 
     their deterioration and restore the robust and enduring 
     mission readiness that relies on them.


                      Secure transportation asset

       The Committee recommends $152,989,000. Of the amount 
     appropriated, $100,863,000 is provided for operations and 
     equipment, and $52,126,000 is provided for program direction.


                        Safeguards and security

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $509,954,000. 
     The Committee recommendation includes $8,900,000 for 
     construction of the nuclear material safeguard and security 
     upgrade project at Los Alamos.
       The Committee directs the NNSA to continue to improve its 
     ability to build an integrated multi-year budgeting process 
     and eliminate the separate line-item treatment of the 
     security budget in a manner consistent with April 2002 Report 
     of the Commission on Science and Security, (``Hamre 
     Commission'').

                    Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$803,586,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,113,630,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,115,630,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $1,115,630,000 for 
     defense nuclear nonproliferation.
       The fiscal year 2002 Energy and Water Development 
     Appropriations Act provided $861,419,000 for nuclear 
     nonproliferation activities. Since that time, Congress has 
     appropriated an additional $326,000,000 for defense nuclear 
     nonproliferation in supplemental appropriations bills. 
     Unfortunately, a substantial portion of the total 
     appropriated funding for fiscal year 2002 remains unspent and 
     unobligated.

[[Page 753]]

       These programs are of critical interest to this Committee 
     and to Congress as a whole. However, the Committee is 
     concerned that the rate of expenditure for nonproliferation 
     programs lags substantially behind that of the rest of the 
     National Nuclear Security Administration. Carry-over rates of 
     40 percent are not uncommon. Although the Committee 
     recognizes the difficulty in implementing nonproliferation 
     activities in Russia, the Committee strongly urges the 
     Department to improve on this level of performance. However, 
     the Committee does not expect the Department to carry out 
     these programs with any less rigorous oversight in ensuring 
     efficient and cost-effective implementation. The securing and 
     safeguarding of fissile nuclear material abroad is a critical 
     component of our Nation's terrorism prevention effort.
       Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation activities of the NNSA are 
     directed to reducing the serious global danger of the 
     proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The NNSA 
     utilizes the highly specialized scientific, technical, 
     analytical, and operational capabilities of the NNSA and its 
     national laboratories, as well as other Department of Energy 
     laboratories to implement its nonproliferation programs. Its 
     mission is to prevent the spread of WMD materials, technology 
     and expertise; detect the proliferation of WMD worldwide; 
     reverse the proliferation of nuclear weapons capabilities; 
     dispose of surplus materials in accordance with terms set 
     forth in agreements between the United States and Russia; and 
     store surplus fissile materials in a safe and secure manner 
     pending disposition. The Committee continues to strongly 
     support these important national security programs.
       Nonproliferation and verification research and 
     development.--The Committee recommends $293,407,000.
       The recommended level continues the important remote 
     sensing and verification technology research, development and 
     deployment, and continues to invest in the development of 
     essential technologies for responding to the growing threat 
     of chemical and biological terrorism.
       The Nonproliferation and Verification, Research and 
     Development program is essential for stable long-term 
     research and the development of unique science and technology 
     competencies needed for the increasing demands of arms 
     control, nonproliferation, domestic nuclear safeguards and 
     security, energy security, and emergency management.
       Within available funds, the Committee has provided 
     $15,000,000 to support on-going activities at the Remote 
     Sensing Test and Evaluation Center including sensor test bed 
     development, support for field testing, and deployment of 
     sensors, applied technology activities, the HAZMAT Spill 
     Center, the RSL, and the STL. Within available funds, the 
     Committee recommendation also includes $500,000 for the 
     Remote Sensing Test and Evaluation Center to conduct a site-
     wide survey of the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant (IAAP) in 
     Middletown, Iowa, for radiological contamination. This study 
     shall be done in conjunction with the Army Corps of Engineers 
     and the State of Iowa. The Committee recommends $2,500,000 in 
     support of the 3-year research effort by the Caucasus Seismic 
     Information Network. The Committee recommendation includes 
     $5,250,000 for the Incorporated Research Institutions for 
     Seismology PASSCAL Instrument Center.
       The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
     $10,000,000 in support of the nuclear and radiological 
     national security program. The NNSA is directed to provide 
     for the sustained development of advanced technologies needed 
     to counter nuclear terrorism threats and should focus on 
     improving capabilities through research and development in 
     threat assessment and prediction, basic nuclear 
     understanding, sensors and detection systems, consequence 
     mitigation, forensics and attribution and render-safe 
     technologies.
       Nonproliferation and International Security.--The Committee 
     recommends $92,668,000 for Nonproliferation and International 
     Security.
       The Department's Nonproliferation and International 
     Security program supports the U.S. arms control and 
     nonproliferation policies, and provides leadership and 
     representation within the Department in the international 
     arms control and nonproliferation community. The goal is to 
     reduce the threat of nuclear proliferation by integrating the 
     Department's assets and efforts, including those of the 
     national laboratories and contractors, to provide technical 
     support to the U.S. Government's foreign policy and national 
     security objectives. The Committee recommendation includes 
     $8,100,000 for continuing the efforts for disposition of 
     spent nuclear fuel in Kazakhstan.
       The Committee commends the NNSA for engaging the wider U.S. 
     scientific community in contributions to the treaty 
     monitoring program. The Committee will not continue direction 
     that the NNSA complete a specific portion of the treaty 
     monitoring program, but strongly encourages the laboratories 
     to continue to incorporate more industry and academic 
     involvement and to establish metrics that will allow the 
     Committee to track progress in this effort.
       Russian Transition Initiatives.--The Committee recommends 
     $39,334,000 for Russian Transition Initiatives. The 
     recommendation is meant to continue important activities that 
     counter ``brain drain'' to potential proliferant states and 
     terrorist organizations from the nuclear weapons complex 
     laboratories and production plants of the former Soviet 
     Union. The request includes $16,748,000 for the Nuclear 
     Cities Initiative (NCI), and $22,586,000 for Initiatives for 
     Proliferation Prevention (IPP).
       International materials protection, control, and 
     accounting.--The recommendation provides $233,077,000 for 
     international material protection, control, and accounting 
     (MPC&A) activities. The Committee continues to consider these 
     activities extremely important to reducing the threat created 
     by the breakup of the former Soviet Union.
       The increased funding from fiscal year 2002 supplemental 
     appropriations and the fiscal year 2003 recommendation will 
     allow for additional material consolidation and control work, 
     an expanded program of MPC&A at several Russian Navy sites, 
     and expanded MPC&A efforts within defense-related and 
     important civilian and regulatory sites in Russia. In 
     addition, the Committee supports the NNSA pursuing 
     opportunities to work with the Russian Strategic Rocket 
     Forces in securing additional weapons sites. The Committee 
     continues to believe that these activities are critical 
     elements of the United States nonproliferation efforts.
       The Committee recommendation includes $14,000,000 to 
     develop and implement efforts with the Russian Federation for 
     blending or otherwise securing highly enriched uranium so 
     that the concentration of U-235 is below 20 percent or 
     otherwise secured consistent with appropriate international 
     standards. These efforts may include the purchase of highly 
     enriched uranium from the Russian Federation and transporting 
     it to the United States.
       The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for the 
     NNSA's radiological dispersion devices (RDD) program for the 
     protection, control and accounting of RDD materials in 
     countries other than Russia and the newly independent states.
       Second Line of Defense.--From within available funds, an 
     additional $15,000,000 is provided for expanded activities 
     within NNSA's Second Line of Defense (SLD) program. This 
     program is responsible for improving border and 
     transportation security against the illicit movement of 
     material used in weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The 
     Committee supports expanded program work in major transit/
     transportation hubs and ports in countries other than Russia 
     and the Newly Independent States.
       HEU (Highly Enriched Uranium) Transparency 
     Implementation.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $17,229,000, the amount of the budget request for the HEU 
     Transparency Implementation program of the Department of 
     Energy. This program is responsible for ensuring that the 
     non-proliferation aspects of the February 1993 agreement 
     between the United States and the Russian Federation are met. 
     This Agreement covers the purchase over 20 years of low 
     enriched uranium LEU derived from at least 500 metric tons of 
     HEU removed from dismantled Russian nuclear weapons. Under 
     the Agreement, conversion of the HEU components into LEU is 
     performed in Russian facilities. The purpose of this program 
     is to put into place those measures agreed to by both sides, 
     that permit the United States to have confidence that the 
     Russian side is abiding by the Agreement.
       International nuclear safety.--The Committee recommends 
     $14,576,000 to implement permanent improvements in Russian 
     nuclear safety culture as well as improvements in the 
     regulatory framework for Soviet-design reactor operations in 
     nine former Soviet Union countries.
       Elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production.--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $49,339,000 for the 
     elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production program. 
     The Committee supports the administration's request to 
     transfer the Elimination of Weapons-Grade Plutonium program 
     (EWGPP) from the Department of Defense to the NNSA. However, 
     the Committee is concerned with the inherent complexity, 
     delays, and the concomitant problems of cost increases and 
     schedule, when working in the Russian weapons complex's 
     closed cities.
       Fissile materials disposition.--The Committee recommends 
     $448,000,000, to maintain operations, in the United States 
     and in Russia, according to the plan under the budget 
     request.
       Excess weapons-grade plutonium in Russia is a clear and 
     present danger to the security of the United States because 
     of the possibility that it will fall into the hands of non-
     Russian entities or provide Russia with the ability to 
     rebuild its nuclear arsenal at a rate the United States may 
     be unable to equal. For that reason, the Committee considers 
     the Department's material disposition program of comparable 
     importance to weapons activities; both are integral 
     components of our national effort to reduce any threat posed 
     to the United States and to deter the threat that remains.
       The Committee recommendation includes $194,000,000 for U.S. 
     surplus materials disposition, the same as the budget 
     request.

[[Page 754]]

       The Committee urges the Department to continue the thorium-
     based fuel cycle program currently being conducted by the 
     Russian Research Initiative in conjunction with their U.S. 
     industrial partners.
       Construction.--
       Project 99-D-141 Pit Disassembly & Conversion Facility.--
     The Committee recommends $33,000,000, the same as the budget 
     request.
       Project 99-D-143 Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication 
     Facility.--The Committee recommends $93,000,000, the same as 
     the budget request.
       Project 01-D-407 Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) Blend Down 
     Project.--The Committee recommends $30,000,000, the same as 
     the budget request.

                             Naval Reactors

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$688,045,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................706,790,000
Committee recommendation....................................706,790,000

       The Naval Reactors Program within the NNSA provides for the 
     design, development, testing, and evaluation of improved 
     naval nuclear propulsion plants and reactor cores having long 
     fuel life, high reliability, improved performances, and 
     simplified operating and maintenance requirements. The 
     nuclear propulsion plants and cores cover a wide range of 
     configurations and power ratings suitable for installation in 
     naval combat vessels varying in size from small submarines to 
     large surface ships. The Committee recommendation is 
     $706,790,000, the amount of the budget request.

                      Office of the Administrator

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$312,596,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................335,929,000
Committee recommendation....................................335,929,000

       The Committee has included $335,929,000 for the expenses of 
     the Office of the Administrator of the National Nuclear 
     Security Administration (NNSA).
       The NNSA is taking the long-overdue steps necessary to re-
     engineer the entire nuclear weapons complex to reflect new 
     national security realities. In the field, the Operations 
     Offices are being converted to Service Centers and the 8 Site 
     Offices are being given greater authority over the 
     contractors. The NNSA has announced its first major 
     Headquarters re-engineering to consolidate management and 
     oversight.
       When fully implemented, the layers of Federal headquarters 
     management will be reduced. The Committee recognizes that 
     there will be increased costs for permanent change of 
     stations associated with the re-deployment of existing staff. 
     The Committee expects the NNSA to aggressively pursue these 
     efforts without negatively impacting critical national 
     security missions.
       The National Nuclear Security Administration Act and 
     subsequent Appropriations Acts have included requirements or 
     direction to develop and implement a planning, programming, 
     and budgeting system. The Committee directs the Department 
     conduct an independent assessment of the NNSA's PPBS process 
     and structure, including its comparability to that of the 
     Department of Defense. The review should also determine 
     whether the NNSA's PPBS is capable of being used as the 
     central decision making process for resource allocation 
     decisions and the extent to which it has been incorporated by 
     NNSA M&O contractors.


                        recommendation summaries

       Details of the Committee's recommendations are included in 
     the table at the end of this title.

                    OTHER DEFENSE RELATED ACTIVITIES

         Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$5,234,576,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,544,133,000
Committee recommendation..................................5,370,532,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,370,532,000 
     for Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management 
     programs for fiscal year 2003. This is $826,399,000 over the 
     budget request.
       The Department's Environmental Management program is 
     responsible for identifying and reducing health and safety 
     risks, and managing waste at sites where the Department 
     carried out defense nuclear energy or weapons research and 
     production activities which resulted in radioactive, 
     hazardous, and mixed waste contamination. The Environmental 
     Management program goals are to eliminate and manage the 
     urgent risk in the system; emphasize health and safety for 
     workers and the public; establish a system that increases 
     managerial and financial control; and establish a stronger 
     partnership between DOE and its stakeholders. The ``Defense 
     environmental restoration and waste management'' 
     appropriation is organized into two program accounts, site/
     project completion and post-2006 completion to reflect the 
     emphasis on project completion and site closures.


                ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CLEAN-UP REFORM

       The Department's top-to-bottom review of the Environmental 
     Management program concluded that cleaning up the legacy of 
     the Cold War is costing billions more than it should and will 
     take many years longer than anticipated to complete. The 
     Department's position, correct in the view of the Committee, 
     is that the status quo is unacceptable. The Department, 
     during the last year, has embarked on a mission to quickly 
     and markedly improve the program's performance in achieving 
     clean-up and closure, and ensure that the primary goal is 
     reducing risk to workers, the public, and the environment.
       In the fiscal year 2003 budget submittal, the Department 
     recommended the creation of a $1,100,000,000 clean-up reform 
     account in an attempt to lure sites and States into re-
     negotiating binding agreements to accelerate clean-ups 
     throughout the DOE complex. This pot of money was created 
     largely by cutting fiscal year 2003 funding levels at nearly 
     every DOE clean-up site. The Department wanted the 
     $1,100,000,000 to be completely unallocated by Congress as an 
     incentive to bring States and sites to the bargaining table 
     quickly rather than risk not receiving any of the funding. 
     The Department has entered into negotiations with the vast 
     majority of the sites in the complex and has completed final 
     performance management plans in most cases.
       The Committee recommendation does not include a separate 
     clean-up reform account. The Committee is unwilling to 
     provide a completely unallocated $1,100,000,000 to the 
     Department. Rather, the Committee has sought to fairly 
     distribute the resources based on the announced agreements 
     or, where there has not been an announced agreement, on a 
     reasonably informed expectation. In almost all cases, the 
     sites have been provided substantially more than what they 
     received in the current fiscal year. To the extent the 
     Committee has provided funds for acceleration or reform of 
     cleanup beyond the current year level for any affected site 
     or laboratory, the Committee directs that the Department 
     should not release the additional amounts to the sites or 
     laboratories until the Department has entered into a final 
     revised cleanup agreement and a final performance management 
     plan.
       In conclusion, the Committee reiterates its support for the 
     Department's efforts to expedite the clean-up of the legacy 
     of the Cold War in an efficient and effective manner. To the 
     extent that the clean-up reform initiative has improved the 
     legally binding agreements between the Department and the 
     States, the Committee is pleased. However, once these 
     agreements are in place, the Committee expects the annual 
     budget submission from this and future administrations to 
     fully fund the Federal portion of each of these agreements.
       The Committee expects the Department to continue to seek 
     every opportunity to bring about more efficiencies and tough 
     business-like approaches to program execution. The Department 
     should continue the critical review concerning the need and 
     requirement for each individual support service contract, and 
     duplicative and overlapping organizational arrangements and 
     functions.


                      Site and Project Completion

       An appropriation of $981,350,000 is recommended for site 
     and project completion activities, including $973,106,000 for 
     operation and maintenance, and $8,244,000 for construction.
       This account will provide funding for projects that will be 
     completed by fiscal year 2006 at sites or facilities where a 
     DOE mission (for example, environmental management, nuclear 
     weapons stockpile stewardship, or scientific research) will 
     continue beyond 2006. These activities are focused on 
     completing projects by 2006 and distinguishes these projects 
     from the long-term projects or activities at the sites, such 
     as high level waste vitrification or the Department's other 
     enduring missions. The largest amount of funding requested is 
     for activities at the Hanford, WA, Savannah River, SC, and 
     Idaho sites. A significant amount of work is expected to be 
     completed at these sites by 2006, although environmental 
     management and other stewardship activities will continue 
     beyond 2006.
       For construction, the Committee recommendation includes all 
     requested projects.
       The Committee recommendation includes additional funding 
     above the level of the administration's request for the 
     following activities: $40,000,000 to accelerate cleanup at 
     Savannah River Site in South Carolina; $5,000,000 for cleanup 
     activities at Idaho National Engineering and Environmental 
     Laboratory in Idaho; $141,000,000 for accelerated cleanup at 
     the Hanford site in Washington; $8,000,000 to accelerate 
     cleanup activities at Sandia National Lab in New Mexico; and 
     $5,000,000 for accelerated cleanup at the Pantex site in 
     Texas.
       The Committee provides $1,000,000 to the State of Oregon to 
     cover costs of its cleanup effort, including emergency 
     drills, planning activities, technical review of DOE's waste 
     management and cleanup plans, participation in the Hanford 
     Advisory Board meetings and other meetings at Hanford.
       The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
     $1,500,000 for the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory and 
     recommends that the Department continue its relationship with 
     the University of South Carolina's Center for Water Resources 
     at current year levels.
       The Committee understands the Department is prepared to 
     transfer up to 2,000 acres

[[Page 755]]

     for the use of Pueblo of San Ildefonso and approximately 100 
     acres to the County of Los Alamos. The Committee 
     recommendation includes an additional $4,000,000 to cover 
     appropriate expenditures necessary to expedite conveyance of 
     the land consistent with the direction of section 632 of 
     Public Law 105-119.


                          Post-2006 Completion

       The Committee recommendation for Post-2006 completion 
     activities is $3,353,098,000, which includes $2,211,240,000 
     in operating expenses for Post-2006 completion, $455,256,000 
     in operating expenses for the Office of River Protection, and 
     $671,732,000 for ORP construction.
       The Post-2006 completion request supports projects that are 
     projected to continue well beyond 2006. As cleanup is 
     completed, it will be necessary for environmental management 
     to maintain a presence at most sites to monitor, maintain, 
     and provide information on the continued residual 
     contamination. These activities are required to ensure the 
     reduction in risk to human health is maintained.
       Post-2006 construction.--The Committee recommends the 
     amount of the administration's request.
       Post-2006 operation and maintenance.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes additional funding above the level of 
     the administration's request for the following activities: 
     $229,000,000 for vitrification plant work at the Office of 
     River Protection in Washington; $176,000,000 to accelerate 
     cleanup and nuclear materials stabilization at Savannah River 
     Site in South Carolina; $105,000,000 for cleanup activities 
     at Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory in 
     Idaho; $63,000,000 for accelerated cleanup of the River 
     Corridor and tank waste management at the Hanford site in 
     Washington; $54,000,000 to accelerate remediation, waste 
     management, and nuclear materials stewardship activities at 
     Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico; $40,000,000 for 
     accelerated cleanup at the Oak Ridge National Lab and Oak 
     Ridge Reservation in Tennessee; $33,000,000 for accelerated 
     cleanup at the Nevada Test Site in Nevada; $22,000,000 for 
     accelerated cleanup at the Lawrence Livermore National Lab; 
     and $2,000,000 for the University of Alaska to address 
     environmental contamination and the health effects of 
     residual radiation in the food chain.
       The Department is expected to continue making PILT payments 
     to counties that have the Hanford reservation within their 
     boundaries and at last year's level.
       Within available funds, the Committee also directs the 
     Department to fund the Hazardous Waste Worker Training 
     Program and the HAMMER programs at levels consistent with 
     fiscal year 2001 levels.
       The Department is directed to pay its Title V air 
     permitting fees at the INEEL consistent with prior year 
     levels.
       Last year the Committee encouraged the Department to 
     utilize alternative dispute resolution to resolve the Pit 9 
     issue currently in Federal court. The Committee is aware the 
     district court has ordered the parties to enter into 
     mediation. The Committee commends that initiative and 
     encourages the pursuit of the action to avert continued 
     costly and protracted litigation. The Committee expects the 
     Department to participate directly in that mediation, not 
     through the M&O contractor. If mediation is not successful, 
     the Committee expects the Department to initiate and 
     participate in arbitration to resolve this dispute.
       Carlsbad Field Office.--The recommendation includes an 
     additional $14,000,000 for Carlsbad to accelerate shipping 
     and disposing of transuranic waste around the complex; an 
     additional $5,000,000 to continue the U.S. Mexico Border 
     Health Commission/Materials Corridor Partnership Initiative. 
     The recommendation also includes an additional $3,500,000 
     which shall be made available to the Carlsbad community for 
     educational support, infrastructure improvements, and related 
     initiatives to address the impacts of accelerated operations.
       In order to provide more timely information in a useable 
     format to citizens, researchers, stakeholders, and 
     regulators, the Committee directs the Department to 
     consolidate at Carlsbad, all record archives relevant to the 
     operations of WIPP and the TRU waste in the repository.


                         Science and Technology

       The Committee recommendation includes $77,000,000 for 
     science and technology, $15,000,000 below the 
     administration's request. The Committee notes that the 
     administration's request is a cut of nearly $164,000,000 from 
     the current year.
       The Science and Technology program provides new or improved 
     technologies and research results that reduce risks to 
     workers, the public and the environment; reduce cleanup 
     costs; and/or provide solutions to environmental problems 
     that currently have no solutions. New and improved 
     technologies have the potential to reduce environmental 
     restoration and cleanup costs by an estimated several billion 
     dollars.
       The Committee is aware of the Department's plan to ``re-
     focus'' the Science and Technology program and to discontinue 
     all focus area activities, all technology applications 
     activities, as well as other university and industry programs 
     under this account. This recommendation is a result of the 
     Department of Energy's recent Top-to-Bottom Review of the 
     Environmental Management program.
       The Committee disagrees with this decision and is skeptical 
     that a robust Science and Technology program can be 
     maintained given the $164,000,000 cut. Long-term investment 
     in research and development is the single most important 
     thing the Department can do to ensure that clean-ups are 
     completed quickly and efficiently. The solutions to many of 
     the technical problems facing clean-up sites throughout the 
     DOE complex have not yet been invented. Sharp cuts to science 
     and technology are not the answer and the Committee hopes the 
     Department will reconsider for fiscal year 2004.
       Within available funds, the Committee provides $7,000,000 
     for the Western Environmental Technology Office; $3,150,000 
     to conduct advanced conceptual design of the Subsurface 
     Geosciences Laboratory; $6,000,000 for the Subsurface Science 
     Research Institute (operated by the Inland Northwest Research 
     Alliance and INEEL); $5,000,000 for the National Spent 
     Nuclear Fuel program; $6,000,000 for the Diagnostic 
     Instrumentation and Analysis Laboratory; $3,000,000 to 
     continue micro-sensing technology development and prototype 
     development and prototype deployment for the Underground Test 
     Area; and $4,350,000 for the University Research Programs in 
     Robotics.
       An additional $5,000,000 is provided to establish the 
     Critical Infrastructure Testbed at INEEL to implement the 
     recommendations of the Energy Infrastructure Assurance Task 
     Force.
       Within available funds, the Committee provides additional 
     funding of $7,500,000 to INEEL for the research and 
     development of technologies to address environmental 
     challenges.
       The Committee urges the Department to continue its previous 
     commitment to seek alternative cost-effective technologies 
     from outside the Department in cleaning up legacy waste. The 
     Committee is aware that the international agreement with AEA 
     Technology has been successful in accomplishing this vital 
     task and urges the Department to expand use of this 
     Agreement.
       The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 for basic 
     science experiments requiring the specialized underground 
     environment of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, including 
     continuation of evaluation of the mass of the neutrino 
     through study of double beta decay of xenon-136 as initiated 
     in fiscal year 2002. The Committee recommends close 
     coordination between the Office of Science and the Assistant 
     Secretary for Environmental Management to assure that basic 
     science studies at WIPP do not interfere with the TRU waste 
     responsibilities of WIPP. The Committee also notes with 
     concern that funds provided to initiate this work in fiscal 
     year 2002 were not released by the Department until well into 
     that fiscal year, seriously jeopardizing progress. Therefore, 
     the Committee directs that funds be promptly released in 
     fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee agrees with DOE's testimony that proven 
     innovative technology should be deployed in clean-up 
     operations as quickly as possible. As in previous years, the 
     Committee continues to support proving out the advanced 
     vitrification technology, which holds the potential to 
     significantly lower clean-up costs and future appropriation 
     requirements. The advanced vitrification system also 
     represents technology and innovation which have been 
     invented, developed, and produced in the United States and 
     should be a national security priority for government-funded 
     nuclear waste management programs.
       Therefore, the Committee directs the Department, from 
     within available funds, to develop the vitrification-in-the-
     final-disposal-container AVS system in accordance with the 
     work plan.
       Finally, the Department is directed to renew its 
     cooperative agreement with the University of Nevada-Las Vegas 
     through its Research Foundation.


                           EXCESS FACILITIES

       The Committee recommendation for excess facilities is 
     $1,300,000, which is the same as the budget request. These 
     funds are provided to manage the transfer for the final 
     disposition of excess contaminated physical facilities 
     leading to significant risk and cost reductions. In fiscal 
     year 2003, these funds are to be used for the transfer of 
     excess facilities at the Pantex Plant, Savannah River Site, 
     and the Y-12 Plant from other DOE organizations.


                               multi-site

       The Committee recommendation includes $479,871,000 for 
     multi-site activities.
       This program account supports management and oversight for 
     various crosscutting Environmental Management and Department 
     initiatives, including the program's contribution to the 
     Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund.
       Within available funds, the Committee provides $14,000,000 
     for the National Energy Technology Laboratory to support the 
     implementation of an integrated program for closing small DOE 
     clean-up sites and to serve as the DOE field service center 
     for the long-term stewardship of former DOE sites in the 
     eastern United States. The Committee further directs that no 
     action shall be taken

[[Page 756]]

     to diminish the fiscal year 2002 Environmental Management 
     employee levels at NETL in any was as the Laboratory's 
     workload transitions from the Science and Technology program.
       The Department shall continue its support of WERC, the 
     Consortium for Environmental Education and Technology 
     Development, at current year levels consistent with its 
     contractual obligations and shall extend the Tribal Colleges 
     Initiative grant, involving Crownpoint Institute of 
     Technology, Dine College, Southwestern Indian Polytechnic 
     Institute, to develop high-quality environmental programs at 
     tribal colleges.
       Within available funds, the Committee provides additional 
     funding of $7,500,000 to INEEL for the research and 
     development of technologies to address environmental 
     challenges.


                        SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

       The Committee recommendation for safeguards and security is 
     $228,260,000, the same as the budget request.


                           Program Direction

       The Committee recommendation for program direction totals 
     $324,000,000, a reduction of $20,000,000 from the budget 
     request.
       Program direction provides the overall direction and 
     administrative support for the environmental management 
     programs of the Department of Energy.


                          FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS

       The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental 
     Restoration and Waste Management includes a funding 
     adjustment of $70,000,000 for use of prior year balances and 
     anticipated schedule slippage. The budget request proposed a 
     $34,000,000 use of prior year balances. Due to the difficulty 
     the Department has had in some cases reaching final 
     performance management plans, the limitations of the 
     continuing resolution, and the resulting delay in the ability 
     of the Department to initiate all planned acceleration and 
     reform activities, the Committee recommendation includes an 
     additional reduction for anticipated schedule slippage of 
     $36,000,000.
       The Committee recommendation includes the $4,347,000 
     security charge for reimbursable work included in the budget 
     request.

                   Defense Facility Closure Projects

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,092,878,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,091,314,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,125,314,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,125,314,000 
     for the site closure program, an increase of $34,000,000 over 
     the request.
       The ``Site closure'' account includes funding for sites 
     where the Environmental Management program has established a 
     goal of completing the cleanup mission by the end of fiscal 
     year 2006. After the cleanup mission is complete at a site, 
     no further DOE mission is envisioned, except for limited 
     long-term surveillance and maintenance. This account provides 
     funding to cleanup the Rocky Flats, Fernald, Mound, 
     Ashtabula, and Columbus sites.
       The Committee recommendation includes additional funding 
     above the administration's request to maintain the 2006 
     closure goal at the following sites in Ohio: $25,000,000 for 
     Fernald; $4,000,000 for the Mound site; $5,000,000 for the 
     Columbus Environmental Management project.

             Defense Environmental Management Privatization

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$153,537,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................158,399,000
Committee recommendation....................................158,339,000

       An appropriation of $158,339,000 is recommended for the 
     environmental management privatization initiative.


                        recommendation summaries

       Details of the Committee's recommendations are included in 
     the table at the end of this title.

                        Other Defense Activities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$544,044,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................468,664,000
Committee recommendation....................................537,664,000


                     ENERGY SECURITY AND ASSURANCE

       The Committee recommendation for Energy Security and 
     Assurance is $56,686,000. This program supports the national 
     security of the United States by working to protect the 
     Nation against severe energy supply disruptions by working 
     with the private sector and the National Infrastructure 
     Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC) to provide technical 
     response support during an emergency. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $5,000,000 for a pilot project in 
     Washington, DC, to be carried out in conjunction with the 
     local power provider and the Washington Metropolitan Council 
     of Governments, to protect and harden electricity 
     infrastructure in the Nation's Capital, an area uniquely 
     susceptible to terrorist attack.
       The Committee recommendation includes a total of 
     $30,000,000 in support of the National Infrastructure 
     Simulation and Analysis Center. This funding will enable the 
     continuation of work authorized in the U.S.A. Patriot Act to 
     develop sophisticated models and simulation capabilities for 
     critical infrastructures. The additional resources are to be 
     available for additional operations, construction of general 
     plant projects and acquisition of equipment to support the 
     Center.
       The Committee recommendation also includes $16,000,000 for 
     the National Energy Technology Laboratory to assist the 
     Office of Energy Assurance in support of research and 
     development to monitor and protect the physical assets of the 
     U.S. energy infrastructure, including power plants, 
     pipelines, transmissions lines, gaseous and liquid fuel 
     storage, depots, processing plants, and refineries.
       The Committee strongly urges the Department, when 
     conducting critical infrastructure assessments, to use 
     entities with a proven global information technology 
     infrastructure, and with experience in cyber-security and 
     energy information management.


                              Intelligence

       The Committee recommendation totals $41,246,000 for 
     intelligence.
       The Office of Intelligence provides information and 
     technical analysis on international arms proliferation, 
     foreign nuclear programs, and other energy-related matters to 
     policymakers in the NNSA, the Department and other U.S. 
     Government agencies. The focus of the Department's 
     intelligence analysis and reporting is on emerging 
     proliferant nations, nuclear technology transfers, foreign 
     nuclear materials production, and proliferation implications 
     of the breakup of the former Soviet Union.


                                security

       The Committee recommendation for security and emergency 
     operations is $185,515,000.
       Nuclear Safeguards.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $91,102,000 for nuclear safeguards.
       Security Investigations.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides $45,870,000, the amount of the budget request.
       Program Direction.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $48,543,000 for program direction.
       Coordination with local communities.--The Committee 
     recognizes the unique emergency response role carried out by 
     local governments adjacent to Departmental facilities and 
     directs the Department to use available resources to improve 
     local government emergency response capabilities through 
     better communications and stronger coordination of training 
     and response activities.


            independent oversight and performance assurance

       The Committee recommendation provides $22,430,000 for 
     independent oversight and performance assurance, the amount 
     of the budget request.
       The Independent Oversight and Performance Assurance program 
     provides independent evaluation and oversight of safeguards, 
     security, emergency management and cyber security for the 
     Department at the Secretary's direction.


                          Counterintelligence

       An appropriation of $45,955,000, the amount of the request, 
     is provided for the counterintelligence activities of the 
     Department of Energy.
       The Counterintelligence program has the mission of 
     enhancing the protection of sensitive technologies, 
     information, and expertise against foreign intelligence, 
     industrial intelligence, and terrorist attempts to acquire 
     nuclear weapons information or advanced technologies from the 
     National Laboratories.


                     environment, safety and health

       The Committee recommendation provided $114,041,000 for 
     Environmental, Safety and Health activities including 
     $17,149,000 for program direction. The mission of the Office 
     of Environmental, Safety and Health is to protect the health 
     and safety of Department of Energy workers, the public, and 
     the environment and is to be the Department's independent 
     advocate for safety, health and the environment.
       The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 to 
     continue the DOE worker records digitization project through 
     the Research Foundation at the University of Nevada-Las 
     Vegas.
       The Committee continues to be concerned that the Department 
     has failed to recognize the importance of automating records 
     management processes and continues to encumber extraordinary 
     costs by employing labor intensive procedures in support of 
     these requirements. Though the Committee recommended a 
     Department-wide standardization of processes to ensure data 
     preservation and access, the Committee is not aware of a 
     comprehensive coordinated effort being undertaken within the 
     Department. The Committee is also aware that even within the 
     Environmental Safety & Health organization, parallel 
     activities were undertaken to digitize worker records while 
     another part of the organization sought the digitization of 
     similar worker records to support the Employee Compensation 
     Initiative. To the extent that there is a desire to digitize 
     records in support of the ECI, the Committee strongly 
     encourages the Department to utilize the existing program at 
     UNLV.
       The Committee is concerned that the Department is waivering 
     in its commitment to medical screening and health studies of 
     current and former workers. Many of these medical screenings 
     are required by law. The

[[Page 757]]

     Committee expects the Department to expend $60,000,000, a 
     slight increase above the current year rather than the 
     $7,000,000 cut proposed by the Administration, on health 
     studies.
       The Committee recommends $5,200,000, an increase of 
     $4,150,000 above the request, for medical monitoring at the 
     gaseous diffusion plants at Paducah, Kentucky, Portsmouth, 
     Ohio, and Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This will fully fund, as 
     required by law, the worker screening program for both 
     current and former workers. The Committee strongly supports 
     and requires the continued use of helical low-dose CAT 
     scanning for early lung cancer detection in workers with 
     elevated risks of lung cancer. Such tests may detect lung 
     cancers at an early stage even when they are not visible with 
     conventional x-rays. The program in place at the gaseous 
     diffusion plants is successfully identifying early lung 
     cancers at a stage when they are treatable and can be 
     expected to dramatically increase survival rates. The 
     recommendation also includes $1,000,000 for health studies at 
     the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant.
       The Committee directs the Department to initiate a 
     beryllium screening and outreach program for those workers 
     employed at vendors in the Worcester, Massachusetts, area who 
     supplied beryllium to the Atomic Energy Commission for use in 
     the nuclear weapons program. The DOE is directed to expedite 
     the screening program by using one of the DOE's existing 
     former worker medical screening program providers. The 
     Committee recommends $250,000 for this program.
       Energy Employees Compensation Initiative.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $16,000,000, the amount of the 
     request, for the Energy Employees Compensation Initiative. 
     Title 36 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2001 
     (Public Law 106-398) established the Energy Employees 
     Occupational Illness Compensation program to provide benefits 
     to DOE contractor workers made ill as a result of exposures 
     from nuclear weapons production. The Department is 
     responsible for establishing procedures to assist workers in 
     filing compensation claims.
       The Committee understands that a proposed final rule 
     implementing Part D of the Energy Employees Occupational 
     Illness Compensation program is currently under review within 
     the Administration. Any final rule implementing Part D should 
     prohibit contractor challenges, specify that a majority 
     determination of the Physicians' Panel is sufficient, and 
     rely on the independent judgment of a physicians' panel with 
     respect to the burden of proof and medical causation.


                    Worker and Community Transition

       The Committee has provided an appropriation of $25,683,000 
     for these activities for fiscal year 2003. This is the same 
     as the budget request.
       The Worker and Community Transition budget provides funding 
     for activities associated with enhanced benefits beyond those 
     required by contract, existing company policy or collective 
     bargaining agreements at defense nuclear facilities. The 
     goals of the program are to mitigate the impacts on workers 
     and communities from contractor work force restructuring, and 
     to assist community planning for all site conversions, while 
     managing the transition to the reduced work force that will 
     better meet ongoing mission requirements through the 
     application of best business practices.


           NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

       The Committee recommendation includes $50,587,000 for 
     National Security Programs Administrative support. This fund 
     pays for departmental services that are provided in support 
     of the National Nuclear Security Administration.


                     Office of Hearings and Appeals

       An appropriation of $2,933,000 is recommended for the 
     Office of Hearings and Appeals. The Office of Hearings and 
     Appeals conducts all of the Department's adjudicative process 
     and provides various administrative remedies as may be 
     required. The goal is to promote successful and uninterrupted 
     DOE operations through the deliberate, expeditious, and 
     equitable resolution of all claims of adverse impact 
     emanating from the operations of the Department.

                     Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$280,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................315,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................280,000,000

       The Committee recommends $280,000,000 for defense nuclear 
     waste disposal.


                        RECOMMENDATION SUMMARIES

       Details of the Committee's recommendations are included in 
     the table at the end of this title.

                    Power Marketing Administrations

       Public Law 95-91 transferred to the Department of Energy 
     the power marketing functions under section 5 of the Flood 
     Control Act of 1944 and all other functions of the Department 
     of the Interior with respect to the Bonneville Power 
     Administration, Southeastern Power Administration, 
     Southwestern Power Administration, and the power marketing 
     functions of the Bureau of Reclamation, now included in the 
     Western Area Power Administration.
       All Power Marketing Administrations except Bonneville are 
     funded annually with appropriations, and related receipts are 
     deposited in the Treasury. Bonneville operations are self-
     financed under authority of Public Law 93-454, the Federal 
     Columbia River Transmission System Act of 1974, which 
     authorizes Bonneville to use its revenues to finance 
     operating costs, maintenance and capital construction, and 
     sell bonds to the Treasury if necessary to finance any 
     remaining capital program requirements.
       Purchase power and wheeling.--The Committee is recommending 
     the elimination of the phase out by the end of fiscal year 
     2004 of the use of receipts by the Southeastern Power 
     Administration, the Southwestern Power Administration, and 
     the Western Area Power Administration for purchase power and 
     wheeling.
       This approach was originally proposed in the 
     Administration's fiscal year 2001 budget request and endorsed 
     in the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 
     Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 106-377). In recognition of the 
     Western energy crisis during the previous year, the Committee 
     did not adhere to the Public Law 106-377 limitations on 
     purchase power and wheeling in fiscal year 2002, with the 
     largest increase being for the Western Area Power 
     Administration. The budget request for fiscal year 2003 
     proposed resuming the phase-out of purchase power and 
     wheeling along the schedule contained in Public Law 106-377. 
     However, the Committee finds that there is no compelling 
     reason to continue the phase out of purchase power and 
     wheeling, particularly since this activity is budget neutral.
       The Committee recommendation for fiscal year 2003 maintains 
     purchase power and wheeling activities at the fiscal year 
     2002 level. The Committee will continue to establish ceilings 
     on the use of receipts for purchase power and wheeling, and 
     also establish the amount of offsetting collections.


                  bonneville power administration fund

       The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is the Federal 
     electric power marketing agency in the Pacific Northwest, a 
     300,000-square-mile service area that encompasses Oregon, 
     Washington, Idaho, western Montana, and small portions of 
     adjacent Western States in the Columbia River drainage basin. 
     Bonneville markets hydroelectric power from 31 Corps of 
     Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation projects, as well as 
     thermal energy from non-Federal generating facilities in the 
     region. Bonneville also markets and exchanges surplus 
     electric power inter-regionally over the Pacific Northwest-
     Pacific Southwest Intertie with California, and in Canada 
     over inter-connections with utilities in British Columbia.
       Bonneville constructs, operates, and maintains the Nation's 
     largest high-voltage transmission system, consisting of over 
     15,000 circuit-miles of transmission line and 324 substations 
     with an installed capacity of 21,500 megawatts. BPA is the 
     largest power wholesaler in the northwest and provides about 
     46 percent of the region's electric energy supply and about 
     three-fourths of the region's electric power transmission 
     capacity.
       Public Law 93-454, the Federal Columbia River Transmission 
     System Act of 1974, placed Bonneville on a self-financed 
     basis. With the passage in 1980 of Public Law 96-501, the 
     Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation 
     Act, Bonneville's responsibilities were expanded to include 
     meeting the net firm load growth of the region, investing in 
     cost-effective, regionwide energy conservation, and acquiring 
     generating resources to meet these requirements.
       Borrowing Authority.--Bonneville Power Administration 
     presently has available $3,750,000,000 in permanent borrowing 
     authority, authorized by the Transmission System Act (Public 
     Law 93-454). For fiscal year 2003, the Committee 
     recommendation includes an estimate of use of $630,800,000 of 
     authorized borrowing authority, the same as the budget 
     request and $256,300,000 more than fiscal year 2002. This 
     borrowing authority is available for capital investments in 
     power systems (including fish and wildlife measures), 
     transmission systems, and capital equipment. Bonneville 
     forecasts that it will fully utilize its remaining borrowing 
     authority during fiscal year 2004.
       The Administration has submitted a legislative proposal to 
     increase the current Bonneville borrowing authority by 
     $700,000,000, for a new total borrowing authority of 
     $4,450,000,000. The Committee recommendation does not include 
     this additional borrowing authority at this time because the 
     matter is presently committed to the House-Senate conference 
     on energy legislation.
       Limitation on direct loans.--The Committee recommends that 
     no new direct loans be made in fiscal year 2003.
       Budget revisions and notification.--The Committee expects 
     Bonneville to adhere to the borrowing authority estimates 
     recommended by the Congress and promptly inform the Committee 
     of any exceptional circumstances which would necessitate the 
     need for Bonneville to obligate borrowing authority in excess 
     of such amounts.
       The Committee recommendation includes $34,463,000 for 
     purchase power and wheeling activities, the same as the 
     current year and consistent with the terms described above.

[[Page 758]]




      operation and maintenance, southeastern power administration

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,891,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,534,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,534,000

       The Southeastern Power Administration markets hydroelectric 
     power produced at Corps of Engineers projects in 11 
     Southeastern States. There are 23 projects now in operation 
     with an installed capacity of 3,092 megawatts. Southeastern 
     does not own or operate any transmission facilities and 
     carries out its marketing program by utilizing the existing 
     transmission systems of the power utilities in the area. This 
     is accomplished through transmission arrangements between 
     Southeastern and each of the area utilities with transmission 
     lines connected to the projects. The utility agrees to 
     deliver specified amounts of Federal power to customers of 
     the Government, and Southeastern agrees to compensate the 
     utility for the wheeling service performed.


      operation and maintenance, southwestern power administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$28,038,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................27,378,000
Committee recommendation.....................................27,378,000

       The Southwestern Power Administration is the marketing 
     agent for the power generated at Corps of Engineers' 
     hydroelectric plants in the six-State area of Kansas, 
     Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana with a 
     total installed capacity of 2,158 megawatts. It operates and 
     maintains some 1,380 miles of transmission lines, 24 
     generating projects, and 24 substations, and sells its power 
     at wholesale primarily to publicly and cooperatively owned 
     electric distribution utilities.
       The Committee recommendation includes $2,200,000 for 
     purchase power and wheeling activities, the same as the 
     current year and consistent with the terms described above.


 construction, rehabilitation, operation and maintenance western area 
                          power administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$171,938,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................162,758,000
Committee recommendation....................................168,858,000

       The Western Area Power Administration is responsible for 
     marketing electric power generated by the Bureau of 
     Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers, and the International 
     Boundary and Water Commission which operate hydropower 
     generating plants in 15 Central and Western States 
     encompassing a 1.3-million-square-mile geographic area. 
     Western is also responsible for the operation and maintenance 
     of almost 17,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines 
     with 258 substations. Western distributes power generated by 
     55 plants with a maximum operating capacity of 10,576 
     megawatts.
       Western, through its power marketing program, must secure 
     revenues sufficient to meet the annual costs of operation and 
     maintenance of the generating and transmission facilities, 
     purchased power, wheeling, and other expenses, in order to 
     repay all of the power investment with interest, and to repay 
     that portion of the Government's irrigation and other 
     nonpower investments which are beyond the water users' 
     repayment capability. Under the Colorado River Basin Power 
     Marketing Fund, which encompasses the Colorado River Basin, 
     Fort Peck, and Colorado River storage facilities, all 
     operation and maintenance and power marketing expenses are 
     financed from revenues.
       Of the total resources available to the Western Power 
     Administration, $6,100,000 shall be transferred to the Utah 
     Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission.
       The Committee recommendation includes $186,124,000 for 
     purchase power and wheeling activities, the same as the 
     current year and consistent with the terms described above.


           falcon and amistad operating and maintenance fund

       Creation of the Falcon and Amistad Operating and 
     Maintenance Fund was directed by the Foreign Relations 
     Authorization Act, fiscal years 1994-95. This legislation 
     also directed that the fund be administered by the 
     Administrator of the Western Area Power Administration for 
     use by the Commissioner of the United States Section of the 
     International Boundary and Water Commission to defray 
     operation, maintenance, and emergency costs for the 
     hydroelectric facilities at the Falcon and Amistad Dams in 
     Texas.
       The Committee recommendation is $2,734,000, the same as the 
     budget request.


                        recommendation summaries

       Details of the Committee's recommendations are included in 
     the table at the end of this title.

                  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$184,155,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................192,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................192,000,000


                salaries and expenses--revenues applied

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$184,155,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................192,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................192,000,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $192,000,000, the 
     amount of the budget request, for the Federal Energy 
     Regulatory Commission (FERC). Revenues are established at a 
     rate equal to the amount provided for program activities, 
     resulting in a net appropriation of zero.
       The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulates key 
     interstate aspects of the electric power, natural gas, oil 
     pipeline, and hydroelectric industries.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee's detailed funding recommendation for 
     programs in Title III, Department of Energy, are contained in 
     the following table.

                                              DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      Budget         Committee
                                  Project title                                      estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  ENERGY SUPPLY
 
                           RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES
 
Renewable energy technologies:
    Biomass/biofuels energy systems.............................................          86,005         100,000
    Geothermal technology development...........................................          26,500          37,000
    Hydrogen research...........................................................          39,881          45,000
    Hydropower..................................................................           7,489           7,489
    Solar energy................................................................          87,625          95,000
    Wind energy systems.........................................................          44,000          50,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Renewable energy technologies......................................         291,500         334,489
 
Electric energy systems and storage.............................................          70,447          75,000
 
Renewable support and implementation:
    Departmental energy management..............................................           3,000           3,000
    International renewable energy program......................................           6,500           6,500
    Renewable energy production incentive program...............................           4,000           5,000
    Renewable Indian energy resources...........................................           8,307           9,307
    Renewable program support...................................................           2,059           6,059
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Renewable support and implementation...............................          23,866          29,866
 
National renewable energy laboratory............................................           4,200           6,000
 
Construction: 02-E-001 Project engineering and design, NREL Golden, CO..........             800             800
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, National renewable energy laboratory...............................           5,000           6,800
 
Program direction...............................................................          16,187          16,907
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Renewable Energy Resources......................................         407,000         463,062
                                                                                 ===============================
Use of prior year balances......................................................  ..............         -15,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES.........................................         407,000         448,062
                                                                                 ===============================
                                 NUCLEAR ENERGY
 
Advanced radioisotope power system..............................................  ..............  ..............

[[Page 759]]

 
Isotopes:
    Isotope support and production..............................................  ..............  ..............
    Construction................................................................  ..............  ..............
    99-E-201 Isotope production facility (LANL).................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Isotope support and production..................................  ..............  ..............
 
Offsetting collections..........................................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Isotopes...........................................................  ..............  ..............
 
University reactor fuel assistance and support..................................          17,500          19,500
 
Research and development:
    Nuclear energy plant optimization...........................................  ..............           5,000
    Nuclear energy research initiative..........................................          25,000          29,000
    Nuclear energy technologies.................................................          46,500          48,500
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Research and development...........................................          71,500          82,500
 
Fast flux test facility (FFTF)..................................................          36,100          36,100
 
Radiological facilities management:
    Radiological facilities.....................................................          78,977          88,638
    ANL-West operations.........................................................  ..............  ..............
    Test reactor area landlord..................................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal..................................................................          78,977          88,638
 
Construction:
    99-E-2-1 Isotope production facility (LANL).................................           1,721           1,721
    99-E-200 Test reactor area electrical utility upgrade, Idaho National                  1,840           1,840
     Engineering Lab, ID........................................................
    95-E-201 Test reactor area fire and life safety improvements, Idaho National             500             500
     Engineering Lab, ID........................................................
                                                                                 -------------------------------
        Subtotal, Construction..................................................           4,061           4,061
                                                                                 -------------------------------
        Total, Radiological facilities management...............................          83,038          92,699
 
Nuclear facilities management:
    EBR-II shutdown.............................................................  ..............  ..............
    Disposition of spent fuel and legacy materials..............................  ..............  ..............
    Disposition technology activities...........................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Nuclear facilities management......................................  ..............  ..............
 
Advanced fuel cycle.............................................................          18,221          77,870
Program direction...............................................................          23,439          23,439
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nuclear Energy..................................................         249,798         332,108
                                                                                 ===============================
Use of prior year balances......................................................  ..............          -8,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY.....................................................         249,798         324,108
                                                                                 ===============================
                         ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH
 
Office of Environment, Safety and Health (non-defense)..........................          10,340           5,340
Program direction...............................................................          18,871          13,871
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY AND HEALTH.....................................          29,211          19,211
                                                                                 ===============================
                            ENERGY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES
 
Technical information management program........................................           1,400           1,400
    Program direction...........................................................           6,525           5,525
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, ENERGY SUPPORT ACTIVITIES..........................................           7,925           6,925
                                                                                 ===============================
                          ENERGY SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE
 
Energy Supply Infrastructure....................................................  ..............          17,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, ENERGY SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE.......................................  ..............          17,000
                                                                                 ===============================
      Subtotal, Energy supply...................................................         693,934         815,306
                                                                                 ===============================
General reduction...............................................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, ENERGY SUPPLY......................................................         693,934         815,306
                                                                                 ===============================
                      NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Site closure....................................................................  ..............  ..............
Site/project completion.........................................................          51,272          67,272
Post 2006 completion............................................................         112,887         123,887
Fast flux test facility (FFTF)..................................................  ..............  ..............
Long-term stewardship...........................................................  ..............  ..............
Excess facilities...............................................................           1,841           1,841
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Non-Defense Environmental Management............................         166,000         193,000
                                                                                 ===============================
Use of prior year balances......................................................  ..............         -17,000
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT...............................         166,000         176,000
                                                                                 ===============================
                 URANIUM FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND REMEDIATION
 
Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund:
    Decontamination and decommissioning.........................................         234,523         333,523
    Uranium/thorium reimbursement...............................................           1,000           1,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Uranium enrichment D&D fund........................................         235,523         334,523
 
Other Uranium Activities:
    Maintenance and pre-existing liabilities....................................         146,631         136,631
    02-U-101 Depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion project, Paducah, KY and    ..............  ..............
     Portsmouth, OH.............................................................
    96-U-201 DUF6 cylinder storage yard, Paducah, KY............................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Other uranium activities...........................................         146,631         136,631
 

[[Page 760]]

 
Use of prior year balances......................................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, URANIUM FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND REMEDIATION.....................         382,154         471,154
 
                                     SCIENCE
 
High Energy Physics:
    Research & Technology.......................................................         258,545         263,555
    Facility operations.........................................................         446,352         446,332
    Construction: 98-G-304 Neutrinos at the main injector, Fermilab.............          20,093          20,093
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, High energy physics................................................         724,990         729,980
 
Nuclear physics.................................................................         382,370         387,370
Biological and environmental research...........................................         504,215         531,215
Construction: 01-E-300 Laboratory for Comparative and Functional Genomics, ORNL.  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Biological and environmental research..............................         504,215         531,215
 
Basic energy sciences:
    Research:
        Materials sciences and engineering research.............................         547,883         553,383
        Chemical sciences, geosciences and energy biosciences...................         220,146         234,146
        Engineering and geosciences.............................................  ..............  ..............
        Energy biosciences......................................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Research....................................................         768,029         787,529
 
Construction:
    03-SC-002 Project engineering & design (PED) SLAC...........................           6,000           6,000
    03-R-312 Center for nanophase materials sciences, ORNL......................          24,000          24,000
    03-R-313 Center for Integrated Nenotechnology...............................  ..............           4,500
    02-SC-002 Project engineering and design (VL)...............................          11,000          12,000
    99-E-334 Spallation neutron source (ORNL)...................................         210,571         210,571
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction....................................................         251,571         257,071
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Basic energy sciences..............................................       1,019,600       1,044,600
 
Advanced scientific computing research..........................................         169,625         169,625
Energy research analyses........................................................           1,020           1,020
Science laboratories infrastructure:
    Infrastructure support......................................................           1,020           1,020
    Oak Ridge landlord..........................................................           5,079           5,079
    Excess facilities disposal..................................................           5,055           5,055
    Construction:
        03-SC-001 Science laboratories infrastructure project engineering and              3,355           3,355
         design (PED), various loc..............................................
        MEL-001 Multiprogram energy laboratory infrastructure projects, various           28,226          28,226
         locations..............................................................
        02-SC-001 Multiprogram energy laboratories, project engineering design,   ..............  ..............
         various locations......................................................
                                                                                 -------------------------------
            Subtotal, Construction..............................................          31,581          31,581
                                                                                 -------------------------------
            Total, Science laboratories infrastructure..........................          42,735          42,735
 
Fusion energy sciences program..................................................         257,310         259,310
Safeguards and security.........................................................          48,127          48,127
Science workforce development...................................................  ..............  ..............
Science program direction:
    Field offices...............................................................          70,163          65,000
    Headquarters................................................................          58,224          64,377
    Science education...........................................................           5,460           5,460
    Technical information management program....................................  ..............  ..............
    Energy research analyses....................................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Science program direction..........................................         133,847         134,837
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Science.........................................................       3,283,839       3,348,819
                                                                                 ===============================
General reduction...............................................................  ..............         -14,980
Less security charge for reimbursable work......................................          -4,383          -4,383
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, SCIENCE............................................................       3,279,456       3,329,456
                                                                                 ===============================
                             NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL
 
Repository program..............................................................         146,713  ..............
Program direction...............................................................          62,989          56,000
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL.............................................         209,702          56,000
                                                                                 ===============================
                           DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
 
Administrative operations:
    Salaries and expenses:
        Office of the Secretary.................................................           4,645           4,645
        Board of contract appeals...............................................             743             743
        Chief information officer...............................................          30,862          28,862
        Congressional and intergovernmental affairs.............................           4,953           4,953
        Economic impact and diversity...........................................           5,121           5,121
        General counsel.........................................................          22,813          21,813
        International affairs...................................................  ..............  ..............
        Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation.............................         106,536          94,536
        Policy office...........................................................  ..............  ..............
        Policy and international affairs........................................          16,840          14,840
        Public affairs..........................................................           4,531           4,531
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Salaries and expenses.......................................         197,044         180,044
 
    Program support:
        Minority economic impact................................................           1,400           1,400
        Policy analysis and system studies......................................             800             800
        Energy security and assurance...........................................           2,000           2,000
        Environmental policy studies............................................           1,200           1,200
        Engineering and construction management reviews.........................  ..............  ..............
        Cybersecurity and secure communications.................................          32,027          32,027
        Corporate management information program................................          20,420           8,420
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Program support.............................................          57,847          45,847
                                                                                 -------------------------------

[[Page 761]]

 
          Total, Administrative operations......................................         254,891         225,891
 
Cost of work for others.........................................................          69,916          69,916
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Departmental Administration.....................................         324,807         295,807
                                                                                 ===============================
Use of prior year balances and other adjustments................................  ..............         -10,000
Funding from other defense activities...........................................         -25,587         -50,587
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Departmental administration (gross)................................         299,220         235,000
                                                                                 ===============================
Miscellaneous revenues..........................................................        -137,524        -137,524
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION (net)..................................         161,696          97,696
                                                                                 ===============================
                           OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
 
Office of Inspector General.....................................................          37,671          37,671
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL........................................          37,671          37,671
                                                                                 ===============================
                        ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
                    NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
 
                               WEAPONS ACTIVITIES
 
Directed stockpile work:
    Stockpile research and development..........................................         467,149         467,149
    Stockpile maintenance.......................................................         401,157         401,157
    Stockpile evaluation........................................................         197,184         197,184
    Dismantlement/disposal......................................................          24,378          24,378
    Production support..........................................................         137,706         137,706
    Field engineering, training and manuals.....................................           6,893           6,893
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Directed stockpile work............................................       1,234,467       1,234,467
 
Campaigns:
    Science campaigns:
        Primary certification...................................................          47,159          47,159
        Dynamic materials properties............................................          87,594          90,594
        Advanced radiography....................................................          52,925          82,925
        Secondary certification and nuclear systems margins.....................          47,790          47,790
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Science campaigns...........................................         235,468         268,468
 
    Engineering campaigns:
        Enhanced surety.........................................................          37,713          32,000
        Weapons system engineering certification................................          27,007          27,007
        Nuclear survivability...................................................          23,394          23,394
        Enhanced surveillance...................................................          77,155          77,155
        Advanced design and production technologies.............................          74,141          74,141
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Engineering campaigns.......................................         239,410         233,697
 
Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield.............................         237,748         273,248
    Construction: 96-D-111 National ignition facility, LLNL.....................         214,045         214,045
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, ILF Ignition....................................................         451,793         487,293
 
Advanced simulation and computing...............................................         669,527         649,000
    Construction:
        01-D-101 Distributed information systems laboratory, SNL, Livermore, CA.          13,305          13,305
        00-D-103, Terascale simulation facility, LLNL, Livermore, CA............          35,030          35,030
        00-D-105 Strategic computing complex, LANL, Los Alamos, NM..............  ..............  ..............
        00-D-107 Joint computational engineering laboratory, SNL, Albuquerque,             7,000           7,000
         NM.....................................................................
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction................................................          55,335          55,335
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Advanced simulation and computing...........................         724,862         704,335
 
Pit manufacturing and certification.............................................         194,484         246,000
Readiness campaigns:
    Stockpile readiness.........................................................          61,027          61,027
    High explosives manufacturing and weapons assembly/disassembly readiness....          12,093          12,093
    Non-nuclear readiness.......................................................          22,398          22,398
    Materials readiness.........................................................  ..............  ..............
    Tritium readiness...........................................................          56,134          42,734
    Construction: 98-D-125 Tritium extraction facility, SR......................          70,165          70,165
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Tritium readiness...............................................         126,299         112,899
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Readiness campaigns.............................................         221,817         208,417
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Campaigns..........................................................       2,067,834       2,148,210
 
Readiness in technical base and facilities:
    Operations of facilities....................................................         949,920       1,026,000
    Program readiness...........................................................         208,089         218,000
    Special projects............................................................          37,744          50,500
    Material recycle and recovery...............................................          98,816          98,816
    Containers..................................................................          17,721          17,721
    Storage.....................................................................          14,593          14,593
    Nuclear weapons incident response...........................................          91,000          96,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Readiness in technical base and fac.............................       1,417,883       1,521,630
 
    Construction:
        03-D-101 Sandia underground reactor facility SURF, SNL, Albuquerque, NM.           2,000           2,000
        03-D-102 LANL Administration Building (LANL)............................  ..............          16,000
        03-D-103 Project engineering and design various locations...............          15,539          15,539
        03-D-121 Gas transfer capacity expansion, Kansas City Plant, Kansas                4,000           4,000
         City, MO...............................................................
        03-D-122 Prototype purification facility, Y-12 plant, Oak Ridge, TN.....          20,800          20,800
        03-D-123 Special nuclear materials requalification, Pantex plant,                  3,000           3,000
         Amarillo, TX...........................................................
        02-D-103 Project engineering and design, various locations..............          27,245          27,245
        02-D-105 Engineering technology complex upgrade, LLNL...................          10,000          10,000
        02-D-107 Electrical power systems safety communications and bus                    7,500           7,500
         upgrades, NV...........................................................
        01-D-103 Project engineering and design (PE&D), various locations.......           6,164  ..............

[[Page 762]]

 
        01-D-107 Atlas relocation, Nevada test site.............................           4,123           4,123
        01-D-108 Microsystems and engineering sciences applications complex               75,000         123,000
         (MESA), SNL............................................................
        01-D-124 HEU materials facility, Y-12 plant, Oak Ridge, TN..............          25,000          25,000
        01-D-126 Weapons Evaluation Test Laboratory Pantex Plant, Amarillo, TX..           8,650           8,650
        01-D-800 Sensitive compartmented information facility, LLNL.............           9,611           9,611
        99-D-103 Isotope sciences facilities, LLNL, Livermore, CA...............           4,011           4,011
        99-D-104 Protection of real property (roof reconstruction--Phase II),              5,915           5,915
         LLNL, Livermore, CA....................................................
        99-D-106 Model validation & system certification center, SNL,             ..............  ..............
         Albuquerque, NM........................................................
        99-D-108 Renovate existing roadways, Nevada Test Site, NV...............  ..............  ..............
        99-D-125 Replace boilers and controls, Kansas City plant, Kansas City,    ..............  ..............
         MO.....................................................................
        99-D-127 Stockpile management restructuring initiative, Kansas City               29,900          29,900
         plant, Kansas City, MO.................................................
        99-D-128 Stockpile management restructuring initiative, Pantex                       407             407
         consolidation, Amarillo, TX............................................
        98-D-123 Stockpile management restructuring initiative, Tritium factory           10,481          10,481
         modernization and consolidation, Savannah River, SC....................
        98-D-124 Stockpile management restructuring initiative, Y-12              ..............  ..............
         consolidation, Oak Ridge, TN...........................................
        97-D-123 Structural upgrades, Kansas City plant, Kansas City, MO........  ..............  ..............
        96-D-102 Stockpile stewardship facilities revitalization (Phase VI),               1,000           1,000
         various locations......................................................
                                                                                 -------------------------------
            Subtotal, Construction..............................................         270,346         328,182
                                                                                 -------------------------------
            Total, Readiness in technical base and facilities...................       1,688,229       1,849,812
 
Facilities and infrastructure recapitalization program..........................         242,512         242,512
Secure transportation asset:
    Operations and equipment....................................................         100,863         100,863
    Program direction...........................................................          52,126          52,126
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Secure transportation asset........................................         152,989         152,989
 
Safeguards and security.........................................................         501,054         501,054
    Construction: 99-D-132 SMRI nuclear material safeguards and security upgrade           8,900           8,900
     project (LANL), Los Alamos, NM.............................................
                                                                                 -------------------------------
        Total, Safeguards and security..........................................         509,954         509,954
                                                                                 -------------------------------
        Subtotal, Weapons activities............................................       5,895,985       6,137,944
Use of prior year balances......................................................  ..............  ..............
General reduction...............................................................  ..............  ..............
Less security charge for reimbursable work......................................         -28,985         -28,985
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Weapons activities..............................................       5,867,000       6,108,959
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-117)...................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES.................................................       5,867,000       6,108,959
                                                                                 ===============================
DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION................................................       5,055,873  ..............
Nonproliferation and verification, R&D..........................................         283,407         293,407
    Construction:
        00-D-192 Nonproliferation and international security center (NISC), LAN.  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Total, Nonproliferation and verification, R&D.........................         283,407         293,407
 
Nonproliferation and international security.....................................          92,668          92,668
Nonproliferation programs with Russia:
    International materials protection, control, and cooperation................         233,077         233,077
    Russian transition initiative...............................................          39,334          39,334
    HEU transparency implementation.............................................          17,229          17,229
    International nuclear safety................................................          14,576          14,576
    Elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production program...................          49,339          49,339
    Fissile materials disposition:
    U.S. surplus materials disposition..........................................         194,000         194,000
    Russian surplus materials disposition.......................................          98,000          98,000
    Construction:
        01-D-407 Highly enriched uranium (HEU) blend down, Savannah River, SC...          30,000          30,000
        99-D-141 Pit disassembly and conversion facility Savannah River, SC.....          33,000          33,000
        99-D-143 Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility, Savannah River, SC......          93,000          93,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction................................................         156,000         156,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Fissile materials disposition...............................         448,000         448,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Total, Nonproliferation programs with Russia..........................         801,555         801,555
 
Program direction...............................................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense nuclear nonproliferation................................       1,177,630       1,187,630
 
Use of prior year balances......................................................         -64,000         -72,000
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-117)...................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION...................................       1,113,630       1,115,630
                                                                                 ===============================
                                 NAVAL REACTORS
 
Naval reactors development......................................................         671,290         671,290
    Construction:
        03-D-201 Cleanroom technology facility, Bettis atomic power lab, West              7,200           7,200
         Mifflin, PA............................................................
        01-D-200 Major office replacement building, Schenectady, NY.............           2,100           2,100
        90-N-102 Expended core facility dry cell project, Naval Reactors                   2,000           2,000
         Facility, ID...........................................................
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction................................................          11,300          11,300
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Total, Naval reactors development.....................................         682,590         682,590
Program direction...............................................................          24,200          24,200
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS.....................................................         706,790         706,790
                                                                                 ===============================
                           OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
 
Office of the Administrator.....................................................         335,929         335,929
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR........................................         335,929         335,929
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION...........................       8,023,349       8,267,308
                                                                                 ===============================
                DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND WASTE MGMT.
 
Site/project completion:
    Operation and maintenance...................................................         779,706         973,106

[[Page 763]]

 
    Construction:
        02-D-402 Intec cathodic protection system expansion project, INEEL,                1,119           1,119
         Idaho Falls, ID........................................................
        02-D-420 Plutonium packaging and stabilization, Savannah River..........           2,000           2,000
        01-D-414 Preliminary project, engineering and design (PE&D), various               5,125           5,125
         locations..............................................................
        99-D-402 Tank farm support services, F&H area, Savannah River site,       ..............  ..............
         Aiken, SC..............................................................
        99-D-404 Health physics instrumentation laboratory (INEL), ID...........  ..............  ..............
        98-D-453 Plutonium stabilization and handling system for PFP, Richland,   ..............  ..............
         WA.....................................................................
        96-D-471 CFC HVAC/chiller retrofit, Savannah River site, Aiken, SC......  ..............  ..............
        86-D-103 Decontamination and waste treatment facility (LLNL), Livermore,  ..............  ..............
         CA.....................................................................
                                                                                 -------------------------------
            Subtotal, Construction..............................................           8,244           8,244
                                                                                 -------------------------------
            Total, Site/project completion......................................         787,950         981,350
 
Post 2006 completion:
    Operation and maintenance...................................................       1,702,241       2,211,240
    Construction: 93-D-187 High-level waste removal from filled waste tanks,              14,870          14,870
     Savannah River, SC.........................................................
    Office of River Protection: Operation and maintenance.......................         226,256         455,256
    Construction:
        03-D-403 Immobilized high-level waste interim storage facility,                    6,363           6,363
         Richland, WA...........................................................
        01-D-416 Hanford waste treatment plant, Richland, WA....................         619,000         619,000
        97-D-402 Tank farm restoration and safe operations, Richland, WA........          25,424          25,424
        94-D-407 Initial tank retrieval systems, Richland, WA...................          20,945          20,945
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Construction................................................         671,732         671,732
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Office of River Protection..................................         897,988       1,126,988
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Total, Post 2006 completion...........................................       2,615,099       3,353,098
 
Uranium enrichment D&D fund contribution........................................  ..............  ..............
Science and technology..........................................................          92,000          77,000
Excess facilities...............................................................           1,300           1,300
Multi-site activities...........................................................         479,871         479,871
Safeguards and security.........................................................         228,260         228,260
Program direction...............................................................         344,000         324,000
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense environmental management................................       4,548,480       5,444,879
 
Use of prior year balances and anticipated schedule slippage....................  ..............         -70,000
General reduction...............................................................  ..............  ..............
Less security charge for reimbursable work......................................          -4,347          -4,347
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-117)...................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRON. RESTORATION AND WASTE MGMT........................       4,544,133       5,370,532
                                                                                 ===============================
                     ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CLEANUP REFORM
 
Environmental management cleanup reform.........................................         800,000  ..............
 
                       DEFENSE FACILITIES CLOSURE PROJECTS
 
Site closure....................................................................       1,054,153       1,088,153
Safeguards and security.........................................................          37,161          37,161
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEFENSE FACILITIES CLOSURE PROJECTS................................       1,091,314       1,125,314
                                                                                 ===============================
                 DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PRIVATIZATION
 
Privatization initiatives, various locations....................................         158,399         158,399
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. PRIVATIZATION..........................         158,399         158,399
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT...................................       6,593,846       6,690,245
                                                                                 ===============================
                            OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES
 
Other national security programs:
    Energy security and assurance:
        Energy security.........................................................          23,411          52,411
        Program direction.......................................................           4,275           4,275
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Energy security and assurance...............................          27,686          56,686
 
    Office of Security:
        Nuclear safeguards and security.........................................          91,102          91,102
        Security investigations.................................................          45,870          45,870
        Corporate management information program................................  ..............  ..............
        Cyber security and secure communications................................  ..............  ..............
        Program direction.......................................................          48,543          48,543
                                                                                 -------------------------------
          Subtotal, Office of Security..........................................         185,515         185,515
 
    Intelligence................................................................          41,246          41,246
    Counterintelligence.........................................................          45,955          45,955
    Independent oversight and performance assurance.............................          22,430          22,430
    Advanced accelerator applications...........................................  ..............  ..............
    Environment, safety and health (Defense)....................................          81,892          96,892
    Program direction--EH.......................................................          17,149          17,149
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Environment, safety & health (Defense)..........................          99,041         114,041
 
    Worker and community transition.............................................          22,965          22,965
    Program direction--WT.......................................................           2,718           2,718
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Worker and community transition.................................          25,683          25,683
 
    National Security programs administrative support...........................          25,587          50,587
    Office of hearings and appeals..............................................           2,933           2,933
                                                                                 -------------------------------
        Subtotal, Other defense activities......................................         476,076         545,076
 
Use of prior year balances......................................................          -6,700          -6,700
Less security charge for reimbursable work......................................            -712            -712
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-117)...................................  ..............  ..............
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES...........................................         468,664         537,664
                                                                                 ===============================

[[Page 764]]

 
                         DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL
 
Defense nuclear waste disposal..................................................         315,000         280,000
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES...................................      15,400,859      15,775,217
                                                                                 ===============================
                         POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS
 
                        SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Purchase power and wheeling.................................................          20,000          34,463
    Program direction...........................................................           4,606           4,606
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance.......................................          24,606          39,069
 
Offsetting collections..........................................................  ..............          -8,000
Offsetting collections (Public Law 106-377).....................................         -20,000         -26,463
Use of prior year balances......................................................             -72             -72
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION..................................           4,534           4,534
                                                                                 ===============================
                        SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Operating expenses..........................................................           3,814           3,814
    Purchase power and wheeling.................................................             288           2,200
    Program direction...........................................................          17,933          17,933
    Construction................................................................           6,031           6,031
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance.......................................          28,066          29,978
 
Offsetting collections..........................................................  ..............          -1,912
Offsetting collections (Public Law 106-377).....................................            -288            -288
Use of prior year balances......................................................            -400            -400
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION..................................          27,378          27,378
                                                                                 ===============================
                        WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION
 
Operation and maintenance:
    Construction and rehabilitation.............................................          17,784          17,784
    System operation and maintenance............................................          37,796          37,796
    Purchase power and wheeling.................................................          30,000         186,124
    Program direction...........................................................         108,378         108,378
    Utah mitigation and conservation............................................  ..............           6,100
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operation and maintenance.......................................         193,958         356,182
 
Offsetting collections..........................................................  ..............        -152,624
Offsetting collections (Public Law 106-377).....................................         -30,000         -33,500
Use of prior year balances......................................................          -1,200          -1,200
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION..................................         162,758         168,858
                                                                                 ===============================
                FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND
 
Operation and maintenance.......................................................           2,734           2,734
                                                                                 ===============================
      TOTAL, POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS....................................         197,404         203,504
                                                                                 ===============================
                      FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
Federal energy regulatory commission............................................         192,000         192,000
FERC revenues...................................................................        -192,000        -192,000
                                                                                 ===============================
    GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY...........................................      20,528,876      20,961,784
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

       The following list of general provisions are recommended by 
     the Committee. The recommendation includes several provisions 
     which have been included in previous Energy and Water 
     Development Appropriations Acts and new provisions as 
     follows:
       Language under section 301 prohibits the use of funds to 
     award, amend or modify a contract in a manner that deviates 
     from the Federal Acquisition Regulations unless on a case-by-
     case basis, a waiver is granted by the Secretary of Energy. 
     Similar language was contained in last year's Energy and 
     Water Development Act, Public Law 107-66.
       Language is included under section 302 which prohibits the 
     use of funds in this Act to develop or implement a workforce 
     restructuring plan or enhanced severance payments and other 
     benefits for Federal employees of the Department of Energy 
     under section 3161 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     of Fiscal Year 1993, Public Law 484. A similar provision was 
     contained in the Energy and Water Development Act, 2002, 
     Public Law 107-66.
       Language is included under section 303 which prohibits the 
     use of funds for severance payments under the worker and 
     community transition program.
       Language is included under section 304 which prohibits the 
     use of funds in this Act to initiate requests for proposals 
     or expression of interest for new programs which have not yet 
     been presented to Congress in the annual budget submission, 
     and which have not yet been approved and funded by Congress. 
     A similar provision was contained in the Energy and Water 
     Development Act, 2002, Public Law 107-66.
       Language is included under section 305 which permits the 
     transfer and merger of unexpended balances of prior 
     appropriations with appropriation accounts established in 
     this bill. A similar provision was contained in the Energy 
     and Water Development Act, 2002, Public Law 107-66.
       Language is included under section 306 which provides that 
     none of the funds in this Act may be used to dispose of 
     transuranic waste in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant which 
     contains concentrations of plutonium in excess of 20 percent 
     by weight for the aggregate of any material category on the 
     date of enactment of this Act, or generated after such date. 
     A similar provision was contained in the Energy and Water 
     Development Act, 2002, Public Law 107-66.
       Language is included under section 307 which provides that 
     the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security 
     Administration may authorize 2 percent of the amount 
     allocated to a nuclear weapons production plant for the 
     production plant to engage in research, development, and 
     demonstration activities with respect to the Engineering and 
     manufacturing capabilities of the plant in order to maintain 
     and enhance such capabilities at the plant. A similar 
     provision was contained in the Energy and Water Development 
     Act, 2002, Public Law 107-66.
       Language is included under section 308 which provides that 
     the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security 
     Administration may authorize 2 percent of the amount 
     allocated for national security operations at the Nevada Test 
     Site for investment in innovative research, development, and 
     demonstration activities with respect to the development, 
     test, and evaluation capabilities necessary for operations 
     and readiness of the Nevada Test Site.

[[Page 765]]

       Language is included under section 309 which provides that 
     funds appropriated in Public Law 107-066 for the Kachemak Bay 
     submarine cable project may be available to reimburse the 
     local sponsor for the Federal share of the project costs 
     assumed by the local sponsor prior to final passage of that 
     Act.
       Language is included under section 310 which provides for 
     the stay and reinstatement of Federal Energy Regulatory 
     Commission license no. 11393.
       Language is included under section 311 which limits the 
     availability of environmental management cleanup reform 
     funding for sites or laboratories except where the Department 
     has entered into a final revised clean-up agreement and a 
     final performance management plan for that site or 
     laboratory.

                     TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                    Appalachian Regional Commission

Appropriations, 2002........................................$71,290,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................66,290,000
Committee recommendation.....................................74,400,000

       The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) is a regional 
     economic development agency established in 1965. It is 
     composed of the Governors of the 13 Appalachian States and a 
     Federal cochairman who is appointed by the President.
       The Committee recommendation for the Appalachian Regional 
     Commission totals $74,400,000, $8,000,000 more than the 
     request.
       The Committee recommendation includes $8,000,000 for the 
     newly authorized telecommunications program within the ARC. 
     This program will broaden the availability of advanced 
     telecommunications services throughout Appalachia.
       Consistent with the administration's budget request, the 
     Committee recommendation does not include funding for ARC 
     highways. Funding for ARC development highways is provided 
     through the Highway Trust Fund in fiscal years 1999 through 
     2004 consistent with provision contained in the Intermodal 
     Surface Transportation Efficiency Act.
       The Committee recognizes the importance of trade and 
     investment opportunities to the Appalachian region, and is 
     encouraged by a preliminary trade report determining that 
     Appalachian firms might find significant trade and investment 
     opportunities, particularly in the energy, high technology, 
     and transportation sectors, in the Republic of Turkey and the 
     surrounding region. In this regard, the Committee supports 
     the Appalachian-Turkish Trade Project (ATTP), a project to 
     promote opportunities to expand trade, encourage business 
     interests, stimulate foreign studies, and to build a lasting 
     and mutually meaningful relationship between the Appalachian 
     States and the Republic of Turkey, as well as the neighboring 
     regions, such as Greece. The Committee commends the ARC for 
     its leadership role in helping to implement the mission of 
     the ATTP. The Committee expects the ARC to continue to be a 
     prominent ATTP sponsor.

                Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$18,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................19,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................19,000,000

       An appropriation of $19,000,000, the amount of the request, 
     is recommended for fiscal year 2003. This is the same as the 
     budget request.
       The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board was created by 
     the Fiscal Year 1989 National Defense Authorization Act. The 
     Board, composed of five members appointed by the President, 
     provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of 
     Energy regarding public health and safety issues at the 
     Department's defense nuclear facilities. The Board is also 
     responsible for investigating any event or practice at a 
     defense nuclear facility which has or may adversely affect 
     public health and safety. The Board is responsible for 
     reviewing and evaluating the content and implementation of 
     the standards relating to the design, construction, 
     operation, and decommissioning of defense nuclear facilities 
     of the Department of Energy.

                        Delta Regional Authority

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................15,000,000

       The Delta Regional Authority (DRA), authorized by Public 
     Law 106-554, was established to assist an eight-state, 236-
     county region of demonstrated distress in obtaining 
     transportation and basic public infrastructure, skills 
     training, and opportunities for economic development 
     essential to strong local economies.
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,000,000 
     for the Delta Regional Authority. The recommended 
     appropriations will be used to carry out the activities of 
     Authority during fiscal year 2003.

                           Denali Commission

Appropriations, 2002........................................$38,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................29,939,000
Committee recommendation.....................................50,000,000

       The Denali Commission is a regional economic development 
     agency established in 1998 for the intended purpose of 
     delivering basic utilities, including affordable power, and 
     other essential infrastructure to the nation's most 
     geographically isolated communities. The Committee is 
     encouraged by the progress of the Denali Commission in 
     assisting distressed communities throughout Alaska, and urges 
     continued work among local and State agencies, non-profit 
     organizations and other participants in meeting the most 
     pressing infrastructure needs.
       The Committee recommendation includes $50,000,000 for the 
     Denali Commission.
       From within those funds, $5,000,000 shall be made available 
     for basic infrastructure and facilities for those communities 
     without running water including Red Devil and Kaktovik; 
     $10,000,000 for community facilities that can serve multiple 
     purposes in villages such as Anaktuvuk Pass, Atqasuk, Brevig 
     Mission, Elim, Gambell, Koyuk, Savoonga, St. Michael, 
     Stebbins, Teller, Unalakleet, and Barrow. None of the funds 
     may be used for clean-up of leaking fuel tanks.
       The Committee recommendation also includes funding for the 
     Pt. MacKenzie gas line extension, Nome power upgrades, Fire 
     Island power upgrade, North Slope grid upgrade, Calista power 
     generation, and the Parks Highway electric line extension. 
     The Committee recommendation includes up to $1,000,000 to 
     study the rural development opportunities, costs and 
     logistics of shipping and marketing new domestic water 
     supplies outside of Alaska.

                     Nuclear Regulatory Commission

                         salaries and expenses

                          gross appropriation

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$516,900,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................578,184,000
Committee recommendation....................................578,184,000

                                revenues

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$473,520,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................492,545,000
Committee recommendation....................................520,087,000

                           net appropriation

Appropriations, 2002........................................$79,380,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................85,639,000
Committee recommendation.....................................58,097,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $578,174,000, the 
     same amount as the request, for the Commission.
       Nuclear energy received a strong endorsement in the 
     National Energy Policy of May 2001 and serious industry 
     interest has emerged in building a new generation of nuclear 
     power plants in the United States to meet the Nation's 
     electricity demands. Three nuclear utilities have announced 
     intentions to submit early site permit applications to the 
     Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Others are also expected 
     to submit early site permit applications over the next few 
     years. Industry has proposed a new risk-informed regulatory 
     framework to license the next generation of plants. The 
     framework would build on the successful structure of the 
     revised reactor oversight process and be reactor design 
     neutral. NRC should evaluate the merits of this approach and 
     establish the new framework through rulemaking.
       Because the NRC needs to ensure that its regulatory 
     infrastructure can be responsive to these new applications, 
     some of which may involve new technologies not previously 
     licensed by the NRC, the Committee provided $10,000,000 in 
     additional budget authority to the NRC for fiscal year 2002 
     so that it can adequately prepare for and respond to these 
     new reactor initiatives without jeopardizing the safety of 
     operating facilities and without impeding ongoing initiatives 
     on license renewals, power uprates, and moving toward a more 
     risk-informed regulatory environment. While the Committee 
     expects the NRC to continue to support these important 
     national initiatives in fiscal year 2003, funds for 
     maintaining these programs should be realized through 
     implementing internal efficiencies in the NRC.
       Recognizing the impact of September 11 on NRC's safeguards 
     mission, an additional $36,000,000 was added to the NRC 
     budget authority for fiscal year 2002. The Committee 
     recognizes that these funds were used to strengthen the NRC's 
     ability to respond to terrorist threats and to assess and 
     enhance security requirements at nuclear facilities. The 
     Committee understands that work is well underway with orders 
     issued to all operating and decommissioned commercial nuclear 
     energy plants. Looking to fiscal year 2003, the focus of 
     security will begin to shift from strengthening security 
     regulations and the response capability of the NRC to the 
     implementation of required enhancements by the licensee. The 
     Committee expects that the funds for oversight of these 
     licensee programs should be realized through implementing 
     internal efficiencies in the NRC.
       The Committee recommendation for the NRC is $578,184,000. 
     This amount is offset by estimated revenues of $520,087,000 
     resulting in a net appropriation of $58,097,000.
       Fee Recovery.--Pursuant to the agreement reached in fiscal 
     year 2001, the NRC is required to recover 94 percent of its 
     budget authority, less the appropriation from the Nuclear 
     Waste Fund, by assessing license and annual fees.

[[Page 766]]

       Reports.--The Committee directs the Commission to continue 
     to provide monthly reports on the status of its licensing and 
     other regulatory activities. In addition, continued 
     congressional oversight is necessary to ensure the NRC 
     streamlines its business processes to improve regulatory 
     efficiency while reducing unnecessary burden on licensees. 
     NRC should report to the Congress by March 31, 2003, on 
     efficiencies gained through implementation of the reactor 
     oversight process. NRC should report to the Congress by June 
     30, 2003, on regulatory efficiencies that would be gained by 
     consolidating or eliminating regional offices.


                      Office of Inspector General

                          gross appropriation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,180,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................6,800,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,800,000

                                revenues

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,933,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................6,392,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,392,000

       This appropriation provides for the Office of Inspector 
     General of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $6,800,000 for fiscal year 
     2003.

                  Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,100,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,102,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,200,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,200,000 for 
     the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. The Nuclear Waste 
     Policy Amendments Act of 1987 directed the Board to evaluate 
     the technical and scientific validity of the activities of 
     the Department of Energy's nuclear waste disposal program. 
     The Board must report its findings not less than two times a 
     year to the Congress and the Secretary of Energy.

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       The following list of general provisions are recommended by 
     the Committee. The recommendation includes several provisions 
     which have been included in previous Energy and Water 
     Development Appropriations Acts:
       Language is included under section 501 which provides that 
     none of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used in any 
     way, directly or indirectly, to influence congressional 
     action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending 
     before Congress, other than to communicate to Members of 
     Congress as described in section 1913 of Title 18, United 
     States Code. A similar provision was contained in the Energy 
     and Water Development Act, 2000, Public Law 106-60.
       Language is included under section 502 which requires that 
     American-made equipment and goods be purchased to the 
     greatest extent practicable. A similar provision was 
     contained in the Energy and Water Development Act, 2000, 
     Public Law 106-60.
       Language is included under section 503 which extends the 
     existing authority for the Denali Commission.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
     general appropriations bills identify each Committee 
     amendment to the House bill ``which proposes an item of 
     appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions 
     of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or 
     resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.''
       The recommended appropriations in title III, Department of 
     Energy, generally are subject to annual authorization. 
     However, the Congress has not enacted an annual Department of 
     Energy authorization bill for several years, with the 
     exception of the programs funded within the atomic energy 
     defense activities which are authorized in annual defense 
     authorization acts. The authorization for the atomic energy 
     defense activities, contained in the National Defense 
     Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2003, is currently being 
     considered by the Senate.
       Also, contained in title III, Department of Energy, in 
     connection with the appropriation under the heading ``Nuclear 
     Waste Disposal Fund,'' the recommended item of appropriation 
     is brought to the attention of the Senate.

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law 
     proposed to be made by the bill are shown as follows: 
     existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets; new 
     matter is printed in italic; and existing law in which no 
     change is proposed is shown in roman.
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or -)
                Item                        2002            Budget       House allowance     Committee    ---------------------------------------------------
                                       appropriation   estimate        deg.        recommendation        2002            Budget            House
                                                                                                            Pappropriation  estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--
 
       DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
 
      Corps of Engineers--Civil
 
General investigations..............         154,350           102,483          148,304           -6,046          +45,821
Construction, general...............       1,715,951         1,415,612        1,636,602          -79,349         +220,990
Flood control, Mississippi River and         345,992           280,671          346,437             +445          +65,766
 tributaries, Arkansas, Illinois,
 Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi,
 Missouri, and Tennessee............
Operation and maintenance, general..       1,874,803         1,913,760        1,956,182          +81,379          +42,422
    Emergency appropriations (Public         139,000   ................  ...............        -139,000   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Regular appropriations (Public            32,000   ................  ...............         -32,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Regulatory program..................         127,000           144,252          144,252          +17,252   ...............
FUSRAP..............................         140,000           140,298          140,298             +298   ...............
Flood control and coastal             ...............           20,227           20,227          +20,227   ...............
 emergencies........................
    Rescission......................         -25,000   ................  ...............         +25,000   ...............
General expenses....................         153,000           155,651          155,651           +2,651   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, title I, Department of        4,657,096         4,172,954        4,547,953         -109,143         +374,999
       Defense--Civil...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 
   Central Utah Project Completion
               Account
 
Central Utah project construction...          24,169            23,643           23,643             -526   ...............
Fish, wildlife, and recreation                10,749            11,259           11,259             +510   ...............
 mitigation and conservation........
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................          34,918            34,902           34,902              -16   ...............
 
Program oversight and administration           1,310             1,326            1,326              +16   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Central Utah project             36,228            36,228           36,228   ...............  ...............
       completion account...........
 
        Bureau of Reclamation
 
Water and related resources.........         762,531           726,147          816,147          +53,616          +90,000
    Emergency appropriations (Public          30,259   ................  ...............         -30,259   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Regular appropriations (Public             7,000   ................  ...............          -7,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Loan program........................           7,495   ................  ...............          -7,495   ...............
    (Limitation on direct loans)....         (26,000)  ................  ...............        (-26,000)  ...............

[[Page 767]]

 
Central Valley project restoration            55,039            48,904           48,904           -6,135   ...............
 fund...............................
California Bay-Delta restoration....  ...............           15,000   ...............  ...............         -15,000
Policy and administration...........          52,968            54,870           54,870           +1,902   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Bureau of Reclamation..         915,292           844,921          919,921           +4,629          +75,000
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department of         951,520           881,149          956,149           +4,629          +75,000
       the Interior.................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
   TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 
Energy supply.......................         666,726           693,934          815,306         +148,580         +121,372
Non-defense environmental management         236,372           166,000          176,000          -60,372          +10,000
Uranium facilities maintenance and           418,425           382,154          471,154          +52,729          +89,000
 remediation........................
Science.............................       3,233,100         3,279,456        3,329,456          +96,356          +50,000
Nuclear Waste Disposal..............          95,000           275,802           56,000          -39,000         -219,802
Departmental administration.........         210,853           299,220          235,000          +24,147          -64,220
    Miscellaneous revenues..........        -137,810          -137,524         -137,524             +286   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Net appropriation.............          73,043           161,696           97,476          +24,433          -64,220
 
Office of the Inspector General.....          32,430            37,671           37,671           +5,241   ...............
 
Environmental restoration and waste
 management:
    Defense function................      (6,473,651)       (6,893,846)      (6,654,245)       (+180,594)       (-239,601)
    Non-defense function............        (654,797)         (548,154)        (647,154)         (-7,643)        (+99,000)
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................      (7,128,448)       (7,442,000)      (7,301,399)       (+172,951)       (-140,601)
 
  Atomic Energy Defense Activities
 
National Nuclear Security
 Administration:
    Weapons activities..............       5,429,238         5,867,000        6,108,959         +679,721         +241,959
        Emergency appropriations             131,000   ................  ...............        -131,000   ...............
         (Public Law 107-117).......
        Emergency appropriations              19,400   ................  ...............         -19,400   ...............
         (Public Law 107-206).......
        Rescission (Public Law 107-          -14,460   ................  ...............         +14,460   ...............
         206).......................
    Defense nuclear nonproliferation         803,586         1,113,630        1,115,630         +312,044           +2,000
        Emergency appropriations             226,000   ................  ...............        -226,000   ...............
         (Public Law 107-117).......
        Regular appropriations               100,000   ................  ...............        -100,000   ...............
         (Public Law 107-206).......
    Naval reactors..................         688,045           706,790          706,790          +18,745   ...............
    Office of the Administrator.....         312,596           335,929          335,929          +23,333   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, National Nuclear           7,695,405         8,023,349        8,267,308         +571,903         +243,959
       Security Administration......
 
Defense environmental restoration          5,234,576         4,544,133        5,370,532         +135,956         +826,399
 and waste management...............
    Emergency appropriations (Public           8,200   ................  ...............          -8,200   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).         -15,540   ................  ...............         +15,540   ...............
Defense environmental management      ...............        1,100,000   ...............  ...............      -1,100,000
 cleanup reform.....................
Defense facilities closure projects.       1,092,878         1,091,314        1,125,314          +32,436          +34,000
Defense environmental management             153,537           158,399          158,399           +4,862   ...............
 privatization......................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Defense                    6,473,651         6,893,846        6,654,245         +180,594         -239,601
       environmental management.....
 
Other defense activities............         544,044           468,664          537,664           -6,380          +69,000
    Emergency appropriations (Public           3,500   ................  ...............          -3,500   ...............
     Law 107-117)...................
    Emergency appropriations (Public           7,000   ................  ...............          -7,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Defense nuclear waste disposal......         280,000           315,000          280,000   ...............         -35,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Atomic Energy Defense        15,003,600        15,700,859       15,739,217         +735,617          +38,358
       Activities...................
 
   Power Marketing Administrations
 
Operation and maintenance,                     4,891             4,534            4,534             -357   ...............
 Southeastern Power Administration..
Operation and maintenance,                    28,038            27,378           27,378             -660   ...............
 Southwestern Power Administration..
Construction, rehabilitation,                171,938           162,758          168,858           -3,080           +6,100
 operation and maintenance, Western
 Area Power Administration..........
Falcon and Amistad operating and               2,663             2,734            2,734              +71   ...............
 maintenance fund...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Power Marketing                 207,530           197,404          203,504           -4,026           +6,100
       Administrations..............
 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............         184,155           192,000          192,000           +7,845   ...............
Revenues applied....................        -184,155          -192,000         -192,000           -7,845   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title III, Department        19,966,226        20,894,976       20,925,784         +959,558          +30,808
       of Energy....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
   TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
 
Appalachian Regional Commission.....          71,290            66,290           74,400           +3,110           +8,110
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety             18,500            19,000           19,000             +500   ...............
 Board..............................
Delta Regional Authority............          10,000            10,000           15,000           +5,000           +5,000
Denali Commission...................          38,000            29,939           50,000          +12,000          +20,061
 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
    Salaries and expenses...........         516,900           578,184          578,184          +61,284   ...............
        Emergency appropriations              36,000   ................  ...............         -36,000   ...............
         (Public Law 107-117).......
    Revenues........................        -473,520          -492,545         -520,087          -46,567          -27,542
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................          79,380            85,639           58,097          -21,283          -27,542
 
    Office of Inspector General.....           6,180             6,800            6,800             +620   ...............
    Revenues........................          -5,933            -6,392           -6,392             -459   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................             247               408              408             +161   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Nuclear Regulatory               79,627            86,047           58,505          -21,122          -27,542
       Commission...................
 
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board           3,100             3,102            3,200             +100              +98
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title IV, Independent           220,517           214,378          220,105             -412           +5,727
       agencies.....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Grand total:
          New budget (obligational)       25,795,359        26,163,457       26,649,991         +854,632         +486,534
           authority................
              Appropriations........     (25,250,000)      (26,163,457)     (26,649,991)     (+1,399,991)       (+486,534)
              Emergency                     (600,359)  ................  ...............       (-600,359)  ...............
               appropriations.......

[[Page 768]]

 
              Rescissions...........        (-55,000)  ................  ...............        (+55,000)  ...............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

      FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS 
                        APPROPRIATION BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

  Mr. McConnell, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for Foreign Operations and related 
     programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and 
     for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends 
     that the bill do pass.


                    Amounts in new budget authority

Fiscal year 2002 appropriations.........................$16,367,780,000
Fiscal year 2003 budget estimate.........................16,515,932,000
Amount of bill as reported to Senate.....................16,294,514,000
Bill as recommended to Senate compared to:
  2002 appropriations.......................................-73,266,000
  Budget estimate..........................................-221,418,000

                                 SUMMARY TABLE: AMOUNTS IN NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Committee
                                                                                                recommendation
                                                                                Committee        compared with
                          Item                             Budget request    recommendation     budget estimate
                                                                                                increase (+) or
                                                                                                 decrease (-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Export Assistance.......................................      $399,281,000      $399,281,000  ..................
Bilateral Economic Assistance...........................    10,050,704,000    10,079,111,000        +$28,407,000
Military Assistance.....................................     4,295,450,000     4,272,025,000         -23,425,000
Multilateral Assistance.................................     1,747,497,000     1,544,097,000        -203,400,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              INTRODUCTION

       In fiscal year 2002, the Committee appropriated 
     $16,367,780,000 for foreign operations and related programs, 
     including supplemental appropriations. This year, the 
     Committee has provided $16,294,514,000, of which 
     $16,249,314,000 is for discretionary spending and $45,200,000 
     is for mandatory spending.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

                                TITLE I

                           EXPORT ASSISTANCE

                Export-Import Bank of the United States


                         subsidy appropriation

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$727,323,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................541,400,000
Committee recommendation....................................541,400,000


                        administrative expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$63,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................68,300,000
Committee recommendation.....................................68,300,000

       The Committee provides $541,400,000 for a subsidy 
     appropriation for the Export-Import Bank. This is the same as 
     the request and $185,923,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     level. Because of a reassessment of international lending 
     risk, the fiscal year 2003 appropriation will allow the 
     Export-Import Bank to support approximately an additional 
     $1,000,000,000 in exports over the fiscal year 2002 level. 
     The Committee provides $68,300,000 for administrative 
     expenses, which is equal to the request and $5,300,000 above 
     the fiscal year 2002 level.
       The Committee directs the Export-Import Bank, no later than 
     120 days after enactment of this Act, to report to the 
     Committee on Appropriations the number of employees for which 
     it utilizes the authority provided in this Act that permits 
     the Bank to nothwithstand subsection (b) of section 117 of 
     the Export Enhancement Act of 1992. This report is to include 
     the positions, job descriptions, and salaries, including 
     consulting fees, of the individuals for which this authority 
     is exercised. The Committee has extended dual use authority 
     for the Export-Import Bank through September 30, 2003.

                Overseas Private Investment Corporation


                         subsidy appropriation

                              direct loans

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$24,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................24,000,000

       The Committee provides a subsidy appropriation for the 
     Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) for direct and 
     guaranteed loan credit programs of $24,000,000, which is 
     equal to the budget request. In fiscal year 2002, no money 
     was provided for a subsidy appropriation, as $24,000,000 in 
     carryover was available for use.


                        administrative expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$38,608,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................39,885,000
Committee recommendation.....................................39,885,000

       The Committee includes $39,885,000 for administrative 
     expenses. This level is equal to the administration's budget 
     request.

                      Trade and Development Agency

Appropriations, 2002........................................$50,024,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................44,696,000
Committee recommendation.....................................44,696,000


[[Page 769]]

       The Committee provides $44,696,000 for the Trade and 
     Development Agency (TDA). This amount is $5,328,000 below the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and equal to the request.

                                TITLE II

                     BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

                  Funds Appropriated to the President


           united states agency for international development

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,626,880,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,932,924,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,222,424,000

       The amounts listed in the above table for fiscal year 2002 
     appropriations, the fiscal year 2003 budget estimate and the 
     Committee recommendation, include funds appropriated or 
     requested under child survival and health programs, 
     development assistance, USAID operating expenses, USAID 
     Inspector General operating expenses, mandatory retirement 
     expenses, international disaster assistance, transition 
     initiatives and credit programs.


                child survival and health programs fund

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,433,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation..................................1,790,000,000

       The Committee provides $1,790,000,000 for the Child 
     Survival and Health Programs Fund of which $350,000,000 is 
     for child survival and maternal health. These funds are 
     available for programs and activities to reduce child 
     mortality and morbidity, combat infectious diseases including 
     HIV/AIDS, and address a wide range of other public health 
     problems around the world. The Committee reiterates its 
     strong support for a comprehensive approach to global health, 
     with an emphasis on building local capacity in developing 
     countries to conduct effective surveillance and deliver basic 
     health services.
       After several years of discussions, the Committee believed 
     that the administration would request, and Congress would 
     appropriate, funds managed by USAID in two separate accounts, 
     Child Survival and Health Programs Fund and Development 
     Assistance. While recognizing that there are some 
     shortcomings with this approach, the Committee has continued 
     to appropriate funds in both accounts in order to maintain 
     more effective oversight and accounting of funds.


                                hiv/aids

       It is widely recognized that the HIV/AIDS pandemic poses 
     the gravest threat to global health. For reasons expressed in 
     prior reports, the Committee believes that the response of 
     the international community to this crisis has been woefully 
     inadequate.
       For fiscal year 2003, the Committee provides a total of 
     $791,500,000 for programs to combat HIV/AIDS. Of this amount, 
     $741,500,000 is from the Child Survival and Health Programs 
     Fund and $50,000,000 is from the Economic Support Fund (ESF), 
     Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States (SEED), 
     and Assistance for the Independent States of the Former 
     Soviet Union (FSU) accounts. Of the amount provided under the 
     Child Survival and Health Programs Fund, $200,000,000 is for 
     a United States contribution to the Global Fund to Fight 
     AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
       The Committee notes the administration's September 3, 2002 
     request for an additional $100,000,000 for the International 
     Mother and Child HIV Prevention Initiative, and provides 
     $100,000,000 for this purpose. The Committee looks forward to 
     working with the administration during the 2004 budget cycle 
     to ensure that this program receives the proper attention it 
     deserves.
       The Committee believes that the first priority for HIV/AIDS 
     funds should be to support HIV/AIDS prevention programs, to 
     reduce the number of new infections and save lives. However, 
     the Committee believes that USAID needs to devote 
     significantly more resources to treatment programs (including 
     programs to facilitate access by infected persons to anti-
     retroviral drugs) which have also been shown to be important 
     in preventing the spread of HIV. The Committee is aware of 
     the concern that some HIV/AIDS affected countries, especially 
     those in sub-Saharan Africa, lack the capacity to effectively 
     use additional funds for the prevention and treatment of HIV/
     AIDS. The Committee believes that where local capacity is 
     lacking, USAID should urgently target resources to build that 
     capacity.
       The Committee believes strongly that the magnitude of the 
     HIV/AIDS crisis requires that USAID pursue all available 
     options and authorities to ensure the most cost-effective 
     utilization of available resources to produce the greatest 
     possible impact in stemming the pandemic.
       Media Training.--The Committee believes that more education 
     about the causes, effects, and treatment of HIV/AIDS is 
     needed in many areas, especially sub-Saharan Africa and 
     southeast Asia. One promising way to increase knowledge about 
     the disease is through a program started in fiscal year 2002 
     to promote accurate and unbiased media reporting on the 
     prevention of HIV/AIDS and the care of people suffering from 
     the disease. The Committee recommends that these efforts be 
     expanded and that USAID make available at least $2,000,000 in 
     fiscal year 2003.
       UNAIDS.--The Committee supports the work of UNAIDS, which 
     plays a key coordination role in the global effort to design 
     national AIDS plans, expand access to HIV drugs, set 
     standards for vaccine trials, and collect data that is 
     critical in combating the HIV/AIDS pandemic.
       Microbicides.--The Committee provides not less than 
     $18,000,000 to support the development of microbicides as a 
     means of combating HIV/AIDS. The Committee recognizes the 
     urgent public health need to develop new HIV prevention 
     options and the emerging scientific opportunities in the 
     field. The Committee supports USAID's research in this area 
     and urges the Office of HIV/AIDS, in conjunction with other 
     USAID offices and appropriate Federal agencies, to fully 
     implement USAID's comprehensive strategy to support the 
     development and use of microbicides.
       Safe Blood.--The Committee encourages USAID to support the 
     efforts of Safe Blood for Africa, which assists African 
     nations through training and technical assistance, to develop 
     systems to ensure that blood supplies are screened for HIV/
     AIDS and other communicable diseases.
       Lott Carey International.--The Committee recognizes Lott 
     Carey International's (LCI) work to establish programs to 
     help mitigate the devastation caused by HIV/AIDS in Africa 
     and the Carribean, including education, building health care 
     infrastructure, and caring for orphans, widows, and other 
     family members affected by HIV/AIDS. The Committee urges 
     USAID to seriously consider supporting proposals from LCI.
       Enhanced Testing.--The Committee believes that USAID should 
     support wider use of new methods of testing for HIV/AIDS that 
     improve the accuracy and timeliness of the results.
       Mother to Child Transmission.--The Committee continues to 
     strongly support additional assistance for programs to 
     prevent HIV/AIDS transmission from mother-to-child.
       Nurse Training.--The Committee continues to support 
     training for nurses to cope with the HIV/AIDS crisis in sub-
     Saharan Africa. Because of the acute shortage of African 
     doctors, nurses are often the first and only contact that 
     people have with the health care system.


                       other infectious diseases

       The Committee provides $185,000,000 for programs to combat 
     other infectious diseases, to strengthen disease 
     surveillance, and to reduce anti-microbial resistance in 
     developing countries. This is the 6th year of a congressional 
     initiative begun in fiscal year 1998, which has resulted in 
     additional appropriations of over $400,000,000 for these 
     activities.
       Tuberculosis.--The Committee recommends not less than 
     $75,000,000 to combat tuberculosis (TB), including at least 
     $65,000,000 from the Child Survival and Health Programs Fund 
     and at least $10,000,000 from the ESF, SEED, and FSU 
     accounts. The Committee expects funds for TB from the ESF, 
     SEED, and FSU accounts to be obligated and disbursed rapidly. 
     The Committee supports DOTS TB programs and other 
     multilateral efforts, including the Global Fund to Combat TB.
       Malaria.--The Committee recommends not less than 
     $75,000,000 from the Child Survival and Health Programs Fund 
     for programs to combat malaria, a debilitating disease that 
     afflicts an estimated 500 million people each year, of whom 
     one million die, mostly African children. The Committee is 
     aware of Medicines for Malaria Venture, a public-private 
     partnership to develop new anti-malaria drugs, which are 
     urgently needed. The Committee recommends that USAID provide 
     direct support to this initiative. The Committee also 
     supports the Centers for Disease Control program of malaria 
     research centers, which are an important part of 
     international efforts to combat malaria. The Committee also 
     recommends that USAID allocate approximately 10 percent of 
     its funding for malaria programs to vaccine research and 
     development, including for the Malaria Vaccine Initiative.


                united nations children's fund (unicef)

       The Committee supports efforts to reach the child survival 
     goals set by the World Summit for Children. In order to 
     implement these goals, the Committee provides $120,000,000 
     from under the Child Survival and Health Programs Fund for a 
     contribution to UNICEF. This does not preclude USAID from 
     providing additional funding for specific UNICEF projects as 
     may be appropriate.


                             immunizations

       The Committee is aware that at least 3 million children die 
     each year because they do not receive life-saving 
     immunizations. Last year, Congress provided funding for The 
     Vaccine Fund, which supports the international, public and 
     private partnership recommendations of the Global Alliance 
     for Vaccines and Immunization. The Committee strongly 
     supports continued funding for this program and recommends up 
     to $60,000,000 for The Vaccine Fund in fiscal year 2003.


                      iodine deficiency disorders

       The Committee is aware that iodine deficiency disorder 
     (IDD) is the leading preventable cause of mental retardation 
     in children.

[[Page 770]]

     Problems associated with IDD are particularly of concern in 
     Africa, south Asia, the former Soviet republics and southeast 
     Europe. Private funding raised by Kiwanis International and 
     implemented by UNICEF is helping to prevent the mental 
     retardation of millions of children each year. In order to 
     help meet the IDD goals, the Committee recommends that USAID 
     provide a total of at least $2,250,000 from the Child 
     Survival and Health Programs Fund, and $1,000,000 from the 
     FSU and SEED accounts for the Kiwanis/UNICEF IDD partnership 
     program.


                   vitamin a and other micronutrients

       The Committee supports increased funding for the vitamin A 
     deficiency program. Vitamin A is a low cost solution to 
     easily preventable diseases and blindness. Like last year, 
     the Committee recommends at least $30,000,000 for the overall 
     USAID micronutrient program, of which at least $20,000,000 
     should be for programs related to vitamin A deficiency.


                           polio eradication

       The Committee again recommends $30,000,000 for the 
     multilateral effort to eradicate polio, an extraordinary 
     public-private effort which is in its final years of 
     completion.


                             blind children

       The Committee recognizes the work being done by Helen 
     Keller Worldwide, the International Eye Foundation, and other 
     organizations to assist blind children in developing 
     countries with simple and inexpensive methods of prevention 
     and treatment. The Committee recommends that $1,500,000 be 
     made available for such programs in fiscal year 2003.


                  displaced children and orphans fund

       The Committee recommends $12,000,000 for the Displaced 
     Children and Orphans Fund, which is in addition to other 
     funding for HIV/AIDS orphans. The Committee has again 
     provided authority to use up to $32,500 in program funds for 
     displaced and orphaned children and victims of war, to enable 
     the USAID office responsible for the design and management of 
     these programs to monitor and oversee their implementation. 
     USAID is also encouraged to use other operating expense 
     funds, as necessary, to further the effectiveness of the 
     oversight of these programs.


                  family planning/reproductive health

       The Committee provides a total of $425,000,000 for family 
     planning/reproductive health programs, of which $368,500,000 
     is made available under the Child Survival and Health 
     Programs Fund.
       The Committee is aware that unchecked population growth is 
     a major cause of environmental degradation, and expects USAID 
     to develop performance goals and indicators which promote 
     cross-sectoral collaboration on community-based, population-
     health-environment programs, and to consult with the 
     Committee regarding these goals and indicators.
       The Committee supports organizations such as the Population 
     Media Center, which promotes the use of mass media to educate 
     people in developing countries about the personal benefits of 
     family planning, encourage the use of effective measures to 
     prevent transmission of HIV, and adopt other health measures.


                            maternal health

       The Committee is aware that pregnancy-related deaths exceed 
     600,000 annually, most of which are preventable. The 
     Committee believes that far more should be done to address 
     this urgent need, and recommends $75,000,000 for maternal 
     health activities and that additional funding be made 
     available specifically to reduce pregnancy-related deaths.


                       health care infrastructure

       The Committee recognizes the work of the Jeffrey Modell 
     Foundation, which has established programs aimed at combating 
     primary immunodeficiencies. The Committee recommends that 
     USAID support the Jeffrey Modell Foundation's efforts in 
     Central and Latin America.
       The Committee also notes the public health work of 
     Esperanca in impoverished communities in Latin America and 
     encourages ongoing support for these activities.


                 PROGRAMS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

       The Committee strongly supports efforts to address the 
     needs of people suffering from physical and mental 
     disabilities in developing countries. The Committee regards 
     this as a health issue as well as a social and economic 
     development issue.
       The Committee endorses efforts in developing countries to 
     produce wheelchairs and artificial limbs for the disabled, 
     who are often unable to become productive members of society 
     due to discrimination and a lack of mobility. The Committee 
     supports the innovative wheelchair design, seating and use 
     approaches of Motivation, which has worked to build the 
     capacity of local partners in many needed countries.
       The Committee also strongly supports Special Olympics, 
     which has programs in several countries for children with 
     mental disabilities who are often locked away in filthy 
     facilities where they receive little or no care. The 
     Committee recognizes that these programs can significantly 
     improve the health and hygiene of these children, as well as 
     enhance their self esteem and strengthen their families and 
     communities. The Committee recommends that USAID, as part of 
     a comprehensive strategy to improve the lives of disabled 
     children in developing countries, provide $3,000,000 to 
     Special Olympics for the expansion of its overseas programs.
       The Committee recognizes the work of Mobility 
     International/USA and believes that USAID and the State 
     Department should seriously consider providing $300,000 to 
     expand Mobility International/USA's professional exchange and 
     other overseas programs. The Committee believes the State 
     Department, USAID, and other U.S. Government entities should 
     undertake additional efforts to promote equal opportunity for 
     people with disabilities. The Committee continues to support 
     efforts to help those in developing countries who have been 
     disabled by a variety of causes.
       The Committee strongly supports The Wheelchair Foundation, 
     which provides assistance for needy children and adults in 
     developing countries who have lost limbs or are otherwise 
     disabled. The Committee is encouraged by the administration's 
     public/private campaign for volunteer and assistance efforts, 
     and has provided $10,000,000 in Economic Support Fund 
     assistance for the Foundation, to be made available on a 
     matching dollar for dollar basis.
       The Committee supports the efforts of the Polus Center in 
     Nicaragua to develop a mobility and social access project for 
     individuals who have lost limbs from acts of war, landmines 
     or diseases.


                           lead-free ceramics

       The Committee is aware of an initiative by Aid To Artisans, 
     an organization that provides technical and marketing 
     assistance to artisans in developing countries, to promote 
     the use of lead-free pottery glazes in Mexico. The use of 
     lead glazes poses serious health risks for people in many 
     countries, and also inhibits the marketability of ceramic 
     products. The Committee believes that this initiative has the 
     potential to improve the health and welfare of millions of 
     people in Mexico and elsewhere, and urges USAID to support 
     it.


                         development assistance

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,178,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,839,500,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,365,500,000

       The Development Assistance account consists of a wide range 
     of poverty-reduction and long-term development activities 
     including democracy and the rule of law, free market 
     development, agriculture and rural development, urban 
     programs, environment and energy, basic education, and micro-
     credit.


                      global development alliance

       The Committee supports, in principle, USAID's Global 
     Development Alliance (GDA), to promote public-private 
     partnerships in international development. However, the 
     Committee has yet to receive sufficient information on this 
     initiative, and has therefore provided that funds for the GDA 
     Secretariat in fiscal year 2003 are subject to the regular 
     notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
       The Committee encourages USAID to consider using GDA funds 
     to build and support schools and other educational 
     institutions in developing countries. These projects should 
     be focused on designing and promoting tolerant, secular 
     education curricula in countries where the needs for basic 
     education and increased understanding of democratic values 
     are most acute.


                          Women in development

       The Committee recommends $15,000,000 in fiscal year 2003 
     for USAID's Office of Women in Development (WID). In addition 
     to providing adequate funding, the Committee expects the 
     Administrator of USAID to strengthen the WID Office. The 
     Office continues to play a key role in integrating gender 
     perspectives into USAID's programs and policies, and 
     providing technical support, research and implementation of 
     initiatives focused on women's economic status and legal 
     rights, and girls' education.
       The Committee strongly supports the mission of Women's 
     Campaign International (WCI), which works to enhance the 
     status of women through media, leadership, business, 
     organizational, and public-service training in developing 
     countries. The Committee recommends at least $600,000 for WCI 
     in fiscal year 2003.


                       children's basic education

       Educating children in developing countries is fundamental 
     to long term development. The Committee believes that USAID 
     should significantly broaden its support for these 
     activities, and provides $200,000,000 for children's basic 
     education in fiscal year 2003. The Committee expects USAID to 
     emphasize programs that expand access and quality of 
     education for girls, enhance community and parental 
     participation in schools, improve teacher training, and build 
     local management capacity. USAID should ensure that it has 
     sufficient education specialists to manage this increased 
     emphasis on basic education.
       The Committee supports the work of Schools, a private 
     voluntary initiative to

[[Page 771]]

     build primary schools at low cost in developing countries.


                 american schools and hospitals abroad

       The Committee continues to recognize the important 
     contributions made to U.S. foreign policy by institutions 
     funded by the American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA) 
     program, and provides that not less than $19,000,000 should 
     be made available to support these institutions in fiscal 
     year 2003. The Committee, once again, expects USAID to 
     allocate sufficient sums to administer the ASHA program from 
     funds provided for Operating Expenses, so it will not be 
     necessary to expend any program funds for administrative 
     purposes.
       Although the Committee understands that ASHA funds are 
     available for a variety of purposes, such as construction and 
     equipment, libraries, computer technology, curriculum and 
     staff support, and related expenses, the Committee reaffirms 
     its intention that this assistance is not to be presumed to 
     offer permanent budget support to ASHA recipients. The 
     Committee strongly encourages ASHA to give priority to 
     organizations which demonstrate a commitment to private 
     fundraising to match government support.
       By increasing ASHA funding above the fiscal year 2002 
     level, the Committee intends to ensure that support is 
     provided to institutions that are effective demonstration 
     centers of American educational and medical practices. The 
     Committee continues to be impressed with the contributions to 
     United States interests made by several institutions and 
     believes that they warrant further support, including 
     Lebanese American University, International College; The 
     Johns Hopkins University's Centers in Nanjing, China and 
     Bologna, Italy; the Center for American Studies at Fudan 
     University, Shanghai; the Hadassah Medical Organization; the 
     American University of Beirut; the American University of 
     Cairo; and the Feinberg Graduate School of the Weizmann 
     Institute of Science.


                           victims of torture

       The Committee recommends that USAID provide up to 
     $10,000,000 in fiscal year 2003 for programs and activities 
     to assist victims of torture, including for centers for 
     victims of torture that provide services consistent with the 
     goals of the Torture Victims Relief Reauthorization Act of 
     1999.


                     patrick leahy war victims fund

       The Committee continues to strongly support the Leahy War 
     Victims Fund, which, since 1989, has provided essential 
     orthopedic and related medical, surgical, and rehabilitation 
     assistance for civilians who are disabled as a direct or 
     indirect result of civil strife or armed conflict. In 
     addition to enabling amputees and other people with 
     disabilities to regain mobility, the Committee supports 
     USAID's efforts to increase their accessibility to mainstream 
     educational, recreational and economic opportunities. The 
     Committee expects USAID to provide $12,000,000 for this 
     program in fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee is concerned with Afghans civilians who have 
     suffered serious injuries as a result of the military 
     operations, and recommends that the Fund, or other assistance 
     in the Act that is available for Afghanistan, be used to 
     provide rehabilitation and related assistance to these 
     people.
       The Committee continues to encourage the Fund to increase 
     its support for initiatives in conflict-affected countries 
     that will lead to appropriate disability laws and policies, 
     and improvements in and the expansion of appropriate services 
     and programs that are needed by people with conflict-related, 
     physical disabilities.
       The Committee again expresses its appreciation to the USAID 
     employees who manage this program, and who have earned the 
     respect of disability experts around the world.


                            sports programs

       The Committee is aware of the intrinsic value of sports in 
     enhancing child health and development and building 
     communities. Olympic Aid is an athlete-driven, non-profit 
     organization using sport and recreation to achieve these 
     goals with programs in Afghanistan, Nepal, the Democratic 
     Republic of Timor-Leste, and several African countries. The 
     Committee encourages USAID and the State Department to 
     provide up to $2,000,000 to support Olympic Aid's programs.


          cooperative association for states for scholarships

       The Committee supports the work of the Cooperative 
     Association for States for Scholarships and expects USAID to 
     continue funding this program.


                           urban development

       The Committee is aware that urban populations in developing 
     countries are growing at a tremendous rate, and is concerned 
     that, despite this trend and the immense social and economic 
     problems it poses, funding for USAID urban programs and 
     associated technical staff have been declining. The Committee 
     strongly recommends that additional funds be provided to 
     USAID's Urban Programs Office to enhance these increasingly 
     important programs.
       The Committee strongly supports the work of the Institute 
     for Liberty and Democracy (ILD), which has successfully 
     implemented a number of economic growth and poverty reduction 
     programs in developing countries. The Committee endorses the 
     House report language on the ILD and looks forward to 
     recommending a final funding level in the statement of 
     managers accompanying the conference report that exceeds the 
     level recommended in the House report.


                         development awareness

       The Committee endorses Operation Day's Work/USA, which 
     enables interested students to study selected countries and 
     raise funds for basic development activities. The Committee 
     expects USAID to continue to provide funding to expand this 
     program.


                    commercial development programs

       The Committee strongly supports micro-credit programs for 
     very poor people and funding for other micro-credit 
     activities, and recommends USAID provide at least 
     $175,000,000 for these and other micro-credit activities. The 
     Committee supports the development of poverty measurements, 
     and recommends that at least half of these resources be 
     targeted to the world's poorest people. The Committee also 
     encourages USAID to begin a micro-credit program in 
     Afghanistan as soon as practicable. The Committee recognizes 
     the positive impact that microcredit programs have on the 
     lives of women around the world.
       The Committee continues to strongly support the volunteer 
     activities of the International Executive Service Corps 
     (IESC), and believes that USAID has underutilized the IESC's 
     capacity to promote economic growth by assisting small and 
     medium sized companies. The Committee believes that 
     aggressive use of volunteer organizations such as IESC 
     produces positive results in development programs abroad, and 
     shares the administration's support for greater volunteerism 
     in America. The Committee expects USAID to significantly 
     increase funding to IESC.
       The Committee recognizes the important role that U.S. 
     credit unions and cooperatives can play in overseas programs. 
     The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the Office of Private 
     Voluntary Cooperation for cooperative development 
     organizations, in order to enhance their technical capacities 
     and build business alliances for overseas activities with 
     U.S. cooperatives.
       The Committee is aware of the efforts of the World Council 
     of Credit Unions to further develop credit union systems in 
     South Africa and Mexico in order to promote free-market 
     principles and increase the ability of poor people to access 
     credit and other banking services. The Committee recommends 
     up to $2,000,000 for this initiative.
       The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the U.S. 
     Telecommunications Training Institute (USTTI). USTTI is a 
     nonprofit joint venture between the public and private 
     sectors dedicated to providing tuition free communications 
     and broadcast training to professionals from around the 
     world.


                    agriculture development programs

       The Committee supports USAID's renewed emphasis on 
     agriculture, as it has long believed that agricultural 
     development is critical to combating poverty. The Committee 
     has provided that $35,000,000 should be made available for 
     plant biotechnology programs, with an emphasis on research 
     projects to improve food security and nutrition in Africa and 
     Asia. The Committee continues to believe that dairy 
     development is an important component of U.S. foreign 
     assistance programs and recommends that USAID increase 
     funding above the current level.
       The Committee notes that USAID is in the process of 
     drafting an agricultural strategy paper, which the Committee 
     expects will improve its internal planning mechanisms. The 
     Committee recognizes that the Board for International Food 
     and Agricultural Development (BIFAD) is an important part of 
     this process. The Committee expects that vacant Board 
     positions will be expeditiously filled and that USAID will 
     provide BIFAD with sufficient resources to enable the Board 
     to function next year.


                          COFFEE PRICE CRISIS

       The Committee endorses the language on the coffee crisis in 
     House Report 107-663. The Committee also notes that, during 
     the 107th Congress, the Senate and House of Representatives 
     passed resolutions, S. Res. 368 and H. Res. 604, calling on 
     the administration to develop a coordinated, global solution 
     to the coffee crisis. The Committee expects the State 
     Department, USAID, and other appropriate agencies to brief 
     the Committee on their progress on this issue no later than 
     60 days after enactment of this Act.


              international fertilizer development center

       The Committee continues to support the work of the 
     International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC) and 
     provides that not less than $2,300,000 should be made 
     available for its core grant. The Committee also recommends 
     an additional $1,700,000 to support the research and 
     development activities of IFDC.


                collaborative research support programs

       The Committee continues its strong support for the 
     Collaborative Research Support Programs (CRSPs). Recognizing 
     the important research and training functions of these 
     programs, the Committee expects that funding above the fiscal 
     year 2002 level of

[[Page 772]]

     $22,383,138 will be provided for the CRSPs, and that the 
     CRSPs be seriously considered for funding for a broad range 
     of development-related activities.


                     protection of the environment

       The Committee has a long history of supporting programs, 
     through USAID, the Department of State, and the U.S. 
     directors to the multilateral development banks, to protect 
     the global environment. Despite increasing amounts of 
     resources and greater appreciation within these agencies and 
     organizations for the importance of addressing environmental 
     concerns, as well as many successes on the ground, the 
     overall trend is disheartening, as from forests to oceans, 
     the global environment is facing unprecedented threats.
       The Committee believes that USAID should be at the 
     forefront of efforts in this area, and is, therefore, 
     extremely concerned by policy, personnel, programmatic and 
     funding changes which could weaken USAID's expertise and role 
     in environmental protection. The Committee is aware that 
     environmental conservation, natural resource management, and 
     sustainable agriculture practices are often inter-related. 
     Indeed, in many instances, one cannot occur without the 
     other. However, effective environmental conservation can also 
     require establishing protected areas, as has been done with 
     USAID support in Gabon and other countries where there are 
     pristine forests rich in biodiversity or other areas of 
     unique environmental significance. The Committee directs 
     USAID to consult closely with the Committee on future plans 
     concerning its environment programs.
       Energy.--The Committee has established a fund to address a 
     wide range of energy conservation, energy efficiency, and 
     clean energy programs. The Committee does not believe these 
     programs have received sufficient support at a time when the 
     environment is under siege in many developing countries due 
     to, among other causes, unchecked population growth, 
     extensive resource extraction, and the burning of fossil 
     fuels in antiquated power plants and other manufacturing 
     processes. The Committee provides $185,000,000 for this fund, 
     to support programs and activities which promote energy 
     conservation, clean energy, energy efficiency, and renewable 
     energy technologies. The Committee also expects these funds 
     to be used to assist developing countries to measure, 
     monitor, report, verify, and reduce greenhouse gases and 
     related activities. Like last year, the Committee has 
     required the President to submit a report detailing U.S. 
     Government support for climate change programs, efforts to 
     promote the transfer and deployment of clean energy and 
     energy efficiency technologies, and other information.
       The Committee supports the efforts of Dakota Gasification 
     to develop a reliable, renewable energy technology, with 
     applications in developing nations, that would combine coal 
     gasification with wind power. The Committee recommends that 
     USAID give serious consideration to this project.
       Office of Energy.--The Committee is concerned that USAID 
     proposes to cut more than half of the budget for the Office 
     of Energy and Information Technology. This office has served 
     a crucial function by providing developing countries with 
     expertise and other assistance on energy efficiency measures 
     that can reduce costs, protect the environment, and improve 
     the quality of life. The Committee provides $13,000,000 for 
     the Office in fiscal year 2003.
       Biodiversity.--The Committee has also established a fund to 
     protect biodiversity and tropical forests, including 
     activities to deter illegal logging. The Committee supports 
     USAID's efforts in this area, but believes they fall far 
     short of what is urgently needed to stem the onslaught of 
     destructive practices which threaten the world's remaining 
     tropical forests and other areas of unique biodiversity, 
     particularly in central Africa, southeast Asia, and the 
     Amazon basin. The Committee provides $150,000,000 in 
     Development Assistance funds for these programs, including 
     initiatives to enhance biodiversity in marine environments.
       The Committee commends USAID for its expanded Central 
     Africa Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE) 
     initiative, and provides $15,000,000 to support it in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       East Asian Pacific Environmental Initiative.--The Committee 
     supports the East Asian Pacific Environmental Initiative 
     (EAPEI), a program jointly managed by the State Department 
     and USAID. The Committee is troubled that funds were not 
     requested for EAPEI, and expects the administration to 
     provide no less than the fiscal year 2002 level of $3,500,000 
     for this program.


                             parks in peril

       The Committee continues to strongly support the Parks in 
     Peril program, which matches USAID funds with private 
     contributions to support conservation of imperiled ecosystems 
     in Latin America and the Caribbean.


                             birds of prey

       Although best known for its efforts to recover the 
     Peregrine Falcon, The Peregrine Fund continues to build a 
     record of conserving birds of prey worldwide. A significant 
     undertaking in the pursuit of preservation is the 
     establishment of The Peregrine Fund's Neotropical Raptor 
     Center in Panama. From this location, The Peregrine Fund 
     would conduct all of its work in the neo-tropics. Like last 
     year, the Committee recommends $500,000 to support this goal, 
     which the Committee understands will be matched by private 
     contributions.


                           mountain gorillas

       The Committee remains concerned with the survival of 
     mountain gorillas which inhabit the high altitude jungles of 
     Rwanda, Uganda, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 
     Like last year, the Committee expects that $1,500,000 will be 
     provided to support groups that protect these animals, such 
     as the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International and other 
     nongovernmental organizations whose mission it is to deter 
     poaching and protect the mountain gorilla's habitat.


                               orangutans

       The Committee remains concerned with the destruction of 
     orangutan habitat in Indonesia, and expects USAID to provide 
     at least $2,500,000 for continued support through 
     nongovernmental organizations, including the Orangutan 
     Foundation and others, for activities to save the orangutan 
     from extinction. The Committee expects these funds to be used 
     to protect orangutan habitat in both Borneo and Sumatra, 
     including, if appropriate, to support law enforcement 
     activities, and requests to be consulted prior to the 
     obligation of these funds.


                           water conservation

       The Committee notes the small amount of funding requested 
     for programs to provide access to reliable sources of 
     drinking water. Water scarcity, and the serious health and 
     environmental problems that occur from it, are reaching 
     crisis proportions in many countries, and the Committee 
     believes the international community should be doing more to 
     address it. For many people in developing countries, a 
     disproportionate amount of time each day is devoted to 
     searching for a shrinking supply of clean water to meet basic 
     needs, severely inhibiting efforts to promote individual and 
     community development. The Committee is concerned that, when 
     inquiries were made to USAID about funding levels for prior 
     and current fiscal years for clean water programs, only 
     fiscal year 2000 figures were available. The Committee 
     provides $100,000,000 for drinking water supply projects, and 
     $450,000,000 for all water projects in fiscal year 2003. The 
     Committee also directs USAID to submit a report to the 
     Committee no later than 120 days after enactment of the Act, 
     on funding and implementation of its water projects.
       The Committee strongly supports the Clean Water for the 
     Americas Partnership, which is a public-private partnership 
     that would help establish projects aimed at providing clean 
     drinking water and protecting the environment. The Committee 
     strongly recommends that USAID fund this Partnership.
       The Committee continues to support the efforts of 
     International Project WET, which has been involved for nearly 
     two decades in international water resources management. The 
     Committee recommends that USAID support International Project 
     WET's efforts to expand its research, development, and 
     implementation capabilities.
       The Committee supports the Middle East Desalination 
     Research Center (MEDRC), which has been integral to efforts 
     to find long-term solutions to regional water problems. The 
     Committee notes that the United States was one of the 
     founding donors of the MEDRC and recommends that the 
     Administration consider providing up to $2,500,000 to MEDRC.


                          university programs

       The Committee has, once again, received a large number of 
     requests to fund specific activities at or through American 
     institutions of higher education. The Committee strongly 
     supports activities that advance international development 
     and U.S. foreign policy goals. The Committee has reviewed the 
     concepts proposed for funding, and recommends that USAID and/
     or the Department of State (as appropriate for the proposed 
     project) actively consider proposals submitted by the 
     following organizations.
       Unless a proposal demonstrates a unique, innovative, or 
     proprietary capability, or demonstrates special 
     considerations that justify limited or non-competitive 
     treatment, the Committee expects that competitive procedures 
     will be applied with regard to the proposals on the list that 
     follows. The Committee also expects USAID to give priority to 
     proposals that have technical merit, realistic budgets, and 
     achievable objectives.
       No later than 60 days after the submission of the report 
     required by section 653(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act, 
     USAID should submit a report to the Committee on the status 
     of each activity identified below. Such a report should 
     include: (1) the status of the funding proposal by the 
     organization associated with each activity; (2) the degree to 
     which the proposal is consistent with and would advance 
     international development and U.S. foreign policy goals for 
     the country or region in which the activity would take place; 
     (3) the degree to which matching or other funds would be 
     provided by the organization to complement the Federal 
     contribution; (4) to the extent known at the time, any 
     decision by USAID or the Department of

[[Page 773]]

     State on funding the activity, including the funding level; 
     and (5) any other relevant information deemed important by 
     USAID or the Department of State. The Committee also expects 
     to receive a second report on the status of these proposals 
     no later than July 1, 2003.
       In last year's report, the Committee noted that USAID had 
     not been responsive to a number of proposals put forward by 
     universities and directed USAID to improve its performance in 
     this regard. The Committee is disappointed with USAID's slow 
     pace in responding to the Committee's latest directives for 
     handling university requests. For example, it took months for 
     USAID to publish a brochure detailing basic information that 
     could be helpful to universities interested in submitting 
     proposals. In addition, USAID's initial efforts to set up a 
     communications system, from which information on university 
     projects could be easily accessed, were woefully inadequate. 
     If USAID is not more responsive to Committee directives 
     concerning university proposals, the Committee will have to 
     consider modifying its approach.
       With the foregoing in mind, the Committee recommends the 
     following proposals for USAID's active consideration:
       Africa-America Institute.--A program by the African 
     Technology for Education and Workforce Development Initiative 
     (AFTECH) to establish a distance learning program between 
     U.S. universities and African universities.
       Alliance of Louisiana Universities.--A proposal of the 
     Louisiana/Honduras Alliance, composed of five Louisiana 
     Universities (University of New Orleans, Louisiana State 
     University Agricultural Center, Loyola University, Tulane 
     University, and Southeastern Louisiana University) and 
     entities in Honduras, to develop a plan to deliver long-term 
     capacity-building assistance in Honduras.
       Ave Maria College of the Americas.--A proposal to create a 
     scholarship program targeted at women and rural students.
       Brandeis University.--A proposal run by the Heller School 
     for Social Policy to train and educate students from the 
     developing world in health policy management and a range of 
     other topics.
       Chicago State University.--A joint proposal with Obafemi 
     Awolowo University in Nigeria to establish and strengthen 
     occupational therapy, nursing, and community health education 
     programs.
       Columbia University.--A proposal, to be managed by the 
     International Research Institute for Climate Prediction, for 
     drought monitoring, health care, food security, and climate 
     change activities.
       Connecticut State University System.--A proposal to work 
     with Mico and Sam Sharpe Colleges to enhance teacher 
     education programs in the Carribean region.
       Dartmouth College.--A joint proposal by a consortium of 
     public and private organizations to enhance information 
     technology development in Lithuania.
       Delaware Technical and Community College.--A proposal to 
     develop an environmental training center in Bulgaria.
       EARTH University.--A proposal to support EARTH University, 
     an institution partnered with 23 universities in the United 
     States, to further develop its Center for Sustainability and 
     Biodiversity in Costa Rica, which is working on enhancing 
     sustainable agriculture, developing medicines using tropical 
     plants, and preserving natural resources in Central America.
       Eastern Michigan University.--A proposal to establish a 
     center for Middle East Studies and Research.
       Emory University.--A proposal implemented by the Atlanta-
     Tbilisi partnership and executed in conjunction with several 
     other Georgia universities to further develop health care 
     infrastructure in the Republic of Georgia.
       Historically Black Colleges.--A proposal to support the 
     efforts of these institutions to develop a virtual university 
     consortium and establish an Institute for Emerging 
     Democracies.
       Johns Hopkins University.--A proposal in conjunction with 
     University of Alabama at Birmingham and the Gorgas Memorial 
     Institute to improve tuberculosis control.
       Kansas State University.--A proposal for the Cereal Genome 
     Initiative to use genomics technologies to develop grain 
     production.
       La Roche College.--A proposal to expand programs to educate 
     young people from conflict, post-conflict, and developing 
     regions of the world.
       Louisiana State University.--A proposal to develop a 
     commercial law program with several Latin American countries.
       Louisiana State University A&M College.--A proposal to 
     provide independent media training to local governmental 
     officials from developing countries.
       Louisiana State University A&M College.--A proposal to 
     develop mariculture and aquiculture resources with the 
     University of Namibia.
       Montana State University, Billings.--A proposal to expand 
     programs in international business in order to enable MSU-
     Billings to offer additional courses in accounting and e-
     commerce in foreign countries.
       Montana State University, Billings.--A proposal to develop 
     an online Master of Health Administration Degree Program with 
     October 6 University in Egypt.
       Morehouse School of Medicine.--A proposal to establish an 
     interchange of medical knowledge and technical capability to 
     improve health care infrastructure in Africa.
       San Diego State University.--A proposal to help implement a 
     cooperative program to address water scarcity and climate 
     change in south Asia.
       San Diego State University.--A proposal to work in 
     collaboration with the Peres Center for Peace to promote 
     sustainable and efficient use of alternative water resources 
     in agricultural development in the Middle East.
       St. Thomas University.--A proposal to further develop the 
     African democracy network in order to work on issues 
     involving democracy, human rights, and gender.
       South Dakota State University.--A proposal to enhance 
     research and education with Russian and Central Asian 
     governments and non-governmental organizations on 
     agricultural development.
       Suffolk University.--A proposal to enhance course offerings 
     at its Senegal campus.
       University of Alabama at Birmingham.--A proposal in 
     conjunction with Johns Hopkins University and the Gorgas 
     Memorial Institute to improve tuberculosis control.
       University of Alaska.--A program with Alaska Pacific 
     University and the North Slope Borough and the Northwest 
     Arctic Borough to provide training and technical assistance 
     to strengthen Chukotka's economy, develop market driven 
     systems and improve social conditions, particularly for 
     indigenous people in the region.
       University of Arkansas Medical School.--A collaborative 
     effort with the Volgograd City Health Department, Volgograd 
     Medical Academy, and other public-private partners in the 
     community to enhance various health care delivery systems in 
     the region.
       University of Georgia.--A proposal to establish a training 
     program for legal professionals, journalists, and government 
     officials from developing countries.
       University of Idaho.--A proposal to help restore the food 
     production and food distribution system in Afghanistan.
       University of Iowa.--A proposal to continue basic education 
     initiatives in East Timor.
       University of Kentucky.--A program relating to the 
     development of crop insurance in Romania.
       University of Kentucky.--A proposal for coal mine safety 
     programs in the former Soviet Union.
       University of Louisville.--A project to conduct training on 
     drinking water system management, financing, laboratory 
     analytical methods, preventive and system maintenance, and 
     the development of public support for water systems in the 
     Republic of Georgia.
       University of Louisville.--A collaborative program with the 
     University of Alabama-Birmingham, the Medical University of 
     South Carolina, and Clemson University for research on plant 
     materials in the rain forests of Dominica.
       University of Louisville.--A proposal for the continued 
     funding of a program in partnership with Rand Afrikaans 
     University to work with impoverished communities in South 
     Africa on economic reform.
       University of Massachusetts, Boston.--A proposal to conduct 
     further research on international conflict.
       University of Miami.--A proposal for the Cuba Transition 
     Project.
       University of Mississippi.--A project by the National 
     Center for Physical Acoustics to help improve mine detection 
     technologies.
       University of Mississippi.--A project by the Center for 
     Marine Resources and Biotechnology to perform environmental 
     research, biowaste treatment, and a hydrographic survey of 
     coastal zones in Central America.
       University of Missouri, Columbia.--A proposal to build 
     capacity for sustainable community development training and 
     application in Afghanistan.
       University of Missouri, Columbia.--A proposal to develop 
     South African indigenous plants as value-added crops and 
     therapeutics for diseases.
       University of Nebraska.--A proposal by the Medical Center's 
     Office of International Health Care Services to combat a 
     range of infectious diseases.
       University of Nebraska, Omaha.--A proposal to further 
     expand efforts to provide basic education in Afghanistan.
       University of Notre Dame.--A proposal by the Kroc Institute 
     for International Peace Studies to promote institution 
     building in Muslim societies.
       University of Northern Iowa.--A proposal for University of 
     Northern Iowa's Orava Project to enhance democracy-building 
     in Central and Eastern Europe through educational reform.
       University of Northern Iowa.--A proposal concerning the 
     Global Health Corps program, which trains university students 
     to conduct community health programs in under-served areas in 
     developing countries.
       University of Northern Iowa.--A proposal for the Russo-
     American Institute to deepen cultural understanding and 
     promote professional collaboration through exchange programs 
     with Moscow International University and other Russian 
     universities.

[[Page 774]]

       University of South Alabama.--A proposal to enhance the 
     Birth Defects Monitoring Program in the Rivine and Volyn 
     oblasts in the Ukraine, which will allow the program to begin 
     monitoring environmentally linked birth defects.
       Western Kentucky University.--A proposal for the continued 
     funding of an international journalist training program.
       Western Kentucky University.--A project to develop and 
     promote safe coal use practices and karst water resources in 
     China.


                             COUNTRY ISSUES

                              AFGHANISTAN

       The Committee notes the many positive changes in 
     Afghanistan in the past year: the brutal Taliban regime has 
     been toppled; a Loya Jirga was convened which selected a 
     government to serve until elections in June 2004; and 
     international relief efforts have started to have a 
     noticeable impact in some portions of the country.
       The Committee, however, also recognizes that enormous 
     social, economic, and political challenges remain. These 
     include a lack of security, food scarcity, insufficient 
     assistance for refugees and internally displaced persons, and 
     reconstruction after decades of conflict. The Committee is 
     extremely concerned that, if more is not done by the United 
     States and the international community to address these 
     issues, Afghanistan will be increasingly at risk of relapsing 
     into civil strife.
       The Committee is supportive of increased assistance for 
     Afghanistan, and notes the enactment of the Afghanistan 
     Freedom Support Act which authorizes a total of 
     $1,700,000,000 for assistance for Afghanistan over the next 4 
     years. While a formal budget request for Afghanistan was not 
     submitted for fiscal year 2003, the Committee has been 
     informally advised that the administration plans to allocate 
     $98,000,000 for that transitional country. The Committee 
     believes that additional funds are necessary and provides 
     $220,000,000 for Afghanistan in this Act. This is short of 
     the fiscal year funding levels authorized in the Afghanistan 
     Freedom Support Act, but the Committee is unable to make 
     additional contributions without making deep cuts in other 
     important international assistance programs. The Committee 
     encourages the administration to submit a supplemental 
     request for Afghanistan, including to support training and 
     equipment for the Afghan National Army.
       The Committee continues to be troubled by the security 
     situation throughout Afghanistan as the lack of security 
     continues to create severe impediments to relief and 
     reconstruction efforts and has resulted, at various times, in 
     the scaling back or cessation of critical humanitarian and 
     development operations around the country. A more detailed 
     discussion of this issue is under the ``Peacekeeping 
     Operations'' heading in this report. The Committee is also 
     aware of the concerns raised by some parts of the 
     administration and nongovernmental organizations regarding 
     reports of military personnel engaging in humanitarian 
     activities while outfitted in civilian clothing. The 
     Committee supports a solution to this issue which is 
     acceptable to all parties involved.
       The Committee supports the deployment of ``Provincial 
     Reconstruction Teams'' and believes that they have the 
     potential to improve the security situation for NGOs, USAID, 
     and others working on reconstruction projects in the more 
     remote parts of Afghanistan. The Committee recommends 
     continued close coordination between all parties involved.
       The Committee notes that while conditions for some women in 
     Afghanistan have improved from what existed under Taliban 
     rule, serious obstacles, including illiteracy, joblessness, 
     violence specifically targeting women, lack of access to 
     health care, and the lack of clearly defined legal rights, 
     continue to hinder the progress of Afghan women. The 
     Committee recognizes the difficulties inherent in 
     implementing assistance programs in Afghanistan, but is 
     nonetheless concerned about the slow pace and relatively 
     small amount of assistance devoted specifically to improving 
     the lives and opportunities of Afghan women. The Committee is 
     concerned with reports of harsh restrictions imposed on women 
     and girls in western Afghanistan.
       The Committee believes that the Afghan Ministry of Women's 
     Affairs is uniquely positioned to become the primary center 
     of capacity to carry out women-focused development in 
     Afghanistan, and commends USAID for the support it has given 
     to the Ministry thus far. The Committee provides $5,000,000 
     to enable the Ministry to establish multi-service women's 
     centers throughout Afghanistan, and to initiate programs to 
     improve girl's and women's education and health, protect 
     their legal rights, and expand their economic opportunities.
       The Committee also supports the United Nations Fund for 
     Women's reconstruction activities in Afghanistan.
       The Committee recognizes the vast energy needs in 
     Afghanistan and believes that the private sector in the 
     United States, through organizations such as the 
     International Energy Advisory Group, is well positioned to 
     complement USAID's efforts in this area.


                                 BURMA

       The Committee commends Burmese democracy leader Daw Aung 
     San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy (NLD) for 
     their unwavering commitment and dedication to democracy and 
     human rights in Burma. The Committee remains gravely 
     concerned with the abuses inflicted upon the people of Burma 
     by the repressive State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), 
     including the systematic rape and killing of ethnic 
     minorities, the imprisonment and torture of political 
     opponents, forced and child labor, and the widespread use of 
     child soldiers. The Committee, like the NLD, is deeply 
     concerned about the welfare of the people of Burma, and has 
     continued its support of humanitarian and democracy efforts.
       The Committee supports $1,000,000 for HIV/AIDS programs and 
     activities in Burma, and suggests an additional $500,000 be 
     made available in commodities from the United States Agency 
     for International Development's HIV/AIDS Commodity Promotion 
     Fund. The Committee directs that all HIV/AIDS programs in 
     Burma be carried out in consultation with the leadership of 
     the National League for Democracy, and that no assistance be 
     provided to the State Peace and Development Council. Given 
     the SPDC's mismanagement of Burma's resources, including the 
     investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in arms 
     purchases and nuclear technology from Russia and China, the 
     Committee suggests the State Department consider a matching 
     requirement from the SPDC for funds provided to Burma to 
     combat a rampant HIV/AIDS infection rate.
       The Committee counsels the State Department to be measured 
     in its response to the SPDC's ongoing campaign to improve its 
     image abroad, and believes that the SPDC should be judged not 
     by what it says, but rather by how it evidences movement 
     toward political dialogue and transition to democracy. The 
     Committee believes that narcotics manufacturing and 
     trafficking in Burma poses a clear and present danger to the 
     region, particularly Thailand, Europe, and the United States.


                                CAMBODIA

       The Committee regrets that the Government of Cambodia 
     failed to hold legitimate local elections in February 2002, 
     adequately investigate and prosecute human rights abuses, or 
     fully implement reforms necessary for the country's economic, 
     political, legal, and social development. Moreover, the 
     Government of Cambodia continues to abuse the constitutional 
     rights and dignity of its citizens, and the lack of the rule 
     of law stifles economic development and perpetuates human 
     suffering, as demonstrated by Cambodia's low ranking in the 
     United Nations Development Program's 2001 Human Development 
     Report.
       As the Committee believes that the Cambodian leadership 
     should be held accountable for its poor governance and human 
     rights record, restrictions on assistance to the Government 
     of Cambodia have been continued and strengthened. The 
     Committee suggests that international financial institutions, 
     particularly the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, 
     conduct independent audits of their loans and grants to that 
     country, including contributions to the Government of 
     Cambodia's Social Fund.
       The Committee believes that the 2003 parliamentary 
     elections provide the people of Cambodia with an opportunity 
     to elect new leadership committed to the rule of law, and 
     encourages the State Department to take a vocal and active 
     role in ensuring a level political playing field and holding 
     accountable those who commit election-related violence and 
     chicanery. The Committee is concerned that absent political 
     change, Cambodia will continue to be a haven for criminal 
     undesirables, including international terrorists.
       The Committee remains concerned about illegal logging in 
     Cambodia, and encourages USAID to support programs in 
     community forest management, which can contribute to forest 
     preservation as well as promote democratic development at the 
     local level.
       The Committee commends the work of the Documentation Center 
     of Cambodia, and expects that at least $275,000 will be 
     provided to the Center in fiscal year 2002, with funds from 
     USAID and the State Department's Bureau for Democracy, Human 
     Rights and Labor. The Committee recommends that at least this 
     amount be provided for the Center in fiscal year 2003, 
     including, if warranted, to purchase a suitable motor vehicle 
     to facilitate the Center's investigative work throughout 
     rural Cambodia.
       The Committee provides $3,750,000 as an initial U.S. 
     contribution for an endowment to sustain the Vietnam Veterans 
     of America Foundation's rehabilitation program in Cambodia. 
     This program, which produces artificial limbs, braces and 
     wheelchairs and provides rehabilitation services, has 
     received USAID funding for many years and is widely regarded 
     to be of superior quality and effectiveness. The program is 
     implemented by trained Cambodian staff, and currently meets 
     the rehabilitations needs of the majority of Cambodians 
     suffering from physical disabilities, many of whom are 
     victims of landmines. It also supports income generating 
     activities for the disabled. The Committee supports USAID's 
     plans to gradually phase out its funding for this successful 
     program, if an endowment is established that ensures its 
     long-term sustainability. The

[[Page 775]]

     U.S. Government funds provided to the VVAF for the endowment 
     are to be matched by one-half with contributions from private 
     sources.


                                 CHINA

       The Committee provides $25,000,000 for programs to support 
     democracy, human rights and the rule of law in China, Hong 
     Kong, Taiwan, and Tibet, of which not less than $15,000,000 
     shall be made available for programs in China to be 
     administered by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and 
     Labor at the State Department. These funds are in addition to 
     such sums provided to the Bureau in the President's fiscal 
     year 2003 request. The Committee expects that of the 
     remaining funds, up to $3,000,000 will be provided to the 
     National Endowment for Democracy, and the balance will be 
     provided to nongovernmental and academic organizations to 
     support programs relating to China, Tibet, and Hong Kong. The 
     Committee strongly endorses activities targeted toward 
     freedom of expression in the media and on the internet, the 
     rule of law, labor reform, and grassroots elections in China.


                                 CYPRUS

       The Committee provides $15,000,000 from the ESF account for 
     Cyprus to be used for scholarships, bicommunal projects, and 
     measures aimed at reunification of the island and designed to 
     reduce tensions and promote peace and cooperation between the 
     two communities on Cyprus. The Committee intends that these 
     resources be made available to maximize leverage to improve 
     prospects for a peaceful settlement in Cyprus.
       The Committee notes the work of the Cyprus Institute of 
     Neurology and Genetics, which is a bicommunal program aimed 
     at providing specialized services in neurology, genetics, and 
     molecular medicine. The Committee is particularly pleased 
     with the progress that the Institute has made to enhance 
     efforts on biomedical research, stroke prevention, gene 
     therapy and brain development research on Cyprus.


                               GUATEMALA

       The Committee continues to be concerned with the unsolved 
     murders of American citizens in Guatemala, including Larry 
     Lee, Steven Michael Gartman, Juan Antonio Zimeri, David James 
     Erf, Robert Orville Edeleman, Sister Barbara Ann Ford, Carlos 
     Humberto Melgar, and Suzanne Spalding Hendricks. The 
     Committee again requests the State Department to make every 
     effort to obtain the cooperation of Guatemalan law 
     enforcement authorities in bringing to justice the 
     perpetrators of these crimes.


                               INDONESIA

       The Committee expresses its condolences to the victims and 
     the families of those killed and injured in the October 12, 
     2002 terrorist attack in Bali. While the Committee commends 
     the progress to date in the investigation, it remains gravely 
     concerned with the presence of indigenous and foreign 
     terrorist elements in Indonesia. The Committee believes 
     Indonesia to be a frontline state in efforts to combat 
     international terrorism.
       As the Committee recognizes the devastating economic and 
     social impact of the attack on the residents of Bali, it 
     recommends that not less than $5,000,000 be provided for 
     reconstruction and recovery efforts. The Committee expects 
     the Government of Indonesia to continue to aggressively 
     pursue terrorists throughout the archipelago, and supports 
     the recommendation of the International Crisis Group for a 
     reopening of investigations into earlier bombing attacks in 
     Indonesia.
       With parliamentary and presidential elections scheduled for 
     2004, Indonesia is at an important crossroads in its 
     democratic development. While recognizing that the process of 
     reform is a long-term endeavor, the Committee notes that the 
     pace of reform in many sectors has not kept pace with 
     expectations and cautions that the continued failure of 
     leadership at all levels may have adverse political, 
     economic, and social impacts. In the face of these 
     challenges, the Committee provides not less than $150,000,000 
     for assistance for Indonesia, and expects significant 
     assistance be provided to democracy and governance programs 
     in support of the upcoming polls.
       The Committee sees no evidence that the Government of 
     Indonesia is serious about developing or implementing 
     military reforms. The Indonesian military's (TNI) 
     decentralized, territorial structure and dependence upon 
     revenue from off-line sources perpetuates corruption, gross 
     human rights violations, and association with extremist and 
     criminal groups and individuals. The Committee is outraged by 
     TNI's alleged complicity in the murder of Americans in Papua 
     on August 31, 2002 and demands that justice be served for 
     these crimes.
       Given the clear and present danger that terrorist groups 
     pose to Indonesia and the region, the Committee has not 
     included restrictions on IMET to the Indonesian military. The 
     Committee understands the limitations of this program as a 
     means of reforming the Indonesian military, and makes clear 
     its view that the provision of IMET is in the national 
     security interests of the United States. Any other 
     interpretation--including the perception of IMET as 
     endorsement of TNI--is wholly incorrect.
       The Committee has maintained restrictions on FMF assistance 
     and licenses of lethal defense articles to Indonesia in this 
     Act, until the President certifies that the Indonesian 
     Minister of Defense is suspending and the Indonesian 
     Government is prosecuting and punishing human rights 
     violators within the Indonesian Armed Forces. Unfortunately, 
     the ongoing special trials of lower ranking officers for 
     abuses in East Timor suffer from serious deficiencies, and 
     the Indonesian military has sought to intimidate judges and 
     prosecutors.
       The Committee is hopeful the recent ceasefire agreement in 
     Aceh will hold, and expects that not less than $10,000,000 
     shall be made available to support programs and activities in 
     Aceh.


                                  LAOS

       The Committee strongly supports the administration's 
     request of $2,000,000 from Development Assistance and the 
     Child Survival and Health Programs Fund for activities to 
     meet basic human needs in Laos. The Committee continues to be 
     concerned by the repressive policies of the Government of 
     Laos.


                                LEBANON

       The Committee believes that economic development in Lebanon 
     should be a priority for U.S. foreign policy in the Middle 
     East, and provides $35,000,000 in ESF assistance for Lebanon. 
     However, none of these funds may be made available for 
     assistance for the central Government of Lebanon.
       The Committee supports the work of American educational 
     institutions in Lebanon and encourages USAID and the State 
     Department make available a portion of these funds for 
     scholarships and direct support of these institutions.
       The Committee is deeply disappointed that past efforts to 
     secure the return of American children abducted to Lebanon 
     have been unsuccessful. The Committee is aware of cases in 
     which the Lebanese Government has failed to enforce the 
     orders of the Lebanese civil courts. These unresolved cases 
     will continue to be an obstacle to closer relations between 
     the United States and Lebanese governments. The Committee 
     calls on the Lebanese Government to ensure that the rule of 
     law is upheld.


                                MONGOLIA

       The Committee supports the administration's $12,000,000 
     request for assistance for Mongolia for fiscal year 2003. 
     While the Mongolian people are to be commended for their 
     continued commitment to democracy and human rights, The 
     Committee is disturbed by recent actions by the Government of 
     Mongolia that seek to stifle popular dissent. The Committee 
     will continue to watch events in Mongolia closely to 
     determine if any backsliding in the democratic process is 
     taking place.


                               NICARAGUA

       The Committee recognizes the important work of the Fabretto 
     Children's Foundation, which provides essential opportunities 
     for children in Nicaragua to escape poverty. The Committee 
     recommends that USAID provide up to $1,500,000 to support 
     four Fabretto programs in Nicaragua.
       The Committee also supports efforts to improve mass 
     transportation systems in Nicaragua and other Central 
     American countries, where cities are overwhelmed with 
     migrants from rural areas seeking employment.


                                NIGERIA

       The Committee is aware that a Judicial Commission of 
     Inquiry is currently investigating the causes of inter-
     communal conflict in Benue, Nassarawa, Taraba, and Plateau 
     states. However, the Committee is also aware that the 
     commission has no prosecutorial powers, and therefore its 
     work does not represent an effective measure to bring to 
     justice individuals responsible for gross violations of human 
     rights.


                              NORTH KOREA

       The Committee is extremely disturbed by recent events in 
     North Korea that underscore that failed state's threat to 
     international security and stability through its production 
     and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The 
     Committee commends the administration for exposing the 
     fallacy of North Korea's commitment to international 
     obligations.
       The Committee remains deeply concerned with the abuses 
     inflicted upon the people of North Korea by the repressive 
     Stalinist regime, and notes that extrajudicial killings, 
     torture, starvation and a failed economy have caused 
     thousands of North Koreans to seek refuge in the People's 
     Republic of China. The Committee recommends the State 
     Department and USAID provide $10,000,000 to safeguard the 
     human rights and dignity of North Korean refugees and asylum 
     seekers, whether through the establishment of camps, 
     contributions to organizations, or other means. The Committee 
     is deeply troubled by the horrific fate that awaits those who 
     are forcibly repatriated to North Korea.


                              SIERRA LEONE

       The Committee notes the progress that Sierra Leone is 
     making toward restoring peace and democratic rule. The 
     Committee particularly commends the efforts of the British 
     Government and the United Nations to end the armed conflict, 
     demobilize combatants, hold free and fair elections, and 
     repatriate refugees.

[[Page 776]]

       The Committee recognizes that the Government of Sierra 
     Leone faces enormous challenges to rebuild the country, and 
     provides $9,000,000 in ESF assistance, in addition to funds 
     from ``Development Assistance'' and funds budgeted for the 
     ``Countries in Transition'' program, for these purposes. The 
     Committee expects that assistance provided above the budget 
     request for Sierra Leone will not result in cuts to programs 
     for other African countries.
       The Committee strongly supports the efforts of the Special 
     Court for Sierra Leone and the Truth and Reconciliation 
     Committee (TRC) to hold accountable those individuals 
     involved in atrocities committed during the conflict. The 
     Committee is also encouraged that the Court is undertaking 
     broader efforts to restore the rule of law and outreach 
     activities to accelerate and strengthen the reconciliation 
     process. The Committee is disappointed that in fiscal year 
     2002 the State Department ignored Committee directives in 
     Senate Report 107-58 and House Report 107-345 to accelerate 
     U.S. financial assistance to the Court. Moreover, the State 
     Department did not offer any justification for this decision. 
     The Committee has also been informed that, while the Court is 
     making substantial progress on a limited budget, additional 
     funds are needed to meet pressing security, transportation, 
     and other needs. Therefore, the Committee has provided 
     $10,000,000 in Economic Support Fund assistance for a 
     contribution to the Special Court. The Committee again 
     strongly urges the Special Court to pursue those most 
     responsible for these heinous acts, even if they are not 
     currently living in Sierra Leone.


                                THAILAND

       The Committee recognizes and appreciates Thailand's efforts 
     to combat international terrorism and encourages continued 
     vigilance by the Thai government and military, particularly 
     in the southern part of the country. The Committee fully 
     supports the administration's IMET and FMF requests for 
     Thailand.
       The Committee is fully aware of the challenges posed to 
     Thailand by its repressive neighbor, Burma, and remains 
     concerned with the plight of all people who flee to Thailand. 
     The Committee notes the many reports detailing the State 
     Peace and Development Council's (SPDC) systematic and 
     egregious abuses inflicted on the people of Burma and 
     recommends that the State Department work closely with other 
     democratic nations, and the appropriate U.N. agencies, to 
     investigate these reports in order to better understand the 
     extent of these abuses and to formulate and coordinate 
     appropriate policy responses.


                                 TIBET

       The Committee recommends $3,000,000 in ESF assistance for 
     programs that provide training and education to Tibetans in 
     democracy and human rights, preserve cultural traditions, and 
     promote economic development and environmental conservation 
     in Tibetan autonomous areas, including the area designated as 
     the ``Tibetan Autonomous Region'' where such activities are 
     underway. The Committee is aware of the valuable assistance 
     the Bridge Fund has provided to promote Tibetan-owned and 
     operated businesses and educational, cultural, and natural 
     resource conservation projects in Tibet.


                   INTERNATIONAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$235,500,000
Emergency supplemental.......................................90,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................285,500,000
Committee recommendation....................................290,000,000

       With the large number of humanitarian emergencies around 
     the world, the Committee believes that, even with 
     supplemental funds, the administration's fiscal year 2003 
     request falls short of meeting these emergency needs, 
     especially in Afghanistan. Therefore, the Committee has 
     provided $290,000,000 for ``International Disaster 
     Assistance'' programs, of which $60,000,000 is for 
     Afghanistan.
       The Committee believes that the Modular Command Post System 
     (MCPS), a mobile communications, command and control 
     facility, can be of value in responding to international 
     disasters around the world. The Committee urges USAID and the 
     State Department to consider using the MCPS in complex relief 
     operations.


                         TRANSITION INITIATIVES

Appropriations, 2002........................................$50,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................55,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................55,000,000

       The Committee commends the work of USAID's Office of 
     Transition Initiatives (OTI), which is on the ground in 
     countries around the world providing essential assistance to 
     bridge the gap between emergency relief and long-term 
     development.


                      DEVELOPMENT CREDIT AUTHORITY

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,591,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,591,000


     PAYMENT TO THE FOREIGN SERVICE RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY FUND

Appropriations, 2002........................................$44,880,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................45,200,000
Committee recommendation.....................................45,200,000

       The Foreign Service retirement and disability fund is a 
     mandatory expense of USAID.


   OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL 
                              DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$549,000,000
Emergency supplemental........................................7,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................572,087,000
Committee recommendation....................................571,087,000

       The Committee provides $571,087,000 for operating expenses 
     of the United States Agency for International Development. 
     The Committee remains concerned about USAID's deficient 
     financial, procurement, and personnel management systems, and 
     recognizes that solving these problems will be costly. At the 
     same time, the Committee believes that USAID's greatest 
     resource is its staff, many of whom have developed 
     extraordinary expertise in their areas of responsibility. The 
     Committee is concerned that USAID has lost some of its most 
     experienced professionals over the years due to misguided 
     management decisions, and it does not want to see those 
     mistakes repeated.


                        CAPITAL INVESTMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$95,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................65,000,000

       The Committee has earmarked funds to upgrade USAID's 
     information technology systems, which is long overdue and 
     necessary to the effective management of USAID's mission-
     based operations. However, the Committee continues to be 
     concerned with the lack of coordination between USAID and the 
     State Department's Office of Overseas Buildings Operations, 
     regarding construction of new USAID facilities. The Committee 
     is concerned about the potential cost of these building 
     projects and expects to be consulted regarding plans for 
     future construction.
       The Committee is concerned about the acute shortage of 
     USAID personnel in Afghanistan. USAID's reconstruction 
     program in Afghanistan is a national security priority for 
     the United States, and an estimated 40 additional personnel 
     are urgently needed to effectively administer this program. 
     While a new USAID building may be constructed at some point, 
     no decision has been made. Therefore, the Committee provides 
     up to $10,000,000 for temporary, secure facilities for an 
     appropriate number of USAID personnel in Kabul, located at a 
     suitable site.


                      COMMITTEE BILLS AND REPORTS

       The Committee is concerned that some employees of the State 
     Department and USAID do not read the portions of the Act and 
     accompanying Committee reports which deal with their 
     respective areas of responsibility. The effect is that these 
     employees do not always accurately and fully implement the 
     laws, policies, programs and activities contained in these 
     documents. The Committee expects that the Secretary of State 
     and the Administrator of the United States Agency for 
     International Development will ensure that each employee 
     under their authority receives a copy of the Act and the 
     relevant reports, and will direct each employee to read the 
     relevant portions of these documents. The Committee intends 
     that these documents may be provided or accessed via the 
     Internet.


       OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2002........................................$31,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................33,046,000
Committee recommendation.....................................33,046,000

       The Committee provides $33,046,000 for operating expenses 
     of the Office of the Inspector General.

                  Other Bilateral Economic Assistance


                         ECONOMIC SUPPORT FUND

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,199,000,000
Emergency supplemental......................................465,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,490,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,260,000,000


                         MIDDLE EAST COUNTRIES

       In 1998, the United States reached agreements with the 
     Governments of Israel and Egypt to reduce the levels of ESF 
     assistance for these countries over a 10-year schedule. In 
     accordance with this schedule, the Committee provides 
     $600,000,000 for Israel and $615,000,000 for Egypt for fiscal 
     year 2003. The Committee provides $250,000,000 for assistance 
     for Jordan, which reflects the amount requested by the 
     administration. The Committee provides $75,000,000 for 
     assistance to the Palestinian people in the West Bank and 
     Gaza, and notes that restrictions on the use of funds 
     provided under the Act remain unchanged from prior years.
       The Committee remains concerned with the situation in the 
     Middle East, and, in particular, with the welfare of the 
     Israeli and Palestinian people. The Committee encourages 
     continued efforts by all parties to achieve lasting peace in 
     the region.
       The Committee is disappointed that this will be the last 
     year of funding for the U.S.-Israel Cooperative Development 
     Program and hopes that USAID will continue to utilize the 
     expertise, including that of Israel's Center for 
     International Cooperation (MASHAV), accumulated by this 
     program.

[[Page 777]]

       The Committee believes that continued political, legal, and 
     economic reform programs should continue in the West Bank and 
     Gaza. The Committee recognizes that calls for reform already 
     exist within Palestinian civil society, and supports the 
     provision of assistance to those groups and associations, 
     including from the United States, advocating greater 
     transparency, accountability, and political pluralism. The 
     Committee notes that rule of law programs would enhance these 
     reforms and encourages the administration to support 
     technical assistance programs in the West Bank and Gaza, if 
     practicable.
       The Committee recognizes that Egypt is a vital and 
     strategic ally of the United States and plays an important 
     role in the Middle East peace process. However, the Committee 
     remains concerned with challenges to the rule of law, human 
     rights, and democracy in Egypt. The Committee commends the 
     State Department for undertaking a review of assistance 
     programs for Egypt.
       The Committee notes with appreciation Jordan's constructive 
     role in the peace process and efforts to implement economic 
     reforms.


                          CONFLICT RESOLUTION

       The Committee has provided $5,000,000 in Economic Support 
     Fund assistance for conflict resolution programs and 
     activities that promote understanding, reconciliation and 
     problem solving in the Middle East. The Committee believes 
     that the following organizations are among those deserving of 
     support--
       --The Arava Institute for Environmental Studies, which 
         manages programs that bring college age Arabs and 
         Israelis together to promote better relations and solve 
         common environmental problems;
       --Seeds of Peace, a widely respected organization which 
         promotes understanding between teenagers in the Middle 
         East, Cyprus, and the Balkans; and
       --Jerusalem International YMCA, which brings together 
         Christian, Jewish and Muslim youth in a positive 
         environment that promotes peace, respect and 
         understanding.
       The Committee also recommends an additional $2,000,000 in 
     Development Assistance, SEED, and ESF funds, to support other 
     conflict resolution programs and activities. The Committee 
     believes that the following organizations are among those 
     deserving of support--
       --International Crisis Group, whose analysts in the field 
         identify potentially explosive problems, produce 
         objective assessments, and prescribe policy responses to 
         prevent or reduce the level of violence resulting from 
         complex crises; and
       --Foundation for Security and Sustainability, a public 
         institute chartered to further understanding about 
         resource scarcity and environmental problems and provide 
         opportunities to avert and better prepare for potential 
         crises.


                             CHILD SOLDIERS

       The Committee recognizes the serious problems associated 
     with child soldiers around the world, as they are used as 
     combatants, camp laborers, sex slaves, and runners, under 
     horrendous conditions. To help address this issue, the 
     Committee recommends $5,000,000 for programs for war-affected 
     youth in such countries as Afghanistan, Angola, Colombia, 
     Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, and the Democratic Republic of the 
     Congo.


                      TERRORISM IN SOUTHEAST ASIA

       The Committee is concerned with the ability of terrorists 
     and other extremists to gain footholds in Muslim communities 
     throughout Southeast Asia, particularly in Indonesia and the 
     Philippines. The Committee believes that community 
     development programs, including those focusing on health and 
     education, and economic development, deter the ability of 
     terrorists to gain a foothold in these communities, and may 
     dissuade Muslim students from seeking educational 
     opportunities in radical institutions both at home and 
     abroad.
       The Committee requests the State Department to submit a 
     report within 60 days after the enactment of this Act 
     detailing its strategy to implement educational programs in 
     Indonesia that can help mitigate the influence of extremist 
     boarding schools. In addition, the Committee recommends that 
     not less $5,000,000 be made available in this Act to bolster 
     and support ongoing programs in the southern Philippines that 
     seek to undermine the social, economic, and political 
     environments in which extremism may take root.


                          WAR CRIMES TRIBUNALS

       The Committee continues to strongly support the war crimes 
     tribunals in Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone. The 
     Committee expects the administration to ensure that the 
     tribunals have sufficient budgets, staff, and equipment, and 
     provides $30,000,000 in drawdown authority for war crimes 
     tribunals established or authorized by the U.N. Security 
     Council with U.S. support, including the tribunal in Sierra 
     Leone. The Committee also urges the administration, where 
     appropriate, to support commissions or judicial bodies that 
     complement the activities of these tribunals. The Committee 
     notes that drawdowns made under this section are unrelated to 
     the establishment of an international criminal court.


                    TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

       The Committee is concerned that the governments of many 
     countries that receive assistance from the United States do 
     not accurately report revenues from the extraction of natural 
     resources such as oil, natural gas, mining and timber, and 
     from other sources such as tax receipts. In some countries 
     such as Angola, billions of dollars in oil revenues have 
     reportedly been stolen by corrupt officials, while the United 
     States and other donors have expended similar amounts to 
     provide food and medical care to the impoverished Angolan 
     people.
       The Committee believes that public disclosure of this 
     information, which is common practice in developed countries, 
     is basic to good governance, and that governments that 
     receive assistance from the United States should adopt 
     similar disclosure practices. Absent such disclosure, United 
     States tax dollars may in effect be offsetting the ill-gotten 
     gains of corrupt foreign officials. Therefore, the Committee 
     has included a provision which requires the Secretary of 
     State to submit a detailed report on the public disclosure of 
     revenues by governments which receive assistance from the 
     United States. The Committee will consider this report in its 
     deliberations on the administration's fiscal year 2004 budget 
     request.


                            IRAQ OPPOSITION

       The Committee supports activities targeted toward bringing 
     about a transition to democracy in Iraq, and commends, in 
     particular, the ``Future of Iraq'' program. The Committee is 
     pleased that the administration is working with Iraqi 
     nationals from civil society, ex-military officers, 
     international experts, and representatives from a multitude 
     of NGOs to establish political pluralism and the rule of law 
     in a post-Saddam Iraq. The Committee supports the State 
     Department Inspector General's efforts to bring increased 
     transparency and accountability to this program.
       In addition to other Iraqi opposition programs, the 
     Committee recognizes efforts to improve educational programs 
     at the Universities of Sulaimani, Dohuk, and Irbil, to 
     continue development efforts in parts of Northern Iraq that 
     are not under the control of Saddam Hussein's government. The 
     Committee recommends that the administration consider 
     providing funding to these universities in order to support a 
     range of initiatives, including expanding the availability of 
     information technologies, learning materials, and university-
     sponsored literacy programs.


    DEMOCRACY, TRANSPARENCY, AND THE RULE OF LAW IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES

       The Committee provides $20,000,000 for programs and 
     activities which foster democracy, human rights, civic 
     education, women's development, press freedoms, and the rule 
     of law in countries with a significant Muslim population. The 
     Committee has also provided the authority for the funding of 
     programs and activities to support the advancement of 
     democracy and human rights in Iran. Of these funds, the 
     Committee provides $10,000,000 for the Human Rights and 
     Democracy Fund of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and 
     Labor. The Committee also provides $3,000,000 for 
     professional training for journalists.


                       FREE AND INDEPENDENT MEDIA

       The Committee strongly supports programs to promote free, 
     independent and professional media in developing nations. The 
     Committee expects USAID and the State Department to fund new, 
     and bolster ongoing, media programs and activities in 
     predominately Muslim countries, including Afghanistan, 
     Pakistan, Egypt and Indonesia. The Committee expects that 
     funding will be used primarily to support programs that 
     provide skills development and promote a deeper understanding 
     of the United States. The Committee believes that free, 
     independent and professional media will provide objective 
     news and credible information throughout the Muslim world, 
     which may help to counterbalance political and religious 
     extremism and terrorism.


                           CONFLICT DIAMONDS

       The Committee strongly supports the efforts of the 
     administration, non-governmental organizations, and the 
     diamond industry to establish the Kimberly Process 
     Implementation Scheme (KPIS), an international regime aimed 
     at stopping the trade in ``conflict diamonds'' which has been 
     used to finance brutal conflicts in Africa and international 
     terrorist organizations. The Committee notes that KPIS will 
     come into effect in early 2003, and is aware that African 
     nations will need assistance to help set up their 
     certification processes and enforcement mechanisms. The 
     Committee has been informed that a major diamond producing 
     nation has already asked the administration for assistance to 
     implement KPIS and expects that there could be similar 
     requests for other nations. The Committee has, therefore, 
     provided $3,500,000 for these purposes.
       In addition, to help combat the numerous, well-documented 
     problems associated with the trade in conflict diamonds that 
     have plagued Sierra Leone and other parts of Africa, the 
     Committee has included language,

[[Page 778]]

     similar to last year, concerning conflict diamonds.
       The Committee also directs the Secretary of State, no later 
     than 120 days after enactment of the Act, to submit a report 
     that identifies: (1) countries that have exported rough or 
     polished diamonds to the United States that are implementing 
     effective measures to curtail the trade in conflict diamonds 
     (and include a description of such measures); (2) countries 
     that have failed to implement effective measures to curtail 
     the trade in conflict diamonds; and (3) a description of 
     additional U.S. financial, technical, or other measures which 
     could help countries implement effective measures to curtail 
     the trade in conflict diamonds, including technological means 
     for determining the origin of diamonds and tracking the trade 
     in diamonds.


                  PARTNERSHIP TO ELIMINATE SWEATSHOPS

       The Committee supports the Partnership to Eliminate 
     Sweatshops, which facilitates cooperation among corporations, 
     consumers, non-governmental organizations, universities, 
     organized labor, and others to address unacceptable working 
     conditions around the world through a variety of approaches. 
     The Committee recommends that $5,000,000 be made available 
     for this program.


          ASSISTANCE FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND THE BALTIC STATES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$621,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................495,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................530,000,000

       The Committee provides $530,000,000 for Eastern Europe and 
     the Baltic States, which is $35,000,000 above the 
     administration's fiscal year 2003 request but $91,000,000 
     below the fiscal year 2002 level. While the Committee 
     supports and encourages the graduation of countries from 
     receiving U.S. foreign assistance, several countries in this 
     region, which are vital to U.S. interests, continue to 
     require substantial support to further implement critically 
     needed democratic reforms and to promote economic 
     development. The Committee expects that of the additional 
     funds provided, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia, and 
     Kosovo will receive assistance above the fiscal year 2003 
     requested levels. The Committee also notes the progress that 
     the Baltic States have made in implementing reforms and 
     strengthening the rule of law, and recommends that $5,000,000 
     be provided to the Baltic States.


              INTERNATIONAL LEGAL AND ECONOMIC INITIATIVES

       The Committee notes the efforts by the American Bar 
     Association (ABA) to strengthen democracy through programs 
     that promote the rule of law in Central and Eastern Europe. 
     The Committee recommends that USAID support these ABA-CEELI 
     projects, especially in Belarus, Bosnia, and Kosovo. The 
     Committee also notes the work of the International Real 
     Property Foundation in the region.
       The Committee notes the work of the Center for Economic 
     Research and Graduate Education Institute, which promotes 
     economic growth and reform in Central and Eastern Europe.


                                 KOSOVO

       The Committee continues to support reconstruction, reform, 
     and reconciliation efforts in Kosovo, and expects that not 
     less than $100,000,000 should be made available for 
     assistance for Kosovo under the heading ``Assistance for 
     Eastern Europe and the Baltic States''. The Committee has 
     also provided $2,000,000 to support the National Albanian 
     American Council's training program for Kosovar women.


                                 SERBIA

       The Committee recommends up to $115,000,000 for assistance 
     for Serbia for fiscal year 2003. The Committee remains 
     committed to assisting reformers in the Republic of Serbia as 
     they continue to recover from the devastation of the 
     Milosevic era. The Committee is pleased that Kosovo-Albanian 
     political prisoners have finally been released, and that 
     selected persons indicted by the International Criminal 
     Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) have surrendered 
     and/or been transferred to The Hague. The Committee strongly 
     encourages further economic, political, and legal reforms, 
     and intends to closely follow the development of a free and 
     independent media.
       The Committee notes, however, that while Milosevic has been 
     out of office since October 5, 2000, many of his unfortunate 
     legacies continue, including an unreformed State security 
     apparatus and military, a politicized judiciary, and 
     political and financial support to hardliners in Bosnia's 
     Republika Srpska and northern Kosovo. The Committee provides 
     $750,000 for programs to promote reconciliation between 
     ethnic groups throughout the region, and expects that USAID 
     will adequately fund programs that educate the people of 
     Serbia on past crimes committed by the Milosevic regime.
       While the Committee notes some progress in Serbia's 
     cooperation with the ICTY, such as the issuance of arrest 
     warrants for indictees, the Committee is very concerned that 
     a predictable, consistent record of cooperation has not yet 
     been established. Federal Yugoslav officials continue to 
     flaunt the authority of the ICTY. The pace of surrenders and 
     transfers of indictees, the continuing freedom of several 
     notorious indictees, and highly circumscribed access to 
     documents and witnesses, suggests that conditioning U.S. 
     assistance is still, regrettably, necessary. It is 
     unacceptable that, according to reliable reports, General 
     Ratko Mladic, who is among those most responsible for the 
     brutality that terrorized the people of the former Yugoslavia 
     during much of the 1990s, continues to live freely in Serbia. 
     Other credible reports indicate that Radovan Karadzic, the 
     former Bosnian Serb leader responsible for the slaughter of 
     thousands of Bosnian Muslims and Croats, regularly travels to 
     Montenegro. The Committee has therefore continued, with 
     modifications, the March 31 certification requirement 
     contained in last year's Act.
       The Committee remains concerned with reports of linkages 
     between Yugoslav defense companies and Iraq. The Committee 
     recognizes and appreciates the cooperation of government 
     authorities in investigating this matter, and expects the 
     State Department to continue to press for a full accounting 
     of these linkages and to keep the Committee informed of its 
     progress.


    ASSISTANCE FOR THE INDEPENDENT STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$784,000,000
Emergency supplemental......................................110,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................755,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................765,000,000

       The Committee provides $765,000,000 for Assistance for the 
     Independent States of the Former Soviet Union, which is 
     $19,000,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level but $10,000,000 
     above the administration's fiscal year 2003 request.


                            RUSSIAN FAR EAST

       The Committee was pleased to learn that the State 
     Department and USAID provided $20,617,000 for assistance for 
     Russian Far East programs, which was above the amount 
     earmarked in fiscal year 2002. The Committee has again 
     earmarked these funds and encourages the administration to 
     continue funding at the fiscal year 2002 level.


                         PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAMS

       The Committee is aware of the Primary Health Care 
     Initiative of the World Council of Hellenes, which was 
     instituted in the former Soviet republics to provide 
     desperately needed basic health care. This program, which is 
     alleviating suffering of people through thousands of visits 
     each month, also enhances U.S. relations with these 
     countries. The Committee recommends at least $2,000,000 for 
     this program in fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee continues to follow the work of the Eurasian 
     Medical Education Program of the American College of 
     Physicians, to enhance the medical capabilities of Russian 
     physicians in the treatment of tuberculosis, cardiovascular 
     disease, and diabetes. This exchange program has been carried 
     out in four regions of the Russian Federation, and volunteer 
     American physicians have shared experience and knowledge with 
     their Russian colleagues to the benefit of the Russian 
     medical profession and the Russian people. The Committee, 
     once again, expresses its support for this program and 
     requests to be consulted regarding future funding for it.


                                ORPHANS

       The Committee continues to support USAID's Russian orphans 
     strategy, which focuses on programs to reduce the number of 
     children entering state orphanages and works with orphanage 
     officials to meet the immediate medical and basic needs of 
     these children. The Committee applauds the work of Holt 
     International Children's Services, Kidsave International, and 
     Mercy Corps International.
       The Committee expects USAID to work with non-profit groups, 
     especially those with contacts in the Russian Far East, 
     including Rotary International, the Anchorage Interfaith 
     Council, and the Municipality of Anchorage. The Committee 
     recommends $4,000,000 for this program in fiscal year 2003.


                         EDUCATIONAL EXCHANGES

       The Committee recommends up to $5,000,000 for the Russian, 
     Eurasian, and East European Research and Training Program 
     (Title VIII).
       The Committee continues to support the East Central 
     European Scholarship Program, with its emphasis on providing 
     training for participants from the countries of southeast 
     Europe.
       The Committee supports continued funding for exchanges with 
     secondary school educators, particularly the Partners in 
     Education and Teaching Excellence Awards programs and the 
     Secondary School Excellence program. The Committee encourages 
     the administration to consider supporting these programs.
       The Committee also recognizes the efforts by the American 
     Councils for International Education and the Institute for 
     Experimental Learning to begin a program to bring individuals 
     from Central Asia to participate in internships. The 
     Committee recommends that USAID and the State Department 
     consider supporting proposals from these organizations.


                            LEGAL EDUCATION

       The Committee strongly supports distance learning legal 
     education programs that have

[[Page 779]]

     been initiated in central and eastern Europe. The Committee 
     recommends that USAID expand these programs and urges the 
     Agency to seriously consider undertaking similar efforts in 
     Central Asia.
       The Committee also supports continued funding for the 
     Russian American Rule of Law Consortium, an outgrowth of the 
     successful Vermont/Karelia Rule of Law Project, which 
     promotes the development of the rule of law in the Russian 
     Federation. The Consortium manages a growing number of 
     partnerships between the legal communities in other U.S. 
     states and Russian regions.


                         VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

       The Committee, once again, commends USAID, the State 
     Department, and the Justice Department for its programs to 
     reduce domestic violence in Russia. As in prior years, the 
     Committee believes the administration should continue to 
     consult closely with and provide direct support to the 
     Russian Association of Crisis Centers for Women to further 
     strengthen local capacity to respond to this endemic problem. 
     Emphasis should be given to strengthening police and 
     prosecutorial capacity in this area. In addition, American 
     grant recipients, including police trainers, should have 
     expertise in domestic violence issues, and Russian NGOs 
     should be consulted in the design, evaluation, and monitoring 
     of these programs. The Committee recommends funding for these 
     activities at not less than the current level, and requests 
     the State Department to submit a report by July 1, 2003, 
     summarizing the actions taken, results to date, and future 
     plans for this initiative.


                                ARMENIA

       The Committee provides $90,000,000 under the heading 
     ``Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet 
     Union'' and $3,000,000 under the heading ``Foreign Military 
     Financing'' for assistance for Armenia. The Committee 
     recommends that a portion of the FMF assistance provided for 
     Armenia be used to enhance communications capabilities. The 
     Committee recommends $750,000 for Armenia under the heading 
     ``International Military Education and Training.''
       The Committee encourages the efforts of the administration, 
     the Minsk Group, and all parties to the Nagorno-Karabakh 
     conflict to continue negotiations toward a peaceful 
     resolution of the dispute. The Committee supports a mutually 
     acceptable negotiated solution, and continues to endorse 
     confidence-building measures among all parties to the 
     conflict, which may include such activities as joint 
     commissions relating to water resources, refugee 
     resettlement, landmine clearance, and joint activities 
     relating to parliamentary, journalist, and rule of law 
     training. The Committee encourages Turkey to reconsider 
     establishing a rail link between Kars, Turkey and Gyumri, 
     Armenia. The Committee believes that such action would make a 
     positive contribution to America's efforts to prevent and 
     respond to international terrorism and the economic 
     development of both Turkey and Armenia. The Committee 
     encourages the State Department and USAID to consider 
     utilizing the American University of Armenia as a learning 
     center for students from the region.
       The Committee is aware of the proposed CANDEL project for 
     Armenia. As the scope of the project far exceeds that of more 
     traditional assistance programs, the Committee recommends 
     that the project's sponsors, the State Department, and 
     relevant Armenian officials continue discussions on the 
     economic viability of CANDEL, including, in particular, 
     issues relating to its sustainability absent assistance from 
     the United States. Given scarce resources within the FSU 
     account, the Committee recommends that continued funding for 
     the project's study be made available from assistance 
     provided for Armenia in this Act.


                                UKRAINE

       The Committee remains concerned with reports of Ukraine's 
     covert transfer of the Kolchuga radar system to Iraq. The 
     Committee encourages the State Department and other Federal 
     authorities to continue to determine if this transfer took 
     place, and calls for greater cooperation by Ukrainian 
     authorities in this endeavor.
       While the Committee believes that the independence and 
     sovereignty of Ukraine is of crucial strategic importance to 
     the United States and stability in Europe, the Committee 
     condemns President Leonid Kuchma's increasingly autocratic 
     rule. The Committee notes that under the leadership of 
     President Kuchma, Ukrainian opposition activists have been 
     intimidated and harassed, and journalists murdered. In 
     addition, the Committee remains concerned with an investment 
     climate that is less than favorable to foreign businesses, 
     particularly the lack of transparent and fair resolution of 
     business disputes.
       The Committee believes that substantial assistance should 
     be provided to support reformers pressing for much needed 
     political, legal, and economic reforms. The Committee 
     endorses increased funding for U.S. nongovernmental 
     organizations seeking to strengthen democracy and the rule of 
     law in Ukraine.
       The Committee provides that not less than $30,000,000 shall 
     be made available for nuclear reactor safety initiatives, 
     which are in the national security interests of the United 
     States. The Committee also provides that not less than 
     $3,000,000 shall be made available for coal mine safety 
     programs and activities in Ukraine. The Committee recommends 
     that $1,000,000 be made available for the study of the 
     environmental causes of birth defects in Rivine and Volyn 
     oblasts. The Committee also recognizes the growing physical 
     security and environmental threats associated with unexploded 
     ordnance and excess weapons stockpiles in Ukraine, and 
     suggests that the State Department evaluate environmentally-
     safe, commercially available disposal technologies for 
     demining activities, the clearance of unexploded ordnance, 
     and the destruction of excess weapon stockpiles.
       The Committee supports efforts to improve nuclear safety in 
     Ukraine and recognizes the important work of the 
     International Nuclear Safety Program, including the Computer 
     Information Systems component of this program.


                                GEORGIA

       The Committee provides $87,000,000 for assistance for 
     Georgia, and commends Georgia for its support for U.S. 
     efforts to prevent and respond to international terrorism. 
     The Committee continues to support the enhancement of 
     Georgia's border control capabilities, and appreciates the 
     timely and effective response of Georgian authorities to the 
     unauthorized deployment of Russian troops in the Kodori gorge 
     region last year. As in the past, the Committee remains 
     concerned with the high incidence of corruption in Georgia 
     and the limited progress by Russia in closing military bases 
     in Georgia.
       The Committee recommends not less than $3,000,000 for a 
     small business development project relating to private sector 
     technology start-ups for Georgia.


                           NAGORONO-KARABAKH

       The Committee continues to be concerned about the plight of 
     the victims of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and expects 
     that the remainder of the $20,000,000 in humanitarian 
     assistance, initially provided in fiscal year 1998, will be 
     promptly disbursed. The Committee expects that should these 
     funds be obligated and expended before the end of fiscal year 
     2003, up to $5,000,000 should be made available to address 
     ongoing humanitarian needs in Nagorno-Karabakh.

                          Independent Agencies


                              PEACE CORPS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$275,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................317,228,000
Committee recommendation....................................285,000,000

       The Committee strongly supports the Peace Corps' mission 
     and is receptive to the President's proposal to increase the 
     number of volunteers in the field over the next 5 years. The 
     Committee is concerned, however, that the quality, 
     effectiveness, and security of volunteers may be compromised 
     if this expansion is not carefully planned. The Committee 
     requests more information about the significant decline of 
     volunteers in the field to 5,648 during fiscal year 2002, and 
     is concerned that the Peace Corps may be overly-ambitious in 
     budgeting for 8,200 volunteers in the field by the end of 
     fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee recommends $285,000,000 for the Peace Corps, 
     which is a $10,000,000 increase over last year's level. The 
     Committee is confident that ample resources are being made 
     available to support a prudent expansion of the number of 
     volunteers, as the fiscal year 2000 budget of $275,000,000 
     supported a program of nearly 6,000 volunteers. The Committee 
     looks forward to receiving a comprehensive analysis of how 
     the Peace Corps intends to expand its programs over the next 
     5 years while maintaining the quality and integrity of its 
     mission.
       The Committee is pleased that the Peace Corps has initiated 
     a program in the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (formally 
     East Timor) and supports efforts to place additional 
     volunteers there in fiscal year 2003.


                     AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION

Appropriations, 2002........................................$16,542,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................16,689,000
Committee recommendation.....................................17,689,000

       The Committee provides $17,689,000 for the African 
     Development Foundation (ADF). The Committee commends the work 
     of the ADF, which provides critical, small-scale support for 
     projects which benefit some of sub-Saharan Africa's most 
     impoverished communities.


                       INTER-AMERICAN FOUNDATION

Appropriations, 2002........................................$13,106,950
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,185,000
Committee recommendation.....................................16,385,000

       The Committee provides $16,385,000 for the Inter-American 
     Foundation (IAF), which is $3,278,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 level. The Committee commends the progress the IAF has 
     made in addressing past management deficiencies.

                          Department of State


              INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$217,000,000
Emergency supplemental......................................114,000,000

[[Page 780]]

Budget estimate, 2003.......................................196,713,000
Committee recommendation....................................196,713,000

       The Committee provides $196,713,000 for International 
     Narcotics and Law Enforcement (INL), which is equal to the 
     administration's request. The Committee is perplexed by the 
     administration's decision to cut funding for INL programs in 
     anti-corruption, financial crimes, border controls, and other 
     law enforcement efforts, at a time when the need for these 
     activities is increasingly apparent.


                         TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS

       The Committee provides $20,000,000 in INL funds for 
     programs and activities to counter trafficking in persons. 
     The Committee remains strongly committed to assisting women 
     and children who are the most innocent victims of this gross 
     human rights violation, which also contributes to the spread 
     of HIV/AIDS. The Committee believes that these funds should 
     be used to combat all three components of anti-trafficking: 
     addressing the root causes of trafficking, protecting and 
     providing services for victims, and prosecuting traffickers. 
     The Committee believes that the issue of human trafficking is 
     sufficiently well-understood that these funds should not be 
     used for additional studies or conferences to assess needs, 
     but rather directed largely to NGOs to implement programs to 
     prevent trafficking, assist victims, and prosecute 
     traffickers.


                INTERNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ACADEMIES

       The Committee continues to support the work that the 
     International Law Enforcement Academies (ILEA) provide to the 
     international community. The Committee is pleased that the 
     administration doubled funding for these programs from fiscal 
     year 2001 to 2002, but notes that the administration's 
     request for the ILEA programs has remained constant for 
     fiscal year 2003 even though it is considering opening an 
     additional center in Latin America. The Committee is aware of 
     ongoing discussions on the location of this center, and 
     recommends that the administration consider Southern Mexico 
     as an appropriate site for the establishment of a regional 
     center. The Committee urges the administration to provide 
     adequate resources for each of these centers and to complete 
     a new facility for the Roswell Center as soon as possible. 
     The Committee strongly endorses the participation of the 
     Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste in regional ILEA programs 
     and activities.


                         MARITIME INTERDICTION

       The Committee continues to believe that both the Bahamas 
     and Costa Rica play important roles in combating the flow of 
     illegal narcotics, especially through maritime interdiction. 
     The Committee directs the State Department to submit a 
     report, no later than 120 days after the date of enactment of 
     the Act, on the procurement needs of the governments of the 
     Bahamas and Costa Rica to implement an effective 
     counternarcotics strategy. This report is to examine these 
     needs, including an assessment of the procurement of high 
     speed boats, within the context of the projected budget for 
     counternarcotics programs in fiscal year 2004.


                     ANDEAN COUNTERDRUG INITIATIVE

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$625,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................731,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................650,000,000

       The Committee provides $650,000,000 for the Andean 
     Counterdrug Initiative (ACI), and the authority for the 
     transfer of up to an additional $35,000,000 from the 
     ``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' 
     account for the ACI. In addition, the Committee provides up 
     to $88,000,000 from the Foreign Military Financing Program 
     account for equipment and training for the Colombian Armed 
     Forces for pipeline security in Arauca department.
       The Committee notes that the expectations of ``Plan 
     Colombia'' remain high, particularly with respect to 
     international donor contributions, coca and poppy 
     eradication, and alternative development activities. The 
     Committee is aware that efforts to eradicate coca and poppy 
     cultivation are hampered by Colombia's ongoing civil war, and 
     recognizes the nexus between those involved in the narcotics 
     trade and in guerrilla warfare against the Colombian people. 
     The Committee provides the authority, requested by the 
     administration, to support Colombia's unified campaign 
     against narcotics trafficking and paramilitary and guerrilla 
     terrorist organizations.
       The Committee appreciates the determination of President 
     Uribe to improve Colombia's security situation and his 
     commitment to eradicate illicit drug cultivation. The 
     Committee notes that since taking office earlier this year, 
     President Uribe has devoted more resources to the military 
     than previous administrations, imposed a tax upon the 
     wealthiest Colombians in an effort to raise $800,000,000, and 
     submitted a budget for 2003 that boosts security spending for 
     the police. The Committee cautions that with these welcomed 
     increases--which evidences the Colombian Government's renewed 
     will to tackle its most pressing challenges--must come 
     greater vigilance to protect and defend the human rights and 
     dignity of the Colombian people.
       The Committee has again included conditions tying the 
     obligation of funds to progress on human rights, and on the 
     aerial spraying of herbicide. The Committee has also retained 
     its limits imposed in fiscal year 2001 on the number of U.S. 
     military on duty, and U.S. civilian personnel employed, in 
     Colombia.
       As the Committee believes that viable alternative sources 
     of income for coca and poppy farmers are essential for the 
     sustainable eradication of illicit crops, it provides 
     $225,000,000 for USAID alternative development programs and 
     activities.
       The Committee condemns the abuses of human rights by all 
     parties to the conflict, particularly paramilitaries and the 
     FARC who are responsible for the large majority of atrocities 
     against civilians. The Committee expects the Colombian 
     Government to hold accountable government and military 
     officials who violate human rights, and to ensure that all 
     government agencies and organizations are fully committed to 
     prosecuting those who violate the law.
       As the Committee believes that a special unit of the 
     Colombian Armed Forces should be dedicated to the 
     apprehension of the leaders of paramilitary organizations, it 
     has included authority and funding from the ``International 
     Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' and ``Foreign 
     Military Financing Program'' accounts to train and equip such 
     a unit.
       The Committee is aware of an initiative in Colombia, the 
     Colombia Military Project, which promotes dialogue and 
     analysis among civilians and retired military officers about 
     the conflict and the implications of peace processes for the 
     Armed Forces. Topics include a cease fire, decommissioning of 
     weapons, demobilization, and the reinsertion into civil 
     society of ex-combatants. Given that any successful peace 
     process requires the active support of the Armed Forces, the 
     Committee believes that the State Department should seriously 
     consider providing financial support to the Colombia Military 
     Project.
       The Committee is increasingly concerned that developments 
     in Colombia may lead to a significant spill-over of refugees, 
     insurgents, and narcotics traffickers into the territory of 
     Colombia's neighbors, and expects the administration's 
     allocation of resources for the Andean Counterdrug Initiative 
     to reflect these volatile conditions.
       The Committee is aware of Colombia's extraordinary national 
     parks and reserves, which encompass some of the world's most 
     biologically diverse tropical forests. These areas, which are 
     among Colombia's greatest natural resource and a potential 
     source of income from eco-tourism, are increasingly 
     threatened by coca farmers and illegal loggers. The Committee 
     provides $3,500,000 for training, equipment and other 
     assistance to protect these parks and reserves.
       The Committee is concerned that PLANTE has not followed 
     through on its pledge to provide some $700,000 in fiscal year 
     2002 funds to the Colombian National Park Service to support 
     coca eradication activities in communities located adjacent 
     to several national parks. The Committee is aware that 
     $150,000 was provided for planning purposes. The Committee 
     believes that this program is important to the economic 
     development of the communities involved and to the protection 
     of these threatened natural areas, and expects the additional 
     funds to be provided expeditiously.


                    MIGRATION AND REFUGEE ASSISTANCE

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$705,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................704,565,000
Committee recommendation....................................787,000,000

       In fiscal year 2002, the Committee reduced the amount 
     provided for Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) because 
     an additional $100,000,000 had been provided in supplemental 
     funding. At that time, the Committee clearly stated that this 
     reduction was not to be interpreted as a lack of support for 
     the MRA account or to be used as a baseline when formulating 
     the fiscal year 2003 request. Thus, the Committee is 
     disappointed with the amount that the administration 
     requested for this account.
       The Committee recognizes that, even with supplemental 
     funding, the crisis in Afghanistan has severely strained the 
     MRA budget. In addition, a number of other urgent 
     humanitarian crises around the world, including those in 
     Africa, southeast Asia, the North Caucasus, and Colombia, 
     have left millions of people at risk of starvation, exposure, 
     and disease. Therefore, the Committee provides $787,000,000 
     for the Migration and Refugee Assistance account.


                         RESETTLEMENT IN ISRAEL

       The Committee provides $60,000,000 for the resettlement of 
     migrants from the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and 
     other areas to Israel. This is equal to the amount 
     appropriated in fiscal year 2002. The Committee notes that 
     while Israel has accepted more than 1 million refugees since 
     1989, over the past year there has been a modest decline in 
     the number of refugees from the former Soviet Union 
     resettling in Israel. Should this decline continue, the 
     Committee anticipates that funding for this program will be 
     decreased in fiscal year 2004.

[[Page 781]]




             UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES

       The Committee strongly supports the work of the United 
     Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which 
     provides assistance to millions of refugees and internally 
     displaced persons. The Committee is deeply concerned by the 
     large budget shortfall that currently confronts UNHCR, and 
     while the Committee commends UNHCR for making a number of 
     necessary spending reductions, it is alarmed that this 
     shortfall is beginning to adversely impact field operations 
     in a number of regions.
       The Committee has, therefore, increased funding for the 
     Migration and Refugee Assistance account with the expectation 
     that the United States will increase its contribution to 
     UNHCR should the need arise. However, the Committee notes 
     that U.S. contributions now exceed 25 percent of the total 
     UNHCR budget and that other international donors are not 
     contributing sufficient amounts or following through on 
     outstanding pledges. The Committee urges UNHCR to use the 
     U.S. contribution to leverage additional support from other 
     nations.
       The Committee continues to be concerned by allegations that 
     refugees in Africa were sexually abused by employees of UNHCR 
     and nongovernmental organizations in the field. While the 
     Committee recognizes that the United Nations has initiated an 
     investigation and implemented measures to prevent a 
     recurrence, including hiring protection staff, the Committee 
     urges the United Nations to ensure that its investigation is 
     thorough and completed in a timely manner, and that those 
     responsible for these acts are punished. The Committee also 
     urges appropriate nongovernmental organizations to take 
     similar action.


 THE UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY FOR PALESTINE REFUGEES IN 
                             THE NEAR EAST

       The Committee recognizes the important contribution of the 
     United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees 
     in the Near East (UNRWA), to provide basic humanitarian 
     services to approximately 3.8 million refugees in the region. 
     The Committee is concerned, however, with reports that some 
     individuals involved in international terrorism have come 
     from refugee camps administered by UNRWA. The Committee urges 
     UNRWA to cooperate with efforts to prevent and respond to 
     acts of international terrorism.


                            TIBETAN REFUGEES

       Like last year, the Committee supports continued funding to 
     assist Tibetan refugees and recommends $2,000,000 for this 
     purpose. The Committee, again, requests that the State 
     Department coordinate with USAID in determining 
     responsibility for long term assistance for Tibetan refugees.


          REFUGEES AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS IN AFRICA

       The Committee notes the dire situation of the more than 4 
     million refugees and IDPs throughout Africa living in 
     deplorable conditions. The Committee urges the administration 
     to work with international organizations, including the World 
     Food Program and UNHCR, as well as other governments to 
     provide additional assistance to the region in fiscal year 
     2003.


            EMERGENCY REFUGEE AND MIGRATION ASSISTANCE FUND

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................15,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................32,000,000

       The Committee notes that the Emergency Refugee and 
     Migration Assistance (ERMA) fund has been drawn down several 
     times over the past year. The Committee is concerned that, 
     despite some supplemental funding, the ERMA account has been 
     reduced to substantially lower than anticipated levels. The 
     Committee provides $32,000,000 for ERMA, which is $17,000,000 
     more than the amount requested.


    NONPROLIFERATION, ANTI-TERRORISM, DEMINING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$313,500,000
Emergency supplemental.......................................83,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................372,400,000
Committee recommendation....................................306,400,000

       The Committee provides $306,400,000 for the 
     Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related 
     Programs account. The Committee continues its strong support 
     for these programs which are critical to efforts by the 
     United States to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass 
     destruction, prevent and respond to international terrorism, 
     and help improve border security.


          COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN TREATY PREPARATORY COMMISSION

       The Committee provides $17,300,000 for a contribution to 
     the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission. 
     These funds help leverage donations from other nations for 
     the International Monitoring System, which is designed to 
     collect data from seismic, hydroacoustic, infrasound, and 
     radionuclide stations around the world, enhancing U.S. 
     capabilities for detecting and monitoring nuclear tests.


                   INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY

       The Committee is concerned that the request for a 
     contribution to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 
     is insufficient, as the IAEA is facing increasing demands on 
     its budget to execute a range of programs that are critical 
     to U.S. security interests. The Committee provides $4,400,000 
     above the amount requested for the IAEA.


           KOREAN PENNINSULA ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION

       As North Korea both violated and withdrew from the Agreed 
     Framework, the administration informally informed the 
     Committee that it was rescinding the $75,000,000 request for 
     the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO).
       The Committee, therefore, has restricted funding for KEDO 
     in this Act. The President may waive this restriction and 
     provide up to $3,500,000 to KEDO for administrative expenses 
     only if he determines, and provides a written policy 
     justification to the appropriate congressional committees, 
     that it is vital to national security interests to do so.


                         HUMANITARIAN DEMINING

       The Committee supports the State Department's Humanitarian 
     Demining Program to clear landmines and other unexploded 
     ordnance that continue to endanger people in over 60 
     countries. The Committee provides $57,000,000 for these 
     activities. Of this amount, up to $10,000,000 may be made 
     available for the Slovenia Trust Fund, on a dollar-for-dollar 
     matching basis.
       The Committee notes that the State Department has developed 
     about 30 public-private partnerships with nongovernmental 
     organizations, foundations, and private companies, in support 
     of mine action activities. To maximize the effectiveness of 
     these public-private partnerships, the State Department needs 
     the ability to enter into grants and cooperative agreements. 
     The grant process would allow the Government and the private 
     sector grantee to enter into a partnership to achieve shared 
     objectives such as training demining personnel and mine-
     detecting dogs; developing training materials and mine risk 
     education materials that teach children and adults how to 
     recognize, report and avoid landmines; and research and 
     development into new technologies to increase the 
     effectiveness and speed of detecting and removing landmines. 
     To the maximum extent feasible, grants and cooperative 
     agreements should be used to support mine action activities 
     of nongovernmental organizations. The State Department is to 
     implement this authority in compliance with all statutory and 
     regulatory guidelines governing grants and cooperative 
     agreements.
       The Committee notes that several country recipients of 
     demining funds from the NADR account also receive large 
     amounts of assistance from the ESF, SEED, or FSU accounts. 
     The Committee is concerned about pressures on the NADR budget 
     which contains a limited amount of humanitarian demining 
     funds, and believes that demining programs in these countries 
     should be funded jointly from both NADR and these other 
     accounts.


                      SMALL ARMS AND LIGHT WEAPONS

       The Committee is aware that small arms and light weapons, 
     including mortars, rocket propelled grenades, and heavy 
     machine guns, have been used by international terrorist 
     organizations, contributed to human rights violations, fueled 
     conflicts, and impeded development efforts. The Committee 
     provides $4,000,000 in fiscal year 2003 for the Small Arms 
     Destruction Initiative, which provides assistance to 
     countries that have requested help in eliminating stockpiles 
     of these weapons. This is $1,000,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 level.

                       Department of the Treasury


                INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS TECHNICAL TRAINING

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,500,000

       The Committee strongly supports the Department of the 
     Treasury's International Affairs Technical Assistance program 
     and provides $10,500,000 for fiscal year 2003. This amount is 
     $500,000 above the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     level. The Committee appreciates the responsiveness of the 
     Treasury Department to Committee requests for information 
     concerning its international affairs programs.

                               TITLE III

                          MILITARY ASSISTANCE

                  Funds Appropriated to the President


             international military education and training

Appropriations, 2002........................................$70,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................80,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................80,000,000

       The Committee continues its strong support for the 
     International Military Education and Training (IMET) program 
     and provides $80,000,000 for this account. The Committee 
     believes that, by capitalizing on the worldwide respect for 
     the U.S. Armed Forces, the IMET program offers a unique 
     opportunity to establish important contacts with foreign 
     militaries and promote American values.
       The Committee recognizes that absent a political commitment 
     on the part of foreign

[[Page 782]]

     governments to support reforms within their militaries--
     including those promoting greater accountability and civilian 
     oversight--IMET's impact may be limited. The Committee 
     believes that in those countries where military reform is not 
     a priority, but where IMET programs are conducted in the 
     security interests of the United States, the administration 
     should make clear that the provision of IMET is not a broad 
     or general endorsement of a foreign government's or 
     military's actions.
       The Committee directs the State Department, in conjunction 
     with the Department of Defense, to provide a report not later 
     than 120 days after enactment of the Act, containing the 
     number of civilians from non-governmental organizations that 
     participated in the IMET program during fiscal year 2002. The 
     report should also include the professional backgrounds of 
     these individuals, their nationality, and the type of IMET 
     program in which they participated.
       The Committee is aware that previously enacted legislation, 
     including the Security Assistance Act of 2000 (Public Law 
     106-280), authorized assistance levels above the 
     administration's fiscal year 2003 request for IMET assistance 
     for Greece and Turkey and encouraged joint training of Greek 
     and Turkish officers to the maximum extent practicable. The 
     Committee continues to be supportive of these initiatives, 
     which could help strengthen ties between two important NATO 
     allies, and encourages the administration to fund these 
     programs at the highest appropriate level.


                       foreign military financing

                          grant program level

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,650,000,000
Emergency supplemental......................................357,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,107,200,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,072,000,000

       The Committee provides $4,072,000,000 in Foreign Military 
     Financing grant programs for fiscal year 2003. This is 
     $422,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 allocation, and 
     $35,200,000 below the administration's request.


                         middle east countries

       The Committee provides the administration's request of 
     $2,100,000,000 in FMF for Israel and $1,300,000,000 for 
     Egypt. The Committee also provides the request level of 
     $198,000,000 for Jordan.


                                 turkey

       The Committee supports military assistance for Turkey 
     without the 10-to-7 ratio of assistance to Greece, because 
     these funds will be used only to support Turkey's command of 
     the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan 
     and for its military role, in cooperation with the United 
     States and Greece, in Operation Enduring Freedom and other 
     efforts against international terrorism.


                            THE PHILIPPINES

       Recognizing the efforts and determination of the 
     Philippines to combat terrorism, the Committee provided 
     increased Foreign Military Financing program funds for the 
     archipelago in the supplemental appropriations bill. The 
     Committee notes with appreciation the cooperation between the 
     United States and the Philippines to counter terrorism, and 
     again recommends increased Foreign Military Financing 
     assistance above the administration's request of $20,000,000.


                             baltic states

       The Committee continues to endorse the measures that 
     Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have taken to bring their 
     militaries in line with Western standards. The Committee 
     strongly supports full funding of the administration's 
     request for IMET and FMF for the Baltic States.


                                TUNISIA

       The Committee supports the administration's request of 
     $5,000,000 in FMF and $1,500,000 in IMET assistance for 
     Tunisia.


                    foreign military training report

       The Committee commends the administration's efforts to 
     improve the transparency and accessibility of the fiscal year 
     2001-2002 Foreign Military Training Report. The Committee 
     expects next year's report to be similar in content and in 
     the amount of information that is classified, including 
     information on training activities by civilian contractors 
     funded by the U.S. Government. The Committee expects to be 
     consulted on the format and contents of the report, if the 
     administration anticipates making significant changes in its 
     format or content.


                              patrol boats

       The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Government of 
     Malta to purchase additional coastal patrol boats. The 
     Committee also urges the Administration to seriously consider 
     a request from the Government of El Salvador to purchase 
     additional high-speed, aluminum patrol boats.


                          non-lethal equipment

       The Committee is concerned that, too often, foreign 
     soldiers and law enforcement officials, because they lack the 
     proper training and equipment, have failed to deal 
     effectively with civil unrest and rioting, resulting in 
     unnecessary bloodshed. The Committee believes that the 
     administration, in consultation with the Committees on 
     Appropriations, should consider providing up to $7,000,000 
     from the ``Foreign Military Financing Program'' and 
     ``International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement'' 
     accounts to help governments train and equip units with non-
     lethal weapons. This assistance should be provided only after 
     thorough vetting of participants and consistent with existing 
     laws on human rights.


                        LIMITATION ON ASSISTANCE

       The Committee reaffirms its language under this heading in 
     its fiscal year 2002 report (pages 57-58 of Report 107-58). 
     The Committee requests to be consulted by the Bureau for 
     Democracy, Human Rights and Labor on steps taken to establish 
     and maintain a centralized, electronic database of credible 
     evidence of violations by foreign security force units. In 
     addition, in order to implement the law effectively, the 
     Committee expects American embassy officials to take 
     affirmative steps to consult regularly with local security 
     and intelligence agencies, human rights groups, and other 
     reliable sources of information about gross violations of 
     human rights, and to record any relevant information in the 
     embassy database. When credible evidence exists, American 
     embassy officials should contact the local security and 
     justice agencies to ensure that they are aware of the law and 
     the need to bring those responsible to justice.


                        peacekeeping operations

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$135,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................108,250,000
Committee recommendation....................................120,250,000

       The Committee remains concerned with the security situation 
     in Afghanistan, and recommends that the administration 
     continue its discussions with international donors on how 
     best to secure a stable environment.
       While the changing mission of U.S. troops in Afghanistan 
     will enhance stability in parts of the country, the Committee 
     notes that the primary justification that the administration 
     has used to oppose expanding the mandate of the International 
     Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is its commitment to train 
     the Afghan National Army (ANA). The Committee shares the 
     belief that training the ANA is the only viable way to 
     improve security over the long term, and is pleased by the 
     recent announcement by the Government of Afghanistan that an 
     army of 70,000 will eventually be fielded. However, it is the 
     Committee's understanding that a battle-ready ANA is at least 
     2 years away, and the Committee strongly urges the 
     administration to consider a wide range of options to deal 
     with the immediate security needs in Afghanistan.
       The Committee remains concerned with the funding levels 
     budgeted for training the ANA. The Committee understands that 
     the situation in Afghanistan remains fluid and dynamic, and, 
     therefore, recommends that $7,000,000 from the ``Peacekeeping 
     Operations'' account be made available to support efforts to 
     establish an effective Afghan National Army.
       The Committee is concerned that the administration's 
     request proposes cuts in important peacekeeping missions in 
     Africa. The Committee recommends that $10,000,000 of the 
     funds provided above the request should be used to restore 
     some of these reductions.

                                TITLE IV

                  MULTILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE --

              International Financial Institutions Summary

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,174,796,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,437,097,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,329,097,000

       The Committee recommends the total amount of paid-in 
     capital funding shown above to provide for contributions to 
     the International Development Association, Multilateral 
     Investment Guarantee Agency, the Global Environment Facility 
     (GEF), the Inter-American Development Bank's Inter-American 
     Investment Corporation and Multilateral Investment Fund, the 
     Asian Development Fund, the African Development Bank and 
     Fund, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 
     and the International Fund for Agriculture Development.
       World Bank.--The Committee continues to follow the World 
     Bank's efforts to reform its internal grievance procedures. 
     Despite some progress, it remains apparent that as long as 
     the Bank and the other international financial institutions 
     are immune from the court process, they need to do more to 
     ensure that complaints are independently investigated and 
     adjudicated in accordance with due process, and that managers 
     are punished for misconduct, especially retaliation. The 
     Committee is particularly concerned with the professionalism 
     of the Bank's legal department, and questions its ability to 
     carry out its responsibilities fairly and effectively. Among 
     other things, the Bank's lawyers have expended resources 
     prolonging cases that should have been resolved quickly, or 
     defended management when it would have been in the interests 
     of the institution to represent the complainants, who often 
     cannot afford lawyers of their own.

[[Page 783]]

       World Commission on Dams.--The Committee is concerned with 
     the World Bank's failure to formally adopt the guidelines 
     recommended by the World Commission on Dams (WCD), whose 
     report, ``Dams and Development,'' addresses a complex, 
     controversial subject in a balanced way, including proposing 
     comprehensive, practical and innovative guidelines for future 
     action. The Committee again urges the Bank to continue to 
     engage with the full range of interested parties in the 
     implementation of the WCD's report, and to integrate these 
     guidelines to the fullest extent practicable into the Bank's 
     relevant operational policies and directives, including those 
     relating to resettlement, environmental assessment, and water 
     and energy policies.
       International Monetary Fund.--The Committee remains 
     concerned that the IMF has not implemented many of the 
     recommendations of its 1994 Working Group on the Status of 
     Women, especially those aimed at increasing the number of 
     women in managerial positions. Last year, the Committee urged 
     the IMF to obtain an updated regression analysis to determine 
     what further steps are needed to correct persistent gender 
     disparities in hiring and promotion. Regrettably, the IMF has 
     failed to do so.

         International Bank for Reconstruction and Development


                 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$792,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................874,338,333
Committee recommendation....................................837,338,333


                      GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$100,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................177,813,533
Committee recommendation....................................177,813,533

                Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,631,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,631,000

       The Committee remains concerned about the Bujagli dam 
     proposal and expects to be consulted concerning the U.S. 
     position prior to a vote on this project.

                    Inter-American Development Bank


                 INTER-AMERICAN INVESTMENT CORPORATION

Appropriations, 2002........................................$18,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................30,352,000
Committee recommendation.....................................18,351,667


                      Multilateral Investment Fund

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$29,590,667
Committee recommendation.....................................29,590,667

                         Asian Development Bank


                         ASIAN DEVELOPMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2002........................................$98,017,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................147,386,133
Committee recommendation....................................100,386,133

                        African Development Bank

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,100,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,104,473
Committee recommendation......................................5,104,473


                        AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$100,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................118,073,333
Committee recommendation....................................108,073,333

            European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Appropriations, 2002........................................$35,779,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................35,804,955
Committee recommendation.....................................35,804,955

       The Committee notes that Article 1 of the Agreement 
     Establishing the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
     Development (EBRD) states that the Bank's purpose is to 
     foster transition toward market economies in countries that 
     are committed to and applying the principles of multiparty 
     democracy and pluralism. The Committee, therefore, is 
     troubled by the EBRD's decision to hold its annual meeting 
     next year in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, and expects the Treasury 
     Department and the EBRD to use this opportunity to urge the 
     Government of Uzbekistan to meet its commitments under the 
     ``Declaration on the Strategic Partnership and Cooperation 
     Framework Between the Republic of Uzbekistan and the United 
     States of America'', by ensuring respect for human rights and 
     freedoms, building a multiparty democracy, and implementing 
     judicial and legal reforms.


            INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2002........................................$20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................15,003,667
Committee recommendation.....................................15,003,667

       The Committee recommends $15,003,667 for a contribution to 
     the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) 
     and expects the United States to continue its strong support 
     of IFAD during negotiations for the 6th replenishment of 
     IFAD.
       The Committee is supportive of the IFAD's new rural finance 
     policy, and encourages IFAD to coordinate more effectively 
     with cooperative development organizations in the United 
     States to build sustainable, member-owned cooperatives and 
     credit unions.
       The Committee also supports IFAD's continuing participation 
     in the enhanced Heavily-Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) 
     initiative. The Committee recommends that the administration 
     explore ways to ensure that IFAD's continued participation in 
     the enhanced HIPC initiative will not detract from its 
     capacity to manage its development programs.


                INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$208,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................310,400,000
Committee recommendation....................................215,000,000

       The Committee provides $215,000,000 for the ``International 
     Organizations and Programs'' account. This amount does not 
     include funding for the Korean Peninsula Energy Development 
     Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency.-


               UNITED NATIONS FUND FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE

       The Committee continues to support the United Nations Fund 
     for Victims of Torture and recommends a U.S. contribution of 
     $5,000,000 in fiscal year 2003. The Committee is aware that 
     this Fund supports nearly 100 treatment programs and projects 
     for victims of torture in over 50 countries. The Committee 
     urges the State Department to seek additional contributions 
     from other governments for the Fund.


  international efforts to combat THE ILLICIT TRADE IN SMALL ARMS AND 
                             LIGHT WEAPONS

       The Committee directs the Secretary of State, no later than 
     120 days after the date of enactment of the Act, to transmit 
     a report describing the activities undertaken, and the 
     progress made, by the Department of State or other agencies 
     and entities of the U.S. Government in implementing the goals 
     of the Program of Action of the 2001 United Nations 
     Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light 
     Weapons in All Its Aspects.


                     UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND

       Last year, the President requested $25,000,000 for the U.N. 
     Population Fund (UNFPA), based on a February 2001 
     determination by the State Department that the UNFPA's 
     program in the People's Republic of China was not in 
     violation of the ``Kemp-Kasten Amendment'' which prohibits 
     United States funds to any organization or program which 
     ``supports or participates in the management of a program of 
     coercive abortions or involuntary sterilization.''
       After lengthy negotiations and a series of comprises, the 
     House and Senate approved up to $34,000,000 for UNFPA. The 
     Statement of the Managers accompanying the fiscal year 2002 
     Foreign Operations Conference Report made clear that the 
     Congress intended to provide $34,000,000 for UNFPA. Congress 
     also continued the prohibition on the use of United States 
     funds in China.
       Allegations that UNFPA was in violation of Kemp-Kasten 
     prompted the administration to withhold disbursement of the 
     fiscal year 2002 funds for UNFPA and to dispatch a 3-member 
     investigative team to China in April. The Committee commends 
     the administration for its efforts to investigate these 
     allegations, and deplores the coercive aspects of China's 
     family planning program which are violations of human rights.
       As the administration is in the process of working with 
     UNFPA and the Chinese Government in an attempt to resolve 
     this matter, the Committee has provided that funds 
     appropriated in this Act, and in Public Law 107-115 that were 
     available for the UNFPA, shall be made available to the UNFPA 
     if the Secretary of State determines that UNFPA no longer 
     participates in the management of a program of coercive 
     abortion or involuntary sterilization.
       The Committee has continued its prohibition on the use of 
     funds made available to UNFPA in the People's Republic of 
     China.


                   UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM

       The Committee has provided $12,025,000 for a United States 
     contribution to the United Nations Environment Program, which 
     plays a key role in addressing a wide range of environmental 
     problems, including ozone depletion, the unsafe use of toxic 
     chemicals, and land-based and marine pollution. The Committee 
     recognizes that UNEP's activities are complimentary to U.S. 
     interests in protecting the global environment, and believes 
     the United States should more strongly support UNEP.


                           WORLD FOOD PROGRAM

       Traditionally, the Committee has provided funds for costs 
     associated with the delivery and management of U.S. food 
     donations to the World Food Program in the Foreign 
     Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 
     Appropriations Act. In its fiscal year 2003 budget, the 
     administration requested funds for this purpose in the 
     Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The Committee 
     prefers to continue its past practice, and provides 
     $6,000,000 for the World Food Program.
       The Committee is extremely concerned with the food security 
     crisis in sub-Saharan

[[Page 784]]

     Africa, where a combination of adverse climate conditions, 
     mismanagement of grain reserves, and questionable government 
     policies, particularly in Zimbabwe, have put approximately 38 
     million people at risk. The Committee has provided additional 
     funds in the ``International Disaster Assistance'' and 
     ``Migration and Refugee Assistance'' accounts to help address 
     this crisis and urges the administration to increase food aid 
     to the region. The Committee urges the administration to 
     request supplemental funding for this purpose.


                       UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSITY

       The Committee is aware that U.N. University contributes, 
     through research and capacity building, to international 
     efforts to address pressing global issues such as food 
     security, environmental degradation, and governance. Rather 
     than a degree-granting institution, U.N. University is an 
     important resource for the United Nations, promoting bridges 
     between the United Nations and the international academic 
     community. The Committee encourages the administration to 
     consider resuming support for U.N. University.

                                TITLE V

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 501. Obligations during last month of availability.
       Sec. 502. Private and Voluntary Organizations.
       Sec. 503. Limitation on Residence Expenses.
       Sec. 504. Limitation on Expenses.
       Sec. 505. Limitation on Representational Allowances.
       Sec. 506. Prohibition on Financing Nuclear Goods.
       Sec. 507. Prohibition Against Direct Funding for Certain 
     Countries.
       Sec. 508. Military Coups.
       Sec. 509. Transfers Between Accounts.
       Sec. 510. Deobligation/Reobligation Authority.
       Sec. 511. Availability of Funds.
       Sec. 512. Limitation on Assistance to Countries in Default.
       Sec. 513. Commerce and Trade.
       Sec. 514. Surplus Commodities.
       Sec. 515. Notification Requirements.
       Sec. 516. Limitation on Availability of Funds for 
     International Organizations and Programs.
       Sec. 517. Independent States of the Former Soviet Union.
       Sec. 518. Export Financing Transfer Authorities.
       Sec. 519. Special Notification Requirements.
       Sec. 520. Definition of Program, Project, and Activity.
       Sec. 521. Child Survival and Health Activities.
       Sec. 522. Notification on Excess Defense Equipment.
       Sec. 523. Authorization Requirement.
       Sec. 524. Democracy Programs.
       Sec. 525. Prohibition on Bilateral Assistance to Terrorist 
     Countries.
       Sec. 526. Prohibition on Assistance to Foreign Governments 
     That Export Lethal Military Equipment to Countries Supporting 
     International Terrorism.
       Sec. 527. Debt-For-Development.
       Sec. 528. Separate Accounts.
       Sec. 529. Compensation for United States Executive 
     Directors to International Financial Institutions.
       Sec. 530. Compliance With United Nations Sanctions Against 
     Iraq.
       Sec. 531. Authorities for the Peace Corps, Inter-American 
     Foundation and African Development Foundation.
       Sec. 532. Impact on Jobs in the United States.
       Sec. 533. Special Authorities.
       Sec. 534. Arab League Boycott of Israel.
       Sec. 535. Administration of Justice Activities.
       Sec. 536. Eligibility For Assistance.
       Sec. 537. Earmarks.
       Sec. 538. Ceilings and Earmarks.
       Sec. 539. Prohibition on Publicity or Propaganda.
       Sec. 540. Prohibition of Payments to United Nations 
     Members.
       Sec. 541. Nongovernmental Organization--Documentation.
       Sec. 542. Withholding of Assistance for Parking Fines Owed 
     By Foreign Countries.
       Sec. 543. Limitation on Assistance for the PLO for the West 
     Bank and Gaza.
       Sec. 544. War Crimes Tribunal Drawdown.
       Sec. 545. Landmines.
       Sec. 546. Restrictions Concerning The Palestinian 
     Authority.
       Sec. 547. Prohibition of Payment of Certain Expenses.
       Sec. 548. Palestinian Statehood.
       Sec. 549. Tibet.
       Sec. 550. Haiti Coast Guard.
       Sec. 551. Limitation on Assistance to the Palestinian 
     Authority.
       Sec. 552. Limitation on Assistance to Security Forces.
       Sec. 553. Protection of Tropical Forests and Biodiversity.
       Sec. 554. Energy Conservation, Energy Efficiency and Clean 
     Energy Programs.
       Sec. 555. Afghanistan.
       Sec. 556. Zimbabwe.
       Sec 557. Nigeria.
       Sec. 558. Burma.
       Sec. 559. Enterprise Fund Restrictions.
       Sec. 560. Cambodia.
       Sec. 561. Foreign Military Training Report.
       Sec. 562. Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization.
       Sec. 563. Colombia.
       Sec. 564. Illegal Armed Groups.
       Sec. 565. Prohibition on Assistance to the Palestinian 
     Broadcasting Corporation.
       Sec. 566. Iraq.
       Sec. 567. West bank and Gaza Program.
       Sec. 568. Indonesia.
       Sec. 569. Restrictions on Assistance to Governments 
     Destabilizing Sierra Leone.
       Sec. 570. Voluntary Separation Incentives.
       Sec. 571. Central Asia.
       Sec. 572. American Churchwomen in El Salvador.
       Sec. 573. Commercial Leasing of Defense Articles.
       Sec. 574. War Criminals.
       Sec. 575. User Fees.
       Sec. 576. Funding For Serbia.
       Sec. 577. Community Based Police Assistance.
       Sec. 578. Excess Defense Articles for Central and Southern 
     European and Certain Other Countries.
       Sec. 579. Overseas Private Investment Corporation and 
     Export-Import Bank Restrictions.
       Sec. 580. Cooperation With Cuba on Counter-Narcotics 
     Matters.
       Sec. 581. Prohibition on Funding for Abortions and 
     Involuntary Sterilization.
       Sec. 582. Tropical Forest Conservation.
       Sec. 583. Regional Democracy Programs for East Asia and the 
     Pacific.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Rule XVI, paragraph 7 requires that every report on a 
     general appropriation bill filed by the Committee must 
     identify each recommended amendment, with particularity, 
     which proposes an item of appropriation which is not made to 
     carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty 
     stipulation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the 
     Senate during that session.
       Items providing funding for fiscal year 2003 which lack 
     authorization are as follows:

Child Survival and Health Programs Fund..................$1,780,000,000
Development Assistance....................................1,350,000,000
International Disaster Assistance...........................255,500,000
USAID Operating Expenses....................................571,087,000
USAID Operating Expenses, Office of Inspector General........33,046,000
USAID Capital Investment Fund................................65,000,000
Economic Support Fund.....................................2,250,000,000
Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltics...............555,000,000
Assistance for the Independent States of the Former Soviet U765,000,000
African Development Foundation...............................17,689,000
Inter-American Foundation....................................16,385,000
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement.........196,713,000
Migration and Refugee Assistance............................782,000,000
Emergency Migration and Refugee Assistance...................32,000,000
Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining and Related Assis376,400,000
Treasury Technical Assistance................................10,500,000
Debt Restructuring...........................................40,000,000
International Military Education and Training................80,000,000
Foreign Military Financing Program........................4,067,000,000
Peacekeeping Operations.....................................125,250,000
International Organizations and Programs....................230,461,000
International Development Association.......................837,338,000
Asian Development Fund......................................127,386,000
African Development Fund....................................108,073,000

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee report on 
     a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
     or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute 
     or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
     comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets, new matter is printed in italic, and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

[[Page 785]]



  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        Senate Committee recommendation
                                                                                                                            compared with (+ or ^)
                             Item                                     2002         Budget estimate      Committee    -----------------------------------
                                                                  appropriation                      recommendation         2002
                                                                                                                        appropriation    Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
           TITLE I--EXPORT AND INVESTMENT ASSISTANCE
 
            EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES
 
Subsidy appropriation.........................................          727,323           541,400           541,400          -185,923   ................
Administrative expenses.......................................           63,000            68,300            68,300            +5,300   ................
Negative subsidy..............................................          -11,000           -13,000           -13,000            -2,000   ................
Rescission (Public Law 107-206)...............................          -50,000   ................  ................          +50,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Export-Import Bank of the United States..........          729,323           596,700           596,700          -132,623   ................
 
            OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION
 
Noncredit account:
    Administrative expenses...................................           38,608            39,885            39,885            +1,277   ................
    Insurance fees and other offsetting collections...........         -290,000          -306,000          -306,000           -16,000   ................
Subsidy appropriation.........................................  ................           24,000            24,000           +24,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Overseas Private Investment Corporation..........         -251,392          -242,115          -242,115            +9,277   ................
 
              FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
 
Trade and development agency..................................           50,024            44,696            44,696            -5,328   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title I, Export and investment assistance........          527,955           399,281           399,281          -128,674   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
            TITLE II--BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE
 
              FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
 
      United States Agency for International Development
 
Child survival and health programs fund.......................        1,433,500   ................        1,790,000          +356,500        +1,790,000
    UNICEF....................................................         (120,000)  ................         (120,000)  ................        (+120,000)
    (Transfer out)............................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Development assistance........................................        1,178,000         2,839,500         1,365,500          +187,500        -1,474,000
    (Transfer out)............................................         (-18,500)  ................  ................         (+18,500)  ................
International disaster assistance.............................          235,500           285,500           290,000           +54,500            +4,500
    Emergency supplemental....................................           50,000   ................  ................          -50,000   ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............           40,000   ................  ................          -40,000   ................
Transition Initiatives........................................           50,000            55,000            55,000            +5,000   ................
Development Credit Program:
    (By transfer).............................................          (18,500)  ................  ................         (-18,500)  ................
    (Guaranteed loan authorization)...........................         (267,500)  ................  ................        (-267,500)  ................
    Administrative expenses...................................            7,500             7,591             7,591               +91   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, development assistance........................        2,994,500         3,187,591         3,508,091          +513,591          +320,500
 
Payment to the Foreign Service Retirement and Disability Fund.           44,880            45,200            45,200              +320   ................
Operating expenses of the U.S. Agency for International                 549,000           572,087           571,087           +22,087            -1,000
 Development..................................................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............            7,000   ................  ................           -7,000   ................
    (By transfer).............................................           (3,500)  ................  ................          (-3,500)  ................
Capital Investment Fund.......................................  ................           95,000            65,000           +65,000           -30,000
 
Operating expenses of the U.S. Agency for International                  31,500            33,046            33,046            +1,546   ................
 Development Office of Inspector General......................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, U.S. Agency for International Development........        3,626,880         3,932,924         4,222,424          +595,544          +289,500
 
              Other Bilateral Economic Assistance
 
Economic support fund:
    Camp David countries......................................        1,375,000         1,415,000         1,215,000          -160,000          -200,000
    Other.....................................................          824,000         1,075,000         1,045,000          +221,000           -30,000
    (Transfer out)............................................          (-3,500)  ................  ................          (+3,500)  ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............          465,000   ................  ................         -465,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Economic support fund.........................        2,664,000         2,490,000         2,260,000          -404,000          -230,000
 
International Fund for Ireland................................           25,000   ................  ................          -25,000   ................
Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States...........          621,000           495,000           530,000           -91,000           +35,000
Assistance for the Independent States of the former Soviet              784,000           755,000           765,000           -19,000           +10,000
 Union........................................................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............          110,000   ................  ................         -110,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Other Bilateral Economic Assistance..............        4,204,000         3,740,000         3,555,000          -649,000          -185,000
 
                     INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
 
                   Inter-American Foundation
 
Appropriation.................................................           13,107            14,185            16,385            +3,278            +2,200
 
                African Development Foundation
 
Appropriation.................................................           16,542            16,689            17,689            +1,147            +1,000
 
                          Peace Corps
 
Appropriation.................................................          275,000           317,228           285,000           +10,000           -32,228
 
                      Department of State
 
International narcotics control and law enforcement...........          217,000           196,713           196,713           -20,287   ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............          114,000   ................  ................         -114,000   ................
    (By transfer).............................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Andean Counterdrug Initiative.................................          625,000           731,000           650,000           +25,000           -81,000
    (By transfer).............................................  ................  ................          (88,000)         (+88,000)         (+88,000)
Migration and refugee assistance..............................          705,000           704,565           787,000           +82,000           +82,435
United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund.           15,000            15,000            32,000           +17,000           +17,000
Nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, demining and related                  313,500           372,400           306,400            -7,100           -66,000
 programs.....................................................
    Emergency supplemental....................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............           83,000   ................  ................          -83,000   ................
    (By transfer).............................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Department of State...........................        2,072,500         2,019,678         1,972,113          -100,387           -47,565
 
                  Department of the Treasury
 
International Affairs Technical Assistance....................            6,500            10,000            10,500            +4,000              +500

[[Page 786]]

 
Debt restructuring............................................          229,000   ................  ................         -229,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Department of the Treasury....................          235,500            10,000            10,500          -225,000              +500
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title II, Bilateral economic assistance..........       10,443,529        10,050,704        10,079,111          -364,418           +28,407
          Appropriations......................................       (9,574,529)      (10,050,704)      (10,079,111)        (+504,582)         (+28,407)
          Emergency appropriations............................         (869,000)  ................  ................        (-869,000)  ................
      (By transfer)...........................................          (22,000)  ................          (88,000)         (+66,000)         (+88,000)
      (Transfer out)..........................................         (-22,000)  ................  ................         (+22,000)  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
                TITLE III--MILITARY ASSISTANCE
 
              FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
 
International Military Education and Training.................           70,000            80,000            80,000           +10,000   ................
 
Foreign Military Financing Program:
    Grants:
        Camp David countries..................................        3,340,000         3,400,000         3,400,000           +60,000   ................
        Other.................................................          310,000           707,200           672,000          +362,000           -35,200
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, grants....................................        3,650,000         4,107,200         4,072,000          +422,000           -35,200
 
    (Limitation on administrative expenses)...................          (35,000)          (37,000)          (38,000)          (+3,000)          (+1,000)
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............          357,000   ................  ................         -357,000   ................
    (Transfer out)............................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Associated outlays:
        Israel................................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
        Egypt.................................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
        Other.................................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    (Transfer out)............................................  ................  ................         (-88,000)         (-88,000)         (-88,000)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Foreign Military Financing.......................        4,007,000         4,107,200         4,072,000           +65,000           -35,200
 
Peacekeeping operations.......................................          135,000           108,250           120,025           -14,975           +11,775
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-206).............           20,000   ................  ................          -20,000   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title III, Military assistance...................        4,232,000         4,295,450         4,272,025           +40,025           -23,425
          Appropriations......................................       (3,855,000)       (4,295,450)       (4,272,025)        (+417,025)         (-23,425)
          Emergency appropriations............................         (377,000)  ................  ................        (-377,000)  ................
      (Limitation on administrative expenses).................          (35,000)          (37,000)          (38,000)          (+3,000)          (+1,000)
                                                               =========================================================================================
          TITLE IV--MULTILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE
 
              FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
 
             International Financial Institutions
 
                       World Bank Group
 
Contribution to the International Bank for Reconstruction and
 Development:
    Global Environment Facility...............................          100,500           177,813           177,813           +77,313   ................
Contribution to the International Development Association.....          792,400           874,338           837,338           +44,938           -37,000
 
Contribution to Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency......            5,000             3,631             1,631            -3,369            -2,000
    (Limitation on callable capital subscriptions)............          (25,000)          (14,825)          (14,825)         (-10,175)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, World Bank Group.................................          897,900         1,055,782         1,016,782          +118,882           -39,000
 
Contribution to the Inter-American Development Bank:
    Contribution to the Inter-American Investment Corporation.           18,000            30,352            18,352              +352           -12,000
    Contribution to the Enterprise for the Americas             ................           29,591            29,591           +29,591   ................
     Multilateral Investment Fund.............................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Inter-American Development Bank..................           18,000            59,943            47,943           +29,943           -12,000
 
Contribution to the Asian Development Bank:
    Contribution to the Asian Development Fund................           98,017           147,386           100,386            +2,369           -47,000
 
Contribution to the African Development Bank:
    Paid-in capital...........................................            5,100             5,104             5,104                +4   ................
    (Limitation on callable capital subscriptions)............          (79,992)          (79,603)          (79,603)            (-389)  ................
    Contribution to the African Development Fund..............          100,000           118,073           108,073            +8,073           -10,000
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, African Development Bank.........................          105,100           123,177           113,177            +8,077           -10,000
 
Contribution to the European Bank for Reconstruction and
 Development:
    Paid-in capital...........................................           35,779            35,805            35,805               +26   ................
    (Limitation on callable capital subscriptions)............         (123,238)         (123,328)         (123,328)             (+90)  ................
 
Contribution to the International Fund for Agricultural                  20,000            15,004            15,004            -4,996   ................
 Development..................................................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, International Financial Institutions.............        1,174,796         1,437,097         1,329,097          +154,301          -108,000
                                                               =========================================================================================
           International Organizations and Programs
 
Appropriation.................................................          208,500           310,400           215,000            +6,500           -95,400
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title IV, Multilateral economic assistance.......        1,383,296         1,747,497         1,544,097          +160,801          -203,400
      (Limitation on callable capital subscript)..............         (228,230)         (217,756)         (217,756)         (-10,474)  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Grand total.............................................       16,586,780        16,492,932        16,294,514          -292,266          -198,418
          Appropriations......................................      (15,390,780)      (16,492,932)      (16,294,514)        (+903,734)        (-198,418)
          Rescissions.........................................         (-50,000)  ................  ................         (+50,000)  ................
          Emergency appropriations............................       (1,246,000)  ................  ................      (-1,246,000)  ................
      (By transfer)...........................................          (22,000)  ................          (88,000)         (+66,000)         (+88,000)
      (Transfer out)..........................................         (-22,000)  ................         (-88,000)         (-66,000)         (-88,000)
      (Limitation on administrative expenses).................          (35,000)          (37,000)          (38,000)          (+3,000)          (+1,000)
      (Limitation on callable capital subscript)..............         (228,230)         (217,756)         (217,756)         (-10,474)  ................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 787]]

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 
                                  2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

    Mr. Burns, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for the Department of the Interior and 
     related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2003, and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and 
     recommends that the bill do pass.


    Amounts in new budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2003

Total of bill as reported to Senate.....................$18,973,625,000
Estimates considered by Senate...........................18,938,078,000
  Above the budget estimate, 2003............................35,547,000
  Below appropriations, 2002 (including emergencies)........184,145,000

                            SUMMARY OF BILL

       For this bill, estimates totaling $18,938,916,000 in new 
     obligational authority were considered by the Committee for 
     the programs and activities of the agencies and bureaus of 
     the Department of the Interior, except the Bureau of 
     Reclamation, and the following related agencies:
       Department of Agriculture:
     Forest Service.
       Department of Energy:
     Clean coal technology.
     Fossil energy research and development.
     Naval petroleum and oil shale reserves.
     Elk Hills School lands fund.
     Energy conservation.
     Economic regulation.
     Strategic petroleum reserve.
     SPR petroleum account.
     Energy Information Administration.
       Department of Health and Human Services:
     Indian Health Service.
       Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation.
       Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and 
     Arts Development.
       Smithsonian Institution.
       National Gallery of Art.
       John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
       Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
       National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities:
     National Endowment for the Arts.
     National Endowment for the Humanities.
     Challenge America Arts Funds.
       Commission of Fine Arts.
       Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
       National Capital Planning Commission.
       United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
       Presidio Trust.

                 Revenue Generated by Agencies in Bill

       Oil and gas leasing and other mineral leasing activities, 
     recreation and user fees, the timber and range programs, and 
     oil production from the naval petroleum reserves are 
     estimated to generate income to the Government of 
     $6,148,958,000 in fiscal year 2003. These estimated receipts, 
     for agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction, are 
     tabulated below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Fiscal year--
                           Item                            -----------------------------------------------------
                                                                  2001              2002              2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Interior................................   $10,865,661,000    $6,609,623,000    $5,719,689,000
Forest Service............................................       424,019,000       420,972,000       422,036,000
Naval petroleum reserves..................................         7,836,000         7,187,000         7,233,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
    Total receipts........................................    11,297,516,000     7,037,782,000     6,148,958,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Major Changes Recommended in the Bill

       The Committee has developed revisions to the budget 
     estimate for the 2003 fiscal year.
       A comparative summary of funding in the bill by agency is 
     shown by agency or principal program in the following table:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Committee
                                                                                                  recommendation
                                                                                     Committee     compared with
                                                                                  recommendation      budget
                                                                                                     estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I--Department of the Interior:
    Bureau of Land Management...................................................       1,861,458         +36,036
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service..............................................       1,213,108         -70,256
    National Park Service.......................................................       2,286,305         -69,256
    United States Geological Survey.............................................         914,617         +47,279
    Minerals Management Service.................................................         170,427            +100
    Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement........................         297,112         +17,710
    Bureau of Indian Affairs....................................................       2,267,329         +21,525
    Departmental Offices........................................................         420,126          -3,409
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Title I--Department of the Interior................................       9,430,482         -20,271
                                                                                 ===============================
Title II--Related agencies:
    Forest Service..............................................................       3,949,824          +1,113
    Department of Energy........................................................       1,764,243         +47,002
    Indian Health Service.......................................................       2,821,271          +5,703
    Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation.................................          14,491  ..............
    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Develop-               5,130  ..............
     ment.......................................................................
    Smithsonian Institution.....................................................         530,960          +3,000
    National Gallery of Art.....................................................          93,449          -1,000
    John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts..............................          33,910  ..............
    Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars............................           8,488  ..............
    National Endowment for the Arts.............................................         116,489         +17,000
    National Endowment for the Humanities.......................................         125,754  ..............
    Institute of Museum and Library Services....................................  ..............  ..............
    Challenge America Arts Fund.................................................  ..............         -17,000
    Commission of Fine Arts.....................................................           1,224  ..............
    National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs..................................           7,000  ..............
    Advisory Council on Historic Preservation...................................           3,667  ..............
    National Capital Planning Commission........................................           7,253  ..............
    U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum..............................................          38,663  ..............
    Presidio Trust..............................................................          21,327  ..............
                                                                                 -------------------------------
      Total, Title II--Related Agencies.........................................       9,543,143         +55,818
                                                                                 ===============================
      Grand total, fiscal year 2003.............................................      18,973,625         +35,547
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Conservation Spending Category

       Title VIII of the Interior and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2001, created a separate conservation 
     spending category within the Budget Act. Given the expiration 
     of the Budget Act and the absence of formal spending 
     allocations pursuant to a budget resolution, the Committee 
     has not included references to the conservation spending 
     category in this bill. The total funding provided

[[Page 788]]

     for conservation category programs, however, meets the 
     aggregate total projected for fiscal year 2003.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                        LAND AND WATER RESOURCES

                       Bureau of Land Management


                    Management of Land and Resources

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$775,632,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................812,990,000
Committee recommendation....................................816,062,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $816,062,000, 
     an increase for $3,072,000 above the budget estimate. The 
     funding amounts described below are at the activity level. 
     Additional details on funding for sub-activities within the 
     various appropriations accounts for the Bureau are set out in 
     a table in the back of the report. A comparison of the 
     Committee recommendations with the budget estimate is as 
     follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land resources...............................................     $177,557,000     $179,857,000      +$2,300,000
Wildlife and fisheries management............................       33,755,000       33,755,000  ...............
Threatened and endangered species............................       21,288,000       21,288,000  ...............
Recreation management........................................       62,696,000       64,096,000       +1,400,000
Energy and minerals..........................................      104,841,000      105,591,000         +750,000
Alaska minerals..............................................        2,228,000        4,000,000       +1,772,000
Realty and ownership management..............................       85,250,000       89,850,000       +4,600,000
Resource protection and maintenance..........................       76,227,000       76,977,000         +750,000
Transportation and facilities maintenance....................       77,958,000       79,458,000       +1,500,000
Land and resources information systems.......................       19,341,000       19,341,000  ...............
Mining law administration:
    Administration...........................................       32,696,000       32,696,000  ...............
    Offsetting fees..........................................      -32,696,000      -32,696,000  ...............
Work force and organizational support........................      132,876,000      132,876,000  ...............
Challenge cost share.........................................       18,973,000        8,973,000      -10,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, management of lands and resources...............      812,990,000      816,062,000       +3,072,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Land resources.--The Committee recommends $179,857,000 for 
     land resources, which is an increase of $2,300,000 above the 
     request. Increases above the request include $300,000 for the 
     Rio Puerco watershed project in New Mexico for a total of 
     $700,000; $1,000,000 to continue work at the National Center 
     for Ecologically-Based Noxious Weed Management at Montana 
     State University, including work on treatments of burned over 
     areas to prevent the spread of noxious weeds; $1,000,000 for 
     the Idaho Department of Agriculture to provide coordination, 
     facilitation, administrative support, and cost-shared weed 
     control project funding to Cooperative Weed Management Areas.
       The Committee notes that the funding provided for land 
     resources fully supports the budget request for noxious weed 
     management. The projects funded above are over and above the 
     request and should provide additional capability to the 
     Bureau in its efforts to manage the serious problem of 
     invasive weed control across all ownerships.
       The Committee is concerned that the Bureau retain its 
     current level of support for the National Conservation 
     Training Center, and directs that $500,000 shall be used for 
     this purpose and made available to NCTC within 60 days of 
     enactment.
       Wildlife and fisheries management.--The Committee 
     recommends $33,755,000 for wildlife and fisheries management, 
     which is equal to the request.
       Threatened and endangered species.--The Committee 
     recommends $21,288,000 for threatened and endangered species 
     management, which is equal to the request.
       Recreation management.--The Committee recommends 
     $64,096,000 for recreation management, which is an increase 
     of $1,400,000 above the request. Increases above the request 
     are $1,000,000 to continue the Undaunted Stewardship program 
     and $400,000 for operations at the Colorado Canyons National 
     Conservation Area. To the extent that Bureau needs to 
     allocate the additional funds provided for the NCA throughout 
     the Management of Lands and Resources appropriation in order 
     to accomplish the program of work at Colorado Canyons it may 
     do so upon notification and consultation with the Committee.
       Energy and minerals management including Alaska minerals.--
     The Committee has provided $105,591,000 for energy and 
     minerals management, which is an increase of $750,000 above 
     the request. The increase above the request is for the 
     permitting, including supporting analysis, of geothermal 
     energy applications and the processing of wind-energy rights-
     of-way in Nevada.
       The Committee has provided an additional $4,000,000 for the 
     Alaska minerals program, which is an increase of $1,772,000 
     above the request. The additional funding is for the minerals 
     at risk program, which will complete this project.
       Realty and ownership management.--The Committee recommends 
     $89,850,000 for realty and ownership management, which is an 
     increase of $4,600,000 above the request. Increases above the 
     request are $2,000,000 for the Alaska Conveyance program, 
     $1,850,000 for the cadastral survey program, and $750,000 for 
     additional personnel to perform realty work in the State of 
     Nevada.
       The Committee is concerned about the failure of the Bureau 
     to process applications under the Native Allotment Act of 
     1906 in a timely manner. Some applications have been pending 
     nearly a century while all applications have been pending for 
     over 30 years. The Committee has provided $2,000,000 in 
     additional funding for the Alaska conveyance program, and 
     directs that of the total amount provided for the program at 
     least $15,000,000 shall be for cadastral surveys. The 
     Committee expects the Bureau to develop a plan to complete 
     work on all allotment applications and all land selections 
     under the Alaska Statehood Act of 1959 by 2009, 50 years 
     after its enactment and nearly 40 years after the deadline 
     for applying for Native allotments.
       Within the funds provided by the Committee for the 
     cadastral survey program, an additional $350,000 is for the 
     State of Utah Automated Geographic Reference Center to 
     continue work on a centralized GIS database of wilderness 
     inventories, and $1,500,000 to continue work on a public 
     lands survey and ownership database for the State of Alaska.
       Resource protection and maintenance.--The Committee 
     recommends $76,977,000 for resource protection and 
     maintenance, which is $750,000 above the request. The 
     increase above the request is for the digitization and 
     cataloging of the extensive collection of five combined 
     Department of the Interior resource libraries in Alaska.
       Transportation and facilities maintenance.--The Committee 
     recommends $79,458,000 for transportation and facilities 
     maintenance, which is $1,500,000 above the request. Increases 
     above the request are $500,000 to continue maintenance work 
     on the Iditarod National Historic Trail, and $1,000,000 for 
     the capping of oil wells in the National Petroleum Reserve to 
     prevent leakage and oil spills into the environment.
       Land and information systems.--The Committee recommends 
     $19,341,000 for land and

[[Page 789]]

     information systems, which is equal to the request.
       Mining law administration.--The Committee recommends 
     $32,696,000 for mining law administration, which is equal to 
     the request.
       Workforce organization and support.--The Committee 
     recommends $132,876,000 for workforce organization and 
     support, which is equal to the request.
       Challenge cost share.--The Committee has provided 
     $8,973,000 for the challenge cost share program, which is 
     equal to the enacted level. The Committee has not provided 
     funds for the Cooperative Conservation Initiative, but has 
     funded the challenge cost share program at current levels 
     which performs similar activities.
       General.--It has come to the Committee's attention that the 
     Department has made little progress responding to direction 
     included in last year's Conference Report urging the 
     Department and its bureaus to begin utilizing battery pulse 
     technology in vehicles and other equipment. The experience of 
     the United States military has illustrated impressive cost 
     savings and environmental benefits following the aggressive 
     application of this technology to extend the service life of 
     batteries. The Department is directed to evaluate the 
     application of this technology within its bureaus and report 
     back to the Committee within 90 days of enactment of this Act 
     on the feasibility and benefits of the use of pulse 
     technology for batteries.
       The Committee notes that the Bureau of Land Management's 
     Preferred Alternative in the Final SEIS for the reclamation 
     of the Zortman Landusky Mine near the Fort Belknap 
     Reservation in Montana proposes additional funding of $33.5 
     million over the amount bonded for reclamation, including $11 
     million to ensure the water treatment facilities proposed in 
     the alternative can be operated in perpetuity. The Committee 
     believes that protecting water quality in the region should 
     be a top priority for the BLM budget requests for fiscal 
     years 2004 and 2005.

                        wildland fire management

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$678,421,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................653,754,000
Committee recommendation....................................654,254,000

       The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
     $654,254,000 for wildland fire management activities, which 
     is $500,000 above the request.
       The Committee recommendation includes $277,213,000 for fire 
     preparedness, which is equal to the request and $3,594,000 
     below the enacted level.
       The Committee also recommends a total of $160,351,000 for 
     fire suppression activities, which is equal to the request.
       The Committee's recommendation includes $216,690,000 for 
     Other Fire Operations, which is $500,000 above the request. 
     Within the amount provided, $186,690,000 is for hazardous 
     fuels reduction, $20,000,000 is for burned area 
     rehabilitation, and $10,000,000 is for rural fire assistance. 
     The increase above the request is for the National Center for 
     Landscape Fire Analysis at the University of Montana, for a 
     total of $1,500,000 for the Bureau's share of this 
     cooperative project.
       The Committee notes that it has more than fully funded the 
     request for hazardous fuels reduction of $186,190,000 within 
     the amounts provided. The Committee believes that reduction 
     of fuel loads in areas adjacent to communities in the 
     wildland-urban interface is critical for protecting the 
     public and that these areas should be a primary focus of the 
     Department. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Department 
     of the Interior to allocate the funding level proposed in the 
     budget request of $111,255,000 on projects in the wildland-
     urban interface. If for any reason the Department is unable 
     to attain the proposed levels, it shall promptly notify the 
     Committee explaining why the Department was unable to expend 
     such sums. The Committee recognizes the serious problem of 
     deteriorating forest health as an underlying cause of 
     wildland fire. A comprehensive approach to improving degraded 
     forests and reducing the threat of wildfire includes forest 
     restoration treatment. The Committee understands that the 
     Ecological Restoration Institute in Flagstaff, Arizona 
     provides research, application, development, and assistance 
     to communities needed to implement landscape level treatments 
     and improve forest health.

                    central hazardous materials fund

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$9,978,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,978,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,978,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,978,000 for 
     the central hazardous materials fund, which is equal to the 
     request.

                              construction

Appropriations, 2002........................................$13,076,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,976,000
Committee recommendation.....................................12,976,000

       The Committee recommends $12,976,000 for construction, 
     which is an increase of $2,000,000 above the request. The 
     increase above the request is for construction of the 
     California Trail Interpretive Center in Elko County, Nevada.

                       payments in lieu of taxes

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$210,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................165,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................210,000,000

       The Committee recommends $210,000,000 for Payments in Lieu 
     of Taxes. The amount provided is an increase of $45,000,000 
     above the budget request.

                            land acquisition

Appropriations, 2002........................................$49,920,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................44,686,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,150,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,150,000 
     for land acquisition, a decrease of $14,536,000 below the 
     budget estimate.
       The following table shows the Committee's recommendations:

                                                              Committee
        Area and State                                   Recommendation

Beaver Creek National WSR/White Mountains NRA (AK).............$750,000
Cosumnes River Watershed (CA).................................2,500,000
Golden Bair Ranch (CO)........................................1,500,000
Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks National Monument (NM)................1,500,000
King Range National Conservation Area (CA)....................2,000,000
Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (ID)..................1,000,000
Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (MT)..................1,000,000
Moses Coulee (WA).............................................2,000,000
Otay Mountain Wilderness (CA).................................2,000,000
Rio Grande National WSR (NM)..................................4,500,000
Sandy River (OR)..............................................2,500,000
Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains NM (CA)..................2,000,000
Squaw Leap Management Area (CA) (San Joaquin River).............900,000
Steens Cooperative Management and Protection Area (OR)........2,000,000
Use of carryover/anticipated slippage........................-3,000,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal, Acquisitions...................................23,150,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Emergency/Inholding/Relocation................................2,500,000
Land Exchange Equalization Payments.............................500,000
Acquisition Management........................................4,000,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total, BLM Land Acquisition..............................30,150,000

       From unobligated funds previously appropriated for the 
     Spring Gulch, WY project, the Bureau is directed to provide 
     $4,000,000 for the West Slope (Devil's Canyon Ranch), WY 
     project and $584,000 for the Continental Divide National 
     Scenic Trail, WY.
       The Committee has consistently supported the West Eugene 
     Wetlands acquisition program over the years, and is aware 
     that the Federal portion of the acquisition program is 
     nearing completion. In order to properly conclude the 
     project, however, certain issues regarding the status of 
     lands in the project area must be resolved. Should these 
     issues be resolved in a manner that warrants additional 
     Federal acquisition support, the Committee will consider 
     providing funding to complete the project.

                   oregon and california grant lands

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$105,165,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................105,633,000
Committee recommendation....................................105,633,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $105,633,000, 
     which is equal to the budget request.


                 FOREST ECOSYSTEMS HEALTH AND RECOVERY

                   (REVOLVING FUND, SPECIAL ACCOUNT)

       The Committee has retained bill language clarifying that 
     the Federal share of salvage receipts to be deposited into 
     this account shall be those funds remaining after payments to 
     counties.

                           range improvements

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000 
     for range improvements, the same as the budget estimate and 
     the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

               service charges, deposits, and forfeitures

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,900,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,900,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,900,000, 
     the same as the budget estimate and $100,000 below the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level.

                       miscellaneous trust funds

Appropriations, 2002........................................$12,405,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................12,405,000
Committee recommendation.....................................12,405,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,405,000, 
     the same as the budget estimate and the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level.

                      FISH AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS

                     U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

                          resource management

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$850,597,000

[[Page 790]]

Budget estimate, 2003.......................................903,604,000
Committee recommendation....................................902,697,000

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecological Services..........................................     $211,147,000     $226,659,000     +$15,512,000
Refuges and Wildlife.........................................      456,717,000      442,692,000      -14,025,000
Fisheries....................................................       94,763,000      104,734,000       +9,971,000
General Administration.......................................      140,977,000      128,612,000      -12,365,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Resource Management.............................      903,604,000      902,697,000         -907,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee recommends $902,697,000 for resource 
     management, $907,000 below the budget estimate. The detail 
     table at the back of the report displays the distribution of 
     funds among the Service's activities. Changes to the budget 
     estimate are detailed below.
       Ecological Services.--The Committee recommends $226,659,000 
     for ecological services, an increase of $15,512,000 above the 
     budget estimate. For the ecological services activity, the 
     Committee recommends an increase of $5,716,000 for the 
     endangered species subactivity. Within that increase, the 
     Committee recommends $1,300,000 for candidate conservation, 
     of which $150,000 is for the conservation of the burbot 
     population in the Kootenai River, $400,000 is for continued 
     funding of the Idaho Sage Grouse Management Plan through the 
     Idaho Office of Species Conservation, $750,000 is for sea 
     otter research in Alaska, and $50,000 is made available to 
     the Idaho State Department of Agriculture to study the 
     influence of herbivory on Slickspot Peppergrass within 
     general program activities. The Committee recommends an 
     increase of $200,000 in consultation programs for the Central 
     Valley and Southern California Habitat Conservation Plan. For 
     recovery, the Committee recommends a net increase of 
     $4,212,000, of which $1,500,000 is for Atlantic salmon 
     recovery activities administered by the National Fish and 
     Wildlife Foundation, $500,000 is for the U.S. Fish and 
     Wildlife Service to undertake Atlantic Salmon recovery 
     efforts in Maine, $1,000,000 is for eider recovery work 
     undertaken by the Alaska Sealife Center, $50,000 is for 
     freshwater mussel recovery to be performed in conjunction 
     with White Sulphur Springs NFH, $600,000 is for recovery of 
     the Lahontan cutthroat trout, and $1,160,000 is for the wolf 
     recovery program in the State of Idaho. Of the funds provided 
     for wolf monitoring, $600,000 is for the Nez Perce Tribe, 
     $100,000 is for the Snake River Basin Fish and Wildlife 
     Service Office, and $460,000 is for the Office of Species 
     Conservation. These funds are provided in lieu of funds the 
     Service proposed for wolf monitoring in the request. The 
     Peregrine Fund should be funded at $400,000 in fiscal year 
     2003. The funds provided also include the $750,000 requested 
     to continue the Virgin River Resource Recovery and Management 
     Plan.
       The Committee is aware of efforts to prevent the Salt Creek 
     Tiger beetle from being listed as an endangered species. The 
     Committee encourages the Service to support these endeavors.
       The Committee recommends $84,423,000 for habitat 
     conservation, an increase of $9,800,000 over the budget 
     request. Changes recommended for habitat conservation 
     programs include an increase of $9,600,000 for the Partners 
     for Fish and Wildlife Program, of which $200,000 is for bald 
     eagle restoration performed in cooperation with the Vermont 
     Natural Heritage Partners program, $500,000 is for the Big 
     Hole Watershed Committee, $600,000 is for Columbia River 
     Estuary Research, $1,000,000 is for the Hawaii Endangered 
     Species Act Community Conservation Plan, $1,450,000 is for 
     the Nevada Biodiversity Research and Conservation Project, 
     $250,000 is for the Thunder Basin Grasslands Initiative, 
     $500,000 is for the Montana Water Center for the Wild Fish 
     Habitat Initiative, and $1,400,000 is for Washington State 
     regional salmon enhancement. Also within the $9,600,000 
     increase provided for the Partners program, $2,700,000 is 
     provided for invasive species control efforts in the State of 
     Hawaii, Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, and Willapa Bay. 
     An additional $400,000 is also provided through refuge 
     operations to eradicate spartina at Willapa NWR. The 
     Committee encourages the Service to address the growing 
     problem of invasive species in its fiscal year 2004 budget 
     request. In project planning, the Committee recommends an 
     increase of $200,000 for the Middle Rio Grande (Bosque) 
     Research program. The Committee also recommends an increase 
     of $1,000,000 for the Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association 
     through coastal programs. The Committee recommends the budget 
     request for environmental contaminants.
       The Committee is concerned by reports that participation of 
     the Fish and Wildlife Service in the Chesapeake Bay Program 
     has diminished over the past decade. The Committee expects 
     the Service to develop and submit to the Committee by April 
     1, 2003, an action plan to increase support for meeting the 
     living resource, habitat restoration and education goals of 
     the Chesapeake Bay Program.
       Refuges and wildlife.--The Committee recommends 
     $442,692,000 for refuges and wildlife, a decrease of 
     $14,025,000 below the budget estimate.
       The Committee has recommended an increase of $46,517,000 
     for the national wildlife refuge system in recognition of the 
     upcoming refuge system centennial.
       The Committee recognizes the agreement reached by the Fish 
     and Wildlife Service, the State of California, and a private 
     landowner for the purchase of salt ponds in the San Francisco 
     Bay area for inclusion in the Don Edwards National Wildlife 
     Refuge. The Committee urges the Fish and Wildlife Service to 
     allocate resources to provide for maintenance and operations 
     associated with the refuge's increased size.
       A total of $998,000, the budget estimate, is recommended to 
     continue the Salton Sea recovery program, contingent on 
     matching funds from the State of California. The Committee 
     does not object to including this program in the regular 
     operations account in fiscal year 2004 and beyond.
       In migratory bird management, the Committee recommends an 
     increase of $575,000 for continued seabird bycatch reduction. 
     Due to funding constraints, the Committee was unable to 
     provide an increase above the request for the North American 
     Waterfowl Management Plans. The Committee agrees to the 
     following distribution of funds for joint ventures:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Recommended  Target level
                             Joint venture                               Fiscal year   fiscal year   fiscal year
                                                                            2002          2003          2004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic Coast........................................................      $506,000      $531,000      $800,000
Lower Mississippi.....................................................       576,000       605,000       750,000
Upper Mississippi.....................................................       363,000       382,000       650,000
Prairie Pothole.......................................................     1,248,000     1,310,000     1,400,000
Gulf Coast............................................................       448,000       470,000       700,000
Playa Lakes...........................................................       369,000       387,000       700,000
Rainwater Basin.......................................................       278,000       292,000       400,000
Intermountain West....................................................       469,000       492,000     1,000,000
Central Valley........................................................       417,000       438,000       550,000
Pacific Coast.........................................................       378,000       397,000       700,000
San Francisco Bay.....................................................       269,000       282,000       370,000
Sonoran...............................................................       278,000       292,000       400,000
Arctic Goose..........................................................       210,000       221,000       370,000
Black Duck............................................................       188,000       197,000       370,000
Sea Duck..............................................................       340,000       357,000       550,000
General Program Activities............................................       662,000       695,000       750,000
Administration........................................................  ............        69,000  ............
                                                                       -----------------------------------------
      Total...........................................................     6,999,000     7,417,000    10,460,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee provides the budget request for law 
     enforcement.
       The Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall, 
     within 180 days of the enactment of this Act, report to the 
     Committee on Appropriations on the current availability of 
     recreational air access to the Charles M. Russell National 
     Wildlife Refuge, the history of such access over the life of 
     the refuge, and alternatives for the enhancement of such 
     access in a manner consistent with refuge purposes. Such 
     report shall specifically address

[[Page 791]]

     the possibility of providing access to the Slippery Ann and 
     Sand Creek airstrip, as well as other alternatives. The 
     Director shall consult with the Montana Pilots Association 
     and other interested stakeholders in preparing the report.
       Fisheries.--The Committee recommends $104,734,000 for 
     fisheries, $9,971,000 more than the budget request.
       For hatchery operations and maintenance, the Committee 
     recommends $52,952,000, which includes an increase of 
     $2,000,000 for hatchery operations and an increase of 
     $1,000,000 for hatchery maintenance. The Committee notes 
     that, while it has restored the cut to hatchery general 
     operations, the Service should pursue cost recovery 
     opportunities outlined in the plan for achieving the proposed 
     budget reduction. Any savings realized from these measures 
     should be used to address the many unmet needs of the 
     hatchery system. Within the funds provided for hatcheries, 
     the Committee expects the Service to address the needs at the 
     Pittsford National Fish Hatchery and the Ouray National Fish 
     Hatchery.
       The Committee encourages the Service to articulate a 
     coherent long-term plan for the hatchery system in the fiscal 
     year 2004 budget, incorporating the numerous reviews 
     completed over the past several years, including the Sport 
     Fishing and Boating Partnership Council report.
       The Committee recommends $51,782,000 for fish and wildlife 
     management, an increase of $6,971,000 over the request. The 
     Committee has provided the budget request for anadromous fish 
     management, $5,771,000 above the request for fish and 
     wildlife assistance, and $1,200,000 above the request for 
     marine mammals. Within the increase provided for fish and 
     wildlife assistance, $400,000 is provided for fish passage 
     improvements along railroads in Alaska, $118,000 is for fish 
     surveys in West Virginia to be performed in conjunction with 
     White Sulphur Springs NFH, $500,000 is for the Great Lakes 
     fish and wildlife restoration program, $850,000 is for 
     continued wildlife enhancement in Starkville, Mississippi, 
     $500,000 is for the wildlife health center in Montana, and 
     $3,403,000 is for Yukon River Treaty implementation (for a 
     total of $4,000,000 devoted to Yukon River Treaty 
     implementation). Within the fish and wildlife assistance 
     program, $2,246,000 is provided for continuation of 
     activities begun in fiscal year 1997 to combat whirling 
     disease and related fish health issues. Within the amount 
     provided, $950,000 is for the National Partnership on the 
     Management of Wild and Native Coldwater Fisheries (of which 
     $250,000 is for resistant trout research in coordination with 
     the Whirling Disease Foundation), and $1,296,000 is provided 
     to continue the National Wild Fish Health Survey, expand 
     whirling disease investigations, and recruit and train health 
     professionals. In marine mammals, $1,200,000 is provided 
     above the request for continued marine mammal protection in 
     Alaska.
       General Administration.--The Committee recommends 
     $128,612,000 for general administration, a decrease of 
     $12,365,000 below the budget request. Within the funds 
     provided, the Committee recommends an increase of $35,000 
     above the request for the National Fish and Wildlife 
     Foundation as well as an increase of $50,000 for training 
     needs at the National Conservation Training Center (NCTC) and 
     a $550,000 increase for maintenance at NCTC. The Committee 
     directs the Service to evaluate the NCTC maintenance budget 
     as to whether it sufficiently meets Federal Facilities 
     Council standards for routine maintenance and repair of a 
     facility of its size and scope. Within funds available for 
     NCTC, up to $5,000 is recommended to help defray the costs 
     for civic and community groups using the facility provided 
     community use does not conflict with that of service and 
     other departmental groups.
       The Committee is also concerned that training courses 
     offered at NCTC have decreased by more than 20 percent at a 
     time when studies point to the need for additional training 
     and the service is completing construction of a new lodge 
     that will only increase the demand for additional offerings.
       The Committee has not funded the Cooperative Conservation 
     Initiative. While the Committee recognizes the value of 
     cooperative partnerships in conservation, it cannot justify 
     the establishment of another grant program when so many 
     existing needs are not met.
       Administrative Provisions.--The Committee has included 
     language regarding the Great Salt Pond.


                              CONSTRUCTION

Appropriations, 2002........................................$55,543,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................35,402,000
Committee recommendation.....................................42,882,000

       The Committee recommends $42,882,000 for construction, an 
     increase of $7,480,000 above the budget estimate.
       The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
     funds:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                             Committee
                          Unit                                                               Project                                      recommendation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Black-Footed Ferret Wildlife Research Center, CO.......  New Endangered Species Facility--Phase IV [cc].................................      $3,240,000
Bozeman Fish Technology Center, MT.....................  Seismic Safety Rehabilitation of Three Buildings--Phase I [p/d]................         150,000
Bozeman Fish Technology Center, MT.....................  Construction of Laboratory/Administration Building--Phase IV [c]...............         500,000
Caddo Lake NWR, TX.....................................  Caddo Lake Ramsar Wetland Science Center.......................................         200,000
Cape Romain NWR, SC....................................  Restoration of Dominick House..................................................         150,000
Cat Island NWR, LA.....................................  Environmental Education Center Construction [p/d]..............................         330,000
Canaan Valley NWR, WV..................................  Road Maintenance...............................................................         650,000
Clark R. Bavin NFW Forensics Lab, OR...................  Forensics Laboratory Expansion--Phase III [c]..................................       6,235,000
Craig Brook NFH, ME....................................  Wastewater Compliance--Phase I [p].............................................         200,000
Garrison Dam NFH, ND...................................  Heat Pump Water System Maintenance [c].........................................         200,000
Jackson NFH, WY........................................  Seismic Safety Rehabilitation--Phase II [d]....................................          80,000
Jordan River NFH, MI...................................  Replace Great Lakes Fish Stocking Vessel, M/V Togue--Phase II [d]..............         800,000
Kealia Pond, HI........................................  Mitigation and restoration [c].................................................       1,000,000
Klamath Basin NWR Complex, CA..........................  Water Supply and Management--Phase IV..........................................       1,000,000
Kodiak NWR, AK.........................................  Visitor Center Construction....................................................       3,000,000
Mammoth Springs NFH, AR................................  Renovation of Environmental Education Center [p,d,cc]..........................       1,400,000
Missisquoi NWR, VT.....................................  Visitor Center completion [c]..................................................       1,500,000
Ohio River Islands, WV.................................  Visitor Center Utilizing standard design--Phase I [d/ic].......................       1,100,000
Orangeburg NFH, SC.....................................  Orangeburg Substation Dam--Phase II [cc].......................................       4,144,000
Quilcene NFH, WA.......................................  Seismic Safety Rehabilitation of the Hatchery Building--Phase I [d]............          45,000
Sevilleta NWR, NM......................................  Laboratory design..............................................................       1,250,000
Silvio O. Conte NFWR (Nulhegan Division), VT...........  Refuge Headquarters/Visitor Center [p,d].......................................         300,000
Servicewide............................................  Bridge Safety Inspections......................................................         560,000
Servicewide............................................  Dam Safety Programs and Inspections............................................         705,000
Sonny Bono Salton Sea NWR, CA..........................  Seismic Safety Rehabilitation of Shop Buildings--Phase II [cc].................         200,000
Waccamaw NWR, SC.......................................  Visitor Center Construction....................................................       2,600,000
White Sulphur Springs NFH, WV..........................  Maintenance....................................................................         625,000
World Birding Center, TX...............................  Construction...................................................................         500,000
                                                                                                                                         ---------------
      Subtotal, Line Item Construction.................  ...............................................................................      32,664,000
                                                                                                                                         ===============
Servicewide............................................  Nationwide Engineering Services................................................       5,468,000
Servicewide............................................  Cost Allocation Methodology....................................................       3,000,000
Servicewide............................................  Seismic Safety Program.........................................................         200,000
Servicewide............................................  Environmental Compliance Management............................................       1,400,000
Servicewide............................................  Waste Prevention and Recycling.................................................         150,000
                                                                                                                                         ---------------
      Subtotal, Nationwide Engineering Services........  ...............................................................................      10,218,000
                                                                                                                                         ===============
      Total, Construction..............................  ...............................................................................      42,882,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Alaska region is directed to evaluate whether 
     additional public use cabins are needed in the Kenai National 
     Wildlife Refuge given the huge increase in visitation it is 
     experiencing. This evaluation should make recommendations on 
     the need for public use cabins and identify alternatives for 
     funding including the use of concessionaires.
       Bill language.--The Committee has provided the authority 
     for the Service to contract for the full scope of 
     constructing a visitor center at Kodiak NWR in hopes this 
     will save the Service money in the long term.

                            land acquisition

Appropriations, 2002........................................$99,135,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................70,384,000
Committee recommendation.....................................81,555,000

       The Committee recommends $81,555,000, $11,171,000 above the 
     budget request for FWS land acquisition.
       The following table shows the Committee's recommendations:


[[Page 792]]


                                                              Committee
        Area and State                                   Recommendation

Baca Ranch (CO)..............................................$4,000,000
Back Bay NWR (VA).............................................2,000,000
Balcones Canyonlands NWR (TX).................................2,200,000
Bandon Marsh NWR (OR)...........................................140,000
Big Muddy NFWR (MO)...........................................2,000,000
Cache River NWR (AR)..........................................2,000,000
Cahaba NWR (AL)...............................................3,000,000
Cape May NWR (NJ).............................................1,100,000
Cat Island NWR (LA)...........................................2,500,000
Centennial Valley NWR (MT)......................................500,000
Chickasaw NWR (TN)..............................................500,000
Clarks River NWR (KY).........................................2,000,000
Cypress Creek NWR (IL)..........................................250,000
Dakota Tallgrass Prairie WMA (ND/SD)..........................1,000,000
Fairfield Marsh WPA (WI)......................................2,000,000
Great Bay NWR (NH)..............................................300,000
Great Meadows NWR (MA)........................................1,600,000
Great River NWR (MO)..........................................2,000,000
J.N. Ding Darling NWR (FL)....................................1,000,000
James Campbell NWR (HI).......................................2,000,000
Laguna Atascosa NWR (TX)........................................750,000
Lower Hatchie NWR (TN)..........................................500,000
Lower Rio Grande Valley NWR (TX)................................500,000
National Key Deer Refuge (FL).................................1,500,000
Neal Smith NWR (IA)...........................................1,000,000
North Dakota WMA (ND).........................................1,500,000
Northern Tallgrass Prairie NWR (MN/IA)........................1,000,000
Ottawa NWR (OH)...............................................1,000,000
Parker River NWR (MA)...........................................500,000
Patoka River NWR (IN)...........................................250,000
Prime Hook NWR (DE)...........................................1,350,000
Rachel Carson NWR (ME)........................................3,000,000
Rappahannock River Valley NWR (VA)..............................180,000
Red River NWR (LA)............................................5,060,000
Rhode Island Refuge Complex (RI)..............................3,400,000
Sacramento NWR (CA)...........................................1,100,000
San Diego NWR (CA)............................................2,000,000
Silvio O. Conte NFWR (VT/NH/MA/CT)............................1,100,000
St. Marks NWR (FL)............................................2,000,000
Tetlin NWR (AK).................................................425,000
Togiak NWR (AK)...............................................3,300,000
Upper Mississippi River NFWR (MN/WI/IA/IL)......................250,000
Waccamaw NWR (SC).............................................3,000,000
Wallkill River NWR (NJ/NY)....................................2,300,000
Western Montana Project (MT)....................................750,000
Willapa NWR (WA)................................................750,000
Use of carryover/anticipated slippage........................-7,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal, Acquisitions...................................63,555,000
                                                       ================

Acquisition Management.......................................10,000,000
CAM...........................................................2,500,000
Exchanges.....................................................1,000,000
Inholdings....................................................2,500,000
Emergencies & Hardships.......................................2,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total, FWS Land Acquisition..............................81,555,000

       The Committee recognizes the Service's efforts to reform 
     acquisition management and has provided $10,000,000 for this 
     activity, which reflects the actual acquisition management 
     costs for the division of realty.
       Within funds available for land acquisition, the Service 
     should provide for survey and related costs at Canaan Valley 
     National Wildlife Refuge associated with the recent land 
     purchase.
       The funds provided for the Rhode Island Refuge Complex 
     should be spent at Ninigret NWR, John H. Chafee NWR, and 
     Sachuest NWR.


                      landowner incentive program

Appropriations, 2002........................................$40,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................50,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................600,000

       The Committee has provided $600,000 for the landowner 
     incentive program primarily to cover residual expenses 
     incurred in the distribution of fiscal year 2002 funds. A 
     portion of these funds may be used to study the program's 
     effectiveness and to determine the most appropriate funding 
     level in the context of the other conservation grant programs 
     available through the Service. The Service should produce a 
     comprehensive comparison of its grant programs in the fiscal 
     year 2004 budget justification so the Committee can better 
     understand the differences between the existing programs and 
     their individual purposes.
       The landowner incentive program was established in fiscal 
     year 2002 to provide competitive matching grants to States, 
     territories, and tribes for assistance to landowners in 
     protecting imperiled species and funded with a $40,000,000 
     appropriation. Unfortunately the Service did not publish the 
     Federal Register notice for this program until June 7, 2002, 
     more than 8 months after enactment of the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation bill. This significant delay is unacceptable to 
     the Committee. While the Committee appreciates the Service's 
     attempt to involve States and other stakeholders in the 
     development of the program, this consultation should have 
     occurred prior to the program's proposal. The Committee 
     cannot justify providing additional funds for grants in 
     fiscal year 2003, when the fiscal year 2002 grants process 
     was initiated at such a late date, and obligation may not 
     occur during this fiscal year.


                           stewardship grants

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................200,000

       The Committee recommends $200,000 for stewardship grants, 
     which are competitive awards made directly to individuals and 
     groups involved in endangered species recovery efforts on 
     private lands. Similar to the Landowner Incentive Program, 
     the Committee cannot provide a large appropriation for an 
     untested program only recently announced in the Federal 
     Register on June 7, 2002. Since no grants have been made, the 
     Committee cannot determine the effectiveness of this 
     conservation measure and, therefore, has only provided a 
     nominal sum for remaining costs incurred in the fiscal year 
     2002 cycle and evaluation of the program.

            cooperative endangered species conservation fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$96,235,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................91,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................81,000,000

       The Committee recommends $81,000,000 for the cooperative 
     endangered species fund, of which $2,600,000 is for 
     administration and $51,471,000 is for habitat conservation 
     plan land acquisition. The Committee has not derived this 
     program from the land and water conservation fund, as 
     proposed in the budget request.

                     national wildlife refuge fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$14,414,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,414,000
Committee recommendation.....................................14,414,000

       The Committee recommends $14,414,000 for the national 
     wildlife refuge fund, the same as the budget request.

               north american wetlands conservation fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$43,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................43,560,000
Committee recommendation.....................................38,560,000

       The Committee recommends $38,560,000 for the North American 
     wetlands conservation fund, a reduction of $5,000,000 below 
     the budget request.


                Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation......................................2,000,000

       The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for neotropical 
     migratory bird conservation, instead of transferring 
     $1,000,000 for neotropical bird conservation to the 
     multinational species fund as proposed in the request. As in 
     fiscal year 2002, the Committee expects the Service's 
     Division of Bird Habitat Conservation to administer this 
     program. The Division of Bird Habitat Conservation should 
     solicit significant input from the international program 
     staff, utilizing their expertise.

                multinational species conservation fund

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,200,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,200,000 for 
     the multinational species conservation fund, an increase of 
     $200,000 above the budget estimate. The increase is provided 
     for rhinoceros and tiger conservation.


                    state and tribal wildlife grants

Appropriations, 2002........................................$60,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................60,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................45,000,000

       The Committee recommends $45,000,000 for State and tribal 
     wildlife grants. Of the amount provided, $3,000,000 is 
     provided for tribal grants. The Committee believes there are 
     opportunities to develop synergies between the State and 
     Tribal Wildlife Grants program and the State Assistance 
     program funded through the National Park Service. The 
     Committee has addressed this issue in the National Park 
     Service, Land Acquisition and State Assistance section of the 
     report.

                         National Park Service

                 operation of the national park system

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,487,075,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,584,565,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,571,065,000

       The Committee recommends $1,571,065,000 for operation of 
     the national park system, an increase of $83,990,000 above 
     the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. Increases above the 
     current enacted level include $16,466,000 in fixed costs, and 
     an overall increase of $15,000,000 in basic park operations. 
     The Committee is aware of the unmet needs in many our 
     nation's parks and has included the additional funds in an 
     effort to address those needs.
       The following table shows the amounts recommended by the 
     Committee as compared with the budget request:

[[Page 793]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Park management:
    Resource stewardship.....................................     $334,923,000     $340,227,000      +$5,304,000
    Visitor services.........................................      309,681,000      314,128,000       +4,447,000
    Maintenance..............................................      531,428,000      528,823,000       -2,605,000
    Park support.............................................      300,297,000      279,651,000      -20,646,000
External administrative costs................................      108,236,000      108,236,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Operation of the National Park System...........    1,584,565,000    1,571,065,000      -13,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Resource Stewardship.--The Committee recommends 
     $340,227,000 for resource stewardship, an increase of 
     $21,915,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     $5,304,000 above the budget request. Within the amount 
     provided, $600,000 is for additional funding for the 
     Vanishing Treasures program, and $500,000 is to be made 
     available to the Klondike Goldrush National Park for the 
     acquisition of the Rapuzzi historic gold rush collection.
       Within the amounts provided, the Committee expects the 
     Service to continue the lake trout control program at 
     Yellowstone National Park.
       Visitor Services.--The Committee recommends $314,128,000 
     for visitor services, an increase of $17,037,000 over the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and $4,447,000 above the 
     budget request. The increase over the request is for park 
     operations.
       Facility Operations and Maintenance.--The Committee 
     recommends $528,823,000 in facility operations and 
     maintenance, an increase of $47,622,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level, and $2,605,000 below the budget request. 
     The amount provided includes increases of $20,000,000 over 
     the current year level for cyclic maintenance and $7,640,000 
     for condition assessments; and an increase over the request 
     of $4,395,000 for park operations. In addition, the Committee 
     expects the National Park Service to meet its 
     responsibilities under the Assateague Island Restoration 
     Project, and to make the required funds available in fiscal 
     year 2003 to match the contribution by the Army Corps of 
     Engineers. Finally, the Committee expects the Service to 
     continue its current level of support for the New River Gorge 
     Parkway Authority for technical advice and maintenance 
     activities on the parkway.
       Park Support.--The Committee recommends $279,651,000 for 
     park support, an increase of $4,626,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 level, and a decrease of $20,646,000 below the budget 
     request. Increases above the request include $854,000 in park 
     operations, and $500,000 for the Volunteer in the Parks 
     program. The decrease of $22,000,000 in cooperative programs 
     reflects the decision of the Committee to utilize all 
     available resources in support of an overall increase in 
     basic park operations as opposed to the more limited scope 
     contained in the budget request. The amount provided 
     continues the Lewis and Clark challenge cost share at the 
     request level. Within the amounts provided, $750,000 is to be 
     used for an independent and comprehensive management, 
     operational, performance and financial review of Yellowstone 
     National Park.
       External administrative costs.--The Committee recommends 
     $108,236,000 for external administrative costs, an increase 
     of $2,888,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     fully commensurate with the budget request.
       General.--The Going to the Sun Road provides close to 2 
     million visitors annually with an unparalleled opportunity to 
     experience the wonders of Glacier National Park. Age and 
     neglect have taken a toll, however, and the threat of 
     catastrophic road failure looms if steps are not taken to 
     reconstruct significant portions of the historic road. The 
     Committee is aware that the National Park Service has drafted 
     an Environmental Impact Statement that assesses road 
     reconstruction options, and directs the Service to devote the 
     resources necessary to complete the EIS in a timely fashion 
     so that reconstruction work can begin promptly. In developing 
     the Record of Decision, the Service should be mindful of the 
     input provided by the Going to the Sun Road Advisory 
     Committee.
       Whichever alternative is selected in the Record of 
     Decision, significant additional resources will be required 
     to rehabilitate the road consistent with the Park's General 
     Management Plan. The Committee strongly urges the 
     Administration to anticipate these needs in developing its 
     proposal for the reauthorization of the transportation bill. 
     The Committee further urges the Service to pursue aggressive 
     completion of road rehabilitation work for which planning has 
     already been done, and which will need to be performed 
     regardless of the alternative selected in the Record of 
     Decision. The Committee understands that there is at least 
     $11,000,000 of such work ready for execution in fiscal year 
     2003. The Committee has included a general provision in this 
     title authorizing the use of certain unobligated carryover 
     funds to accomplish rehabilitation work.
       While the long term reconstruction of the Going to the Sun 
     Road has been the recent focus of park planners, the 
     Committee remains concerned about the ongoing operation of 
     the Road itself. In addition to being the principle route 
     used by visitors to experience the Park, the Road is vitally 
     important to the health of the communities in and around the 
     Park that serve those visitors. In that regard, the opening 
     of the Road each spring is a much anticipated event in these 
     communities. The Committee is concerned that the Park may not 
     be placing adequate emphasis on opening the road in a timely 
     manner each year. While snow conditions and plow crew safety 
     must remain primary considerations in determining the road's 
     opening date, the Committee recommends that the Service 
     undertake a review to determine if options exist to 
     facilitate an earlier opening date and to maximize the window 
     during which the road is open. The Committee understands, 
     while new snow removal equipment has been acquired in recent 
     years, the current policy may be antiquated and does not 
     fully utilize current technological and safety advances used 
     by organizations working in similar, extreme environments. 
     This review should be performed in cooperation with local 
     entities, and should result in a written policy that 
     articulates the Park's road-clearing strategy and offers 
     alternatives for enhancing road-clearing performance. Options 
     explored should include contracting portions of the work to 
     expand the work week or seeking aid from other entities with 
     snow removal duties. The results of this review should be 
     provided to the Committee by March 15, 2003.
       Within the funds provided for ONPS, the Committee expects 
     the National Park Service to continue to provide at least 
     $500,000, the current level of support, to the National 
     Conservation Training Center.
       In the year 2003, the centennial of the Wright brothers' 
     first flight, national and international attention will focus 
     on the two national parks that tell the story of the Wright 
     brothers. The Dayton Aviation Heritage Park, which was first 
     created in 1992, honors the contributions of the Wright 
     brothers. The only Wright brothers' bicycle shop that remains 
     on its original site, the Wright brothers' print shop, the 
     1905 Wright flyer, and the Huffman Prairie Flying Field are 
     all located at this park. The Committee recognizes the 
     importance of the centennial of flight celebration and has 
     fully funded the budget request for operating funds at the 
     Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historic Park and the 
     Wright Brothers National Memorial.
       Not less often than annually, the Director of the National 
     Park Service shall report to the Committee on the status of 
     the Colorado River Management Plan.


                       UNITED STATES PARK POLICE

Appropriations, 2002........................................$90,555,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................78,431,000
Committee recommendation.....................................78,431,000

       The Committee recommends $78,431,000 for the United States 
     Park Police, a decrease of $12,124,000 below the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level, and fully commensurate with the budget 
     request. The decrease below the enacted level is attributable 
     to one-time security costs provided as a result of the 
     September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.


                  NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION

Appropriations, 2002........................................$66,159,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................46,824,000
Committee recommendation.....................................62,978,000

       The Committee recommends $62,978,000 for national 
     recreation and preservation, a decrease of $3,181,000 below 
     the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and an increase of 
     $16,154,000 above the budget request. A comparison of the 
     Committee recommendation to the budget request follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recreation programs..........................................         $552,000         $552,000  ...............
Natural programs.............................................       10,948,000       11,198,000        +$250,000
Cultural programs............................................       19,748,000       19,748,000  ...............
International park affairs...................................        1,719,000        1,719,000  ...............
Environmental and compliance review..........................          400,000          400,000  ...............

[[Page 794]]

 
Grant administration.........................................        1,585,000        1,585,000  ...............
Heritage Partnership Programs................................        7,735,000       13,384,000       +5,649,000
Statutory or Contractual Aid.................................        4,137,000       14,392,000      +10,255,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Recreation Programs.--The Committee recommends $552,000 for 
     recreation programs, which is fully commensurate with the 
     budget request.
       Natural Programs.--The Committee recommends $11,198,000 for 
     natural programs, an increase of $268,000 above the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level, and $250,000 above the budget 
     request. The increase above the request is provided for the 
     Northern Forest Canoe trail. Within the Rivers and Trails 
     Conservation Program, careful consideration should be given 
     to applications for assistance for the Ohio River Trail in 
     Cincinnati, Ohio; the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail in 
     Washington County, Oregon; and the Tuscaloosa Nature Preserve 
     and Hiking Trail.
       Cultural Programs.--The Committee recommends $19,748,000 
     for cultural programs, a decrease of $1,021,000 from the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level, but fully commensurate with 
     the budget request. Within available funds, the Service is 
     directed to provide $100,000 to the National Park Service's 
     Southeastern Archeological Center to conduct a cultural study 
     of the national importance and cultural significance of the 
     Congaree Creek site. In addition, the Service is directed to 
     provide $170,000 for restoration of the area around Ft. Piute 
     in the Mojave National Preserve.
       Environmental and Compliance Review.--The Committee 
     recommends $400,000 for environmental and compliance review, 
     the amount requested by the Service.
       Grants Administration.--The Committee recommends $1,585,000 
     for grants administration, the amount request by the Service.
       International Park Affairs.--The Committee recommends 
     $1,719,000 for international park affairs, the amount request 
     by the Service.
       Heritage Partnership Programs.--The Committee recommends 
     $13,384,000 for heritage partnership programs, an increase of 
     $175,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     $5,649,000 above the budget request. The Committee recommends 
     the following distribution of funds:

        Project                                                  Amount

America's Agricultural Heritage Partnership-...................$800,000
Augusta Canal National Heritage Area-...........................600,000
Automobile National Heritage Area-..............................500,000
Cache La Poudre River Corridor-..................................50,000
Cane River National Heritage Area-..............................995,000
Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor-.................850,000
Erie Canalway...................................................210,000
Essex National Heritage Area-.................................1,000,000
Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area-.....................600,000
Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor-.........400,000
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corrido800,000
Lackawanna Heritage Area........................................750,000
National Coal Heritage Area-....................................210,000
Ohio and Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor-.................700,000
Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corrid1,000,000
Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area-.......................1,000,000
Schuylkill National Heritage Center.............................400,000
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District-......500,000
South Carolina National Heritage Corridor-....................1,000,000
Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area...............................210,000
Wheeling National Heritage Area.................................480,000
Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area............................210,000
Administrative support..........................................119,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total....................................................13,384,000

       Statutory or Contractual Aid.--The Committee recommends 
     $14,392,000 for statutory or contractual aid, a decrease of 
     $2,613,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and an 
     increase of $10,255,000 above the budget request. The 
     Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                                                Budget estimate   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aleutian World War II Nat'l Historic Area.....................................  ...............         $400,000
Brown Foundation (Brown v. Board of Ed).......................................         $101,000          401,000
Chesapeake Bay Gateways & Water Trails........................................          798,000        3,000,000
Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission...........................................           47,000          500,000
Ice Age National Scientific Reserve...........................................          806,000          806,000
Illinois & Michigan Canal Passage.............................................  ...............          500,000
Jamestown 2007................................................................  ...............          400,000
Johnstown Area Heritage Association...........................................           49,000           49,000
Lamprey Wild & Scenic River...................................................          200,000        1,000,000
Louisiana Creole Heritage Center..............................................  ...............          250,000
Louisiana Purchase Comm. of Arkansas..........................................  ...............          350,000
Martin Luther King, Jr. Center................................................          528,000          528,000
National Constitution Center..................................................  ...............          500,000
Native Hawaiian Culture & Arts Program........................................          740,000          740,000
New Orleans Jazz Commission...................................................           66,000           66,000
Office of Arctic Studies......................................................  ...............        1,500,000
Penn Center National Landmark.................................................  ...............        1,000,000
Roosevelt Campobello Int'l Park Commission....................................          802,000          802,000
Sewall-Belmont House..........................................................  ...............          500,000
Sleeping Rainbow Ranch, Capitol Reef NP.......................................  ...............          700,000
Vancover NHR..................................................................  ...............          400,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Total...................................................................        4,137,000       14,392,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The amount provided for the Dayton Aviation Heritage 
     Commission includes $150,000 for interpretive exhibits.


                    URBAN PARKS AND RECREATION FUND

Appropriations, 2002........................................$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................300,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,000,000

       The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the urban parks 
     and recreation fund, a decrease of $20,000,000 below the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and an increase of $9,700,000 
     above the budget request.


                       HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND

Appropriations, 2002........................................$74,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................67,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................67,000,000

       The Committee recommends $67,000,000 for the historic 
     preservation fund, a decrease of $7,500,000 below the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level. The amount provided includes 
     $34,000,000 in Grants in Aid to States, $3,000,000 in Grants 
     in Aid to Tribes, $30,000,000 for the Save America's 
     Treasures program.

                              construction

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$387,668,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................322,384,000
Committee recommendation....................................322,826,000

       The Committee recommends $322,826,000 for construction, a 
     decrease of $64,842,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level, and an increase of $442,000 above the budget request. 
     The decrease below the enacted level is attributable, in 
     large part, to one-time security costs provided as a result 
     of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The Committee 
     recommends the following distribution of funds:


                   National Park Service Construction


                                                              Committee
        Project                                          recommendation

Acadia NP, ME (rehab bridges)................................$3,351,000
Acadia NP, ME (upgrade utilities/camp)........................5,171,000
Adams NP, MA (p/d visitor center)...............................541,000
American, Saipan (upgrade water system).........................858,000
Apostle Islands NL, WI (upgrade utility system)...............1,030,000
Arches NP, UT (replace visitor center)........................5,600,000
Bent's Old Fort NHS, CO (new space/restrooms).................1,325,000

[[Page 795]]

Big Bend NP, TX (rehab/expand water system).....................246,000
Big Bend NP,TX (install sprinkler system).......................673,000
Big Cypress NP, FL (rehab off-road trails)....................2,000,000
Blue Ridge Prkwy, NC (rehab Mt. Pisgah utilities).............1,624,000
Channel Islands NP, CA (animal protection devices)............2,116,000
Chickasaw NRA, OK (construct visitor center)..................2,665,000
Colonial NP, VA (protect Jamestown collections)...............4,221,000
Congaree Swamp NM, SC (new maint facility)......................650,000
Craters of the Moon NM, ID (upgrade visitor center)...........1,283,000
Cumberland Gap NHP, KY (rehab wilderness road)................5,583,000
Death Valley NP, CA (replace maint facility)..................2,007,000
Death Valley NP, CA (replace roof)..............................550,000
Denali NP&P, AK (complete visitor center).....................3,171,000
Denali NP&P, AK (p/d for south Denali visitor facilities).......750,000
Eleanor Roosevelt NHS, NY (restoration).........................400,000
Everglades NP, FL (Pine Island water).........................4,594,000
Everglades NP, FL (modified water)...........................13,295,000
Fort Larned NHS, KS (rehab quarters).............................30,000
Fort Osage NHL, MO (education center)...........................500,000
Fredericksburg NMP, VA (stabilize ruins)......................2,250,000
Ft. McHenry, MD (p/d visitor center)............................200,000
G Washington Memorial Prkwy, VA (Arlington house)...............616,000
G. Washington Carver NM, MO (improvements)....................1,000,000
Gateway NRA, NY (Jamaica Bay).................................3,299,000
General Grant N Mem, NY (rehab tomb)..........................1,840,000
Gettysburg NMP, PA (p/d for Wills house)........................938,000
Glacier NP, MT (Many Glacier Hotel)...........................1,500,000
Golden Gate NRA, CA (repair balconies at Alcatraz)............1,210,000
Golden Gate NRA, CA (renovate Cliff House)....................1,914,000
Grand Portage NM, MN (heritage center)..........................400,000
Great Basin NP, NV (complete visitor center)..................2,700,000
Great Sand Dunes NM & Pres, CO (renovate visitor center)......4,424,000
Harpers Ferry NP, WV (renovate bldgs).........................1,413,000
Hispanic Cultural Center, NM (complete).......................1,000,000
Horace Albright TC (rehab training center)....................7,151,000
Independence NHP, PA (site rehab).............................4,923,000
Indiana Dunes NL, IN (remove hazardous struc).................2,389,000
Japanese Amer Hist--Presidio, CA (design).......................600,000
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley NHC, RI (restoration)..1,000,000
Joshua Tree NP, CA (repair campgrounds)..........................70,000
Keweenaw NHP, MI (rehab bldg)...................................395,000
Lincoln Library & Museum, IL (construction)...................5,000,000
Mammoth Cave NP, KY (mitigate water pollution)..................555,000
Manassas NB, VA (stabilize structures)........................1,493,000
Morris Thompson Visitor Center, AK............................3,000,000
Mount Rainier NP, WA (Paradise Guide House).....................244,000
Mount Rainier NP, WA (seasonal emp dorms).....................4,400,000
Natchez Trace Parkway, TN (access road).........................350,000
National Cave & Karst Inst, NM (const vc).......................782,000
National Museum Amer Revolution, PA.............................500,000
National Underground RR Freedom, OH (ed center)...............6,088,000
NCP, DC (Lincoln Memorial)....................................5,192,000
NCP, DC (sec at Lincoln Memorial).............................6,183,000
New Bedford Whaling NHP, MA (rehab Corson bldg).................500,000
New River Gorge NSR, WV (infrastructure improvements)...........868,000
Olympic NP, WA (Elwha).......................................14,381,000
Oregon Caves NP, OR (replace hq bldg).........................1,044,000
Organ Pipe NM, AZ (fencing)...................................7,000,000
Pacific Coast Immigration Station, CA (study)...................200,000
Pea Ridge NMP, AR (rehab exhibits)..............................109,000
Pea Ridge NMP, AR (replace cannon carriages)....................230,000
Petrified Forest NP, AZ (Painted Desert Inn)..................3,004,000
Rocky Mountain NP, CO (Hidden Valley).........................2,335,000
SF Maritime NHP, CA (C.A. Thayer).............................5,010,000
Tallgrass Prairie N Pres, KS (fire suppression system)........2,891,000
Thomas Stone NHS, MD (staff offices)............................895,000
U.S.S. Arizona Memorial, HI (restrooms).......................1,157,000
Ulysses S. Grant NHS, MO (restoration)........................1,994,000
Vicksburg NMP, MS (security upgrades)...........................300,000
Virginia City NHL, MT (restoration)...........................2,500,000
Washita Battlefield NHS, OK (visitor center const)............3,500,000
White House, DC (structure/utility repair)....................9,582,000
Wind Cave NP, SD (prevent runoff).............................2,172,000
Wright Brothers N Mem, NC (upgrade)...........................1,000,000
Yellowstone NP, WY (fire protection at Old Faithful)............757,000
Yellowstone NP, WY (rehab hq bldg)............................6,396,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Subtotal................................................207,078,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

Emergency and Unscheduled Projects............................3,500,000
Housing Replacement..........................................12,500,000
Dam Safety....................................................2,700,000
Equipment Replacement........................................32,460,000
Construction Planning (10 percent), pre-design and Supplementary 
  Services...................................................25,400,000
Construction Program Management and Operations...............24,792,000
General Management Planning..................................14,396,000
                                                               ==========
_______________________________________________________________________

    TOTAL, NPS Construction.................................322,826,000

       The Committee has not recommended appropriations for 
     several projects included in the budget request for which 
     funds could not be obligated in fiscal year 2003. The 
     Committee expects the Service to resubmit these projects in 
     the fiscal year 2004 budget request.
       Funds provided for the Pacific Coast Immigration Station 
     and the Japanese American History project at the Presidio are 
     for completion of ongoing planning and feasibility studies. 
     All funding for actual construction (estimated at $7,200,000) 
     will need to be raised through partnerships with the private 
     and non-profit sectors.
       Funding has been provided for further design of the Grand 
     Portage Heritage Center at the Grand Portage National 
     Monument. The Committee is aware that initial planning and 
     design has been completed. Nevertheless, the Committee urges 
     the National Park Service to rethink the size and scope of 
     the Grand Portage project and work to downsize the effort.
       Within the amounts provided for equipment replacement, not 
     to exceed $750,000 is to be provided to the Isle Royale 
     National Park for the acquisition of replacement boats.
       Within the increases provided for general management 
     planning, the Service is directed to allocate $490,000 for 
     the continuation of the GMP at the Harpers Ferry National 
     Historical Park. The Service should also initiate special 
     resource studies of the Baranof Museum and the historic sites 
     in Beaufort, South Carolina if these studies are authorized.
       The Committee has provided additional funds for 
     construction of the Morris Thompson Visitor and Native 
     Cultural Center, but is concerned that the scope of the 
     project has not yet been fully defined. The funds provided 
     for construction should not be released until the Service and 
     the non-Federal cooperators have briefed the Committee 
     regarding project scope and plans to comply with the 
     requirements of H. Rept. 107-234.
       Funding provided for the New Bedford Whaling NHP is for 
     planning activities associated with the interior and exterior 
     rehabilitation of the Corson Building, which the Committee 
     understands is to be donated to the Service for use as an 
     education and community outreach center. Future funding for 
     the project will be contingent upon the Service's ability to 
     complete the donation process.
       The Committee expects funding for the New River Gorge NSR 
     to be used for visitor access improvements ($275,000), 
     building stabilization and demolition ($200,000), boundary 
     surveys ($217,000), and emergency radio equipment ($176,000).
       The Committee recommends $5,600,000 for the Arches National 
     Park visitor center. In combination with remaining balances 
     from this project in the planning account, these funds will 
     be sufficient to complete the proposed facility.
       The Committee concurs with the following modifications to 
     project scopes from the presentation included in the fiscal 
     year 2003 budget justification: Bent's Old Fort (visitor 
     restrooms have already been constructed, but final siting of 
     the proposed structures necessitates higher than anticipated 
     utility hook-up costs); Gateway National Recreation Area 
     (project will not replace facility but will reuse the shell 
     of the existing building and provide viewing opportunities in 
     an alternative way); and Fredericksburg/Spotsylvania National 
     Historical Park (stabilize 14 historic ruins dispersed 
     throughout the

[[Page 796]]

     park rather than 9 historic ruins in one location).
       The Committee recommends $2,700,000 for the visitor center 
     at Great Basin National Park, with the understanding that 
     this completes the project and that funding for the exhibits, 
     estimated at $1,100,000, will come from non-Federal sources.

                    land and water conservation fund


                              (rescission)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................-$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................-30,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................-30,000,000

       The Committee recommends a rescission of $30,000,000 in 
     annual contract authority provided by 16 U.S.C. 460l-10a. 
     This authority has not been used in recent years and there 
     are no plans to use it in fiscal year 2002.

                 land acquisition and state assistance

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$274,117,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................286,057,000
Committee recommendation....................................204,005,000

       The Committee recommends $204,005,000 for land acquisition 
     and State assistance, a reduction of $82,052,000 below the 
     budget request.
       The following table shows the Committee recommendation:

                                                              Committee
        Area and State                                   Recommendation

Big Thicket National Preserve (TX)...........................$5,800,000
Black Canyon NP (CO)............................................300,000
Chickamaugua & Chattanooga NMP (TN)...........................1,030,000
Ebey's Landing National Historical Reserve (WA)...............1,100,000
Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania County Battlefields NMP (VA)....1,100,000
Gauley River NRA (WV).........................................1,750,000
Great Sand Dunes NM & Preserve (CO)...........................6,500,000
Gulf Islands NS (MS).........................................10,600,000
Hawaii Volcanoes NP (HI).....................................10,000,000
Ice Age National Scenic Trail (WI) (Interpretive Center at Cross 
  Plains).......................................................200,000
Keweenaw NHP (MI)...............................................600,000
Little Rock Central HS NHS (AR).................................130,000
Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MN).............607,000
Missouri National Recreational River (SD).....................1,000,000
Mojave NP (CA)................................................2,000,000
Piscataway Park (MD)............................................500,000
Richmond Battlefield Park (VA)................................2,000,000
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (MI)...................2,000,000
Timucuan Ecological Preserve (FL).............................3,000,000
Valley Forge NHP (PA).........................................2,000,000
Virgin Islands NP (USVI)......................................1,500,000
Western Arctic National Parklands (AK)........................1,200,000
Grant to the State of Florida (FL) (Everglades Restoration)..19,500,000
Use of carryover/anticipated slippage........................-5,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal, Acquisitions...................................68,417,000
Acquisition Management.......................................12,588,000
Emergencies/Hardships.........................................4,000,000
Inholdings/Exchanges..........................................4,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total, NPS Federal Land Acquisition......................89,005,000
                                                       ================

Stateside Grants............................................111,000,000
State Assistance Grant Administration.........................4,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal, NPS State Land Acquisition....................115,000,000
                                                       ================

    Total, NPS Land Acquisition and State Assistance........204,005,000

       The amount provided for the acquisition of Cat Island at 
     the Gulf Island National Seashore is based on the latest 
     information available to the Committee regarding the acreage 
     and value of lands to be acquired. The Committee is aware 
     that discussions are ongoing among the National Park Service, 
     the landowner and third party interests, and that the amount 
     required to complete phase two of this acquisition may 
     change. The Service should keep the Committee informed of the 
     status of these discussions.
       The Committee is aware that legislation has been enacted to 
     authorize the acquisition of Pemberton's Headquarters for 
     inclusion in Vicksburg National Military Park. The Committee 
     directs the Service to complete the acquisition using 
     acquisition balances available at the Park, together with 
     additional carryover balances if necessary.
       The Committee has provided $200,000 to purchase the 
     interpretive center at Cross Plains along the Ice Age Scenic 
     Trail. The Committee understands that this amount combined 
     with the current unobligated balance is sufficient to 
     complete the purchase.
       The Committee authorizes the purchase of land from willing 
     sellers under the Inholding program of the National Park 
     Service (Units of the System authorized before fiscal year 
     1960) without referring the offers to the Committee for 
     approval unless the acquisition is more than the approved 
     appraisal and said appraised value is greater than $500,000.
       In addition to the amount provided for State Assistance, 
     the Committee has provided significant funding for State and 
     Tribal Wildlife Grants through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
     Service. The Committee believes that these two programs can 
     be mutually beneficial, as grants supported by the State 
     Assistance program may be beneficial to non-game wildlife and 
     grants supported by the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants 
     program may have associated recreation benefits. The 
     Committee urges the Department to work with States, tribes 
     and other relevant stakeholders to explore opportunities to 
     develop synergies between these two programs.

                          ENERGY AND MINERALS

                         U.S. Geological Survey


                 surveys, investigations, and research

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$914,002,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................867,338,000
Committee recommendation....................................914,617,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $914,617,000 
     for the United States Geological Survey (USGS) for fiscal 
     year 2003. This amount is $615,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and $47,279,000 above the budget estimate. The 
     detail table at the back of the report displays the 
     Committee's proposed distribution of funds among the Survey's 
     activities.
       The Committee is dismayed that the budget estimate for the 
     USGS once again recommends large reductions to valuable 
     ongoing programs. Proposals such as the elimination of the 
     Toxic Substances Hydrology program, a significant reduction 
     to the National Water-Quality Assessment program (NAWQA), and 
     the elimination of Federal funding for the Water Resources 
     Research Institutes are but a few of the recommendations 
     included in the budget estimate. The Committee does not agree 
     to the termination or substantial weakening of programs for 
     which there is strong support from a broad constituency, and 
     a demonstrated value through the significant amount of non-
     Federal funds that are leveraged through most USGS programs. 
     In the Committee's view, it will remain difficult to find the 
     resources to support new directions for the Survey as long as 
     the annual need to restore large amounts to base programs 
     continues. As budget planning gets underway for fiscal year 
     2004, the Committee urges those involved in the process to 
     bear in mind the expressed public support across the United 
     States for the Survey's programs.
       National Mapping Program.--The Committee recommends 
     $131,077,000 for the National Mapping Program, a decrease of 
     $200,000 from the current year enacted level and $1,783,000 
     above the budget estimate. Funds are restored in the amount 
     of $809,000 for the urban dynamics program. An amount of 
     $1,000,000 is provided for the Alaska mapping activities, of 
     which $500,000 is designated for the North Slope project 
     described in the budget. An additional $500,000 is provided 
     for an Alaska Mapping Initiative that will be undertaken in 
     other areas of the State.
       Geologic hazards, resources and processes.--The Committee 
     recommends $234,903,000 for the geologic hazards, resources 
     and processes activity. This amount is an increase of 
     $2,093,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
     $10,247,000 above the budget estimate. The Committee 
     recommendation includes a transfer of $4,000,000 from the 
     National Park Service to support a Critical Ecosystems 
     Initiative in the Everglades. Decreases from the budget 
     request include $1,200,000 for oil and gas assessments and 
     $500,000 for geothermal assessments. The Committee does not 
     agree with many of the program reductions assumed in the 
     budget request and has restored the following: $4,987,000 for 
     the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping program; $500,000 
     to continue coastal erosion studies in North Carolina; 
     $500,000 to continue land subsidence studies in southeastern 
     Louisiana; $1,300,000 for regional aggregate materials 
     projects; $1,500,000 to complete the Alaska Minerals-at-Risk 
     project; $474,000 for geological surveys of the Yukon Flats; 
     and $1,000,000 for the purchase and installation of volcano 
     monitoring equipment at Shemya, AK. In agreement with the 
     budget request, the following programs are continued within 
     base funds: $1,250,000 for South Carolina/Georgia Coastal 
     Erosion and Coastal Monitoring Studies, of which $250,000 is 
     intended for the South Carolina coastal erosion monitoring 
     program; $3,000,000 for operations of the Alaska Volcano 
     Observatory; and $250,000 for the cooperative program at the 
     University of Hawaii-Hilo. Within the coastal program, over 
     $4,000,000 is dedicated specifically to research efforts in 
     the Gulf of Mexico.
       Water resources investigations.--The Committee recommends 
     $206,626,000 for water resources investigations. This amount 
     is $3,800,000 above the current year enacted level and 
     $28,798,000 above the budget estimate. The Committee does not 
     concur with the proposed reductions and has restored 
     programmatic funds as follows: $4,796,000 for the NAWQA 
     program; $12,919,000 for the

[[Page 797]]

     Toxic Substances Hydrology program, which was proposed for 
     elimination in its current form; $2,096,000 for streamgaging 
     activities; $5,500,000 for the Water Resources Research 
     Institutes program, which was proposed for elimination; 
     $200,000 for a study of extremophilic life in the Berkeley 
     Pit Lake; $299,000 for toxic materials studies at Lake 
     Champlain, making the total available for this project 
     $485,000; $450,000 for monitoring water resources in Hawaii; 
     and $195,000 for the Noyes Slough study. A decrease from the 
     budget request of $1,000,000 has been assumed for the 
     proposed United States-Mexico border environmental health 
     initiative. Other increases to the budget estimate include: 
     $220,000 for a cladophora bloom algae study in coastal Maui; 
     $500,000 for the Community Rivers Coalition watershed 
     protection project; and $500,000 for the Rathdrum Prairie/
     Spokane Valley aquifer study. The Committee understands that 
     a State or local match for the Federal contributions will be 
     provided for both the Alaska and Idaho/Washington projects. 
     Within the funds restored for the Toxic Substances Hydrology 
     program, $500,000 is continued for the Gulf Hypoxia project. 
     The Committee continues the direction that allows for up to 
     $1,000,000 to be expended for the Survey's participation in 
     the work of the Long-Term Estuary Assessment Group.
       Biological Resources.--The Committee recommends 
     $166,927,000 for Biological Resources. This amount is 
     $538,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
     $6,446,000 above the budget estimate. The Committee does not 
     agree with many of the reductions proposed in the budget 
     estimate and has restored the following: $750,000 to continue 
     a mining study on the Mark Twain National Forest in 
     cooperation with the Water Resources activity and the Forest 
     Service; $180,000 for Yukon River Chum Salmon research; and 
     $400,000 to continue molecular biology studies at the Leetown 
     Science Center. An amount of $500,000 is included for a 
     Pallid Sturgeon study; this study is funded currently at 
     $300,000, but was proposed for elimination. An amount of 
     $100,000 is included for continuation of the Diamondback 
     Terrapin study, currently funded at $250,000 and also 
     proposed for elimination in the budget request. Other 
     increases above the budget request include: $1,000,000 for 
     the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII); 
     $1,000,000 for a DNA bear sampling study in Montana; $300,000 
     for a multidisciplinary water resources study to be conducted 
     at the Leetown Science Center; and $1,000,000 for additional 
     work at Lake Tahoe, which will include $500,000 for a 
     decision support system, and $500,000 to initiate the process 
     for a place-based study. Within the funds provided for the 
     DNA bear sampling study, USGS may hire temporary FTEs as 
     necessary to support the project. The Committee notes the 
     interest that has been expressed in establishing additional 
     State cooperative research units and, therefore, directs the 
     Survey to develop a priority system for expanding the current 
     program. The Committee supports the NBII but encourages the 
     USGS to more broadly distribute the funding throughout the 
     system and to place greater emphasis on scientific data for 
     the management of public lands.
       Science Support.--The Committee recommends $85,734,000 for 
     science support activities. This amount is $521,000 below the 
     current year enacted level and $370,000 below the budget 
     request. Changes to the budget request include decreases of 
     $1,625,000 for accessible data transfer work and $1,000,000 
     for the Enterprise GIS proposal.
       Facilities.--The Committee recommends $89,350,000 for 
     facilities costs. This amount is $95,000 below the current 
     year enacted level and $375,000 above the budget request. The 
     proposed increase to the budget estimate is provided to the 
     Leetown Science Center for planning and design of much needed 
     additional space at the facility.
       General.--The Committee has concurred with proposed budget 
     increases for fixed costs and reductions to travel costs 
     throughout USGS activities. Other streamlining savings 
     proposed in the budget request have not been assumed because 
     no additional information was provided to assure the 
     Committee that savings would not be gained by reducing 
     programmatic activities.
       The Committee urges the Survey, in conjunction with other 
     agencies of the Department, to work with Alaska educators in 
     developing a science initiative that could involve school 
     children in the Earth and life sciences programs of the 
     Department of the Interior.
       The Committee is deeply concerned by the ongoing spread of 
     Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) among wildlife populations 
     around the country, and is especially troubled by the 
     possibility of cross-species transmission of CWD. The 
     Committee is aware of the Interagency Plan for Assisting 
     States, Federal Agencies, and Tribes in Managing Chronic 
     Wasting Disease in Wild and Captive Cervids, and believes it 
     is appropriate for USGS to expand its collaborative work with 
     outside research institutions to conduct prion research 
     focusing on chronic wasting disease treatments for impacted 
     wildlife populations.

                      Minerals Management Service

                royalty and offshore minerals management

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$150,667,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................164,222,000
Committee recommendation....................................164,322,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $164,322,000 
     for royalty and offshore minerals management, an increase of 
     $100,000 above the budget request. A comparison of the budget 
     estimates and the Committee recommendations are shown in the 
     following table. The funding amounts set out below are at the 
     activity level. Additional details on funding for sub-
     activities within the various appropriations accounts for the 
     Service are set out in a table in the back of this report.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outer Continental Shelf lands................................     $137,543,000     $137,643,000        +$100,000
Royalty management...........................................       83,284,000       83,284,000  ...............
General administration.......................................       43,625,000       43,625,000  ...............
Use of receipts..............................................     -100,230,000     -100,230,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, royalty and offshore minerals management........      164,222,000      164,322,000         +100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Within the funds for the leasing and environmental program 
     in the Outer Continental Shelf lands activity, the Committee 
     has provided $150,000 for the Alaska Eskimo Whaling 
     Commission to ensure that proposed OCS sales in Alaska 
     properly consider the impacts of offshore drilling on whale 
     migration patterns and whaling activities.
       The Committee has provided an increase of $1,600,000 above 
     the budget request for the resource evaluation program in the 
     Outer Continental Shelf lands activity. The increase is 
     comprised of $800,000 for the Center for Marine Resources and 
     Environmental Technology to support exploration and 
     sustainable development of seabed minerals and $800,000 for 
     the Marine Mineral Technology Center in Alaska to conduct 
     assessments on potential gold reserves off the coast of Nome.
       Within the funds provided for the regulatory program in the 
     Outer Continental Shelf lands activity, $1,400,000 shall be 
     for the Offshore Technology Research Center to perform 
     research for MMS through the cooperative agreement dated June 
     18, 1999.
       Within the funds provided for the information management 
     program in the Outer Continental Shelf lands activity, the 
     Committee has reduced the request for the agency's e-
     government initiative by $2,000,000.
       The Committee has continued bill language that was included 
     in the fiscal year 2002 appropriations act under general 
     provisions, Department of the Interior to prohibit the use of 
     funds for Outer Continental Shelf leasing and development in 
     certain areas.
       The Committee understands that the process of projecting 
     offsetting receipts 1 to 2 years into the future is an 
     uncertain business. Recognizing this, the Committee has again 
     given the Minerals Management Service the authority to 
     utilize receipts accruing from rental rates in effect prior 
     to August 5, 1993 to augment primary sources of receipts 
     should this be necessary to reach the operating levels 
     intended by the Committee.

                           oil spill research

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,105,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................6,105,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,105,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,105,000 for 
     oil spill research, which is equal to the request.

          Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

                       regulation and technology

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$103,075,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................105,367,000
Committee recommendation....................................105,367,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $105,367,000 
     for regulation and technology, which is equal to the budget 
     estimate. A comparison of the budget estimate and the 
     Committee recommendation is as follows:

[[Page 798]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental restoration....................................         $162,000         $162,000  ...............
Environmental protection.....................................       79,159,000       79,159,000  ...............
Technology development and transfer..........................       12,593,000       12,593,000  ...............
Financial management.........................................          485,000          485,000  ...............
Executive direction..........................................       12,693,000       12,693,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, regulation and technology....................      105,092,000      105,092,000  ...............
                                                              ==================================================
Civil penalties..............................................          275,000          275,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, regulation and technology.......................      105,367,000      105,367,000  ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund

                         (Definite, Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$203,455,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................174,035,000
Committee recommendation....................................191,745,000

       The Committee recommends $191,745,000 for the abandoned 
     mine reclamation fund, which is an increase above the budget 
     estimate of $17,710,000. A comparison of the Committee 
     recommendation and the budget estimate is as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental restoration....................................     $156,987,000     $174,697,000     +$17,710,000
Technology development and transfer..........................        4,164,000        4,164,000  ...............
Financial management.........................................        6,179,000        6,179,000  ...............
Executive direction..........................................        6,705,000        6,705,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................      174,305,000      191,745,000      +17,710,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee has included $10,000,000 for the Appalachian 
     clean streams initiative to address acid mine drainage 
     problems.
       The Committee remains concerned about the $6,800,000,000 
     backlog of high priority mine reclamation work that must be 
     completed throughout the Nation. Accordingly, the Committee 
     has restored $17,710,000 of the reduction the administration 
     proposed for the abandoned mine reclamation program within 
     the environmental restoration activity. The increase is 
     comprised of $17,500,000 for State grants and $210,000 for 
     Federal high priority reclamation projects.
       Bill language.--As in prior years, the bill includes 
     language related to the conduct of the abandoned mine land 
     program. The Committee has included language that maintains 
     the Federal emergency reclamation program and limits 
     expenditures in any one State to 25 percent of the total 
     appropriated for Federal and State-run emergency programs. 
     Language also is included in the bill to permit States to use 
     prior-year carryover funds from the emergency program without 
     being subject to the 25-percent statutory limitation per 
     State. The Committee also has recommended language in the 
     bill which would fund minimum program State grants at 
     $1,500,000 per State as well as language which provides 
     $10,000,000 to be used for projects in the Appalachian clean 
     streams initiative.
       The Committee also has included language specific to the 
     State of Maryland authorizing the State to set aside the 
     greater of $1,000,000 or 10 percent of the total of the 
     grants made available to the State under title IV of the 
     Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, subject 
     to specific provisions identified in the bill language.

                             INDIAN AFFAIRS

                        Bureau of Indian Affairs

                      operation of indian programs

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,799,809,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,837,110,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,855,635,000

       The Committee recommends $1,855,635,000 for the operation 
     of Indian programs, an increase of $55,826,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and $18,525,000 above the 
     budget estimate. Increases include internal transfers and 
     fixed costs in the amount of $13,381,000. In addition, the 
     Committee has included the full amount requested for the 
     Bureau's trust and trust reform programs; restored cuts made 
     in vital education programs, including the Tribally 
     Controlled Community Colleges; and increased law enforcement 
     funding in the area of border security. The following table 
     provides a comparison of the budget estimate and Committee 
     recommendations in the major programmatic areas:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     TRIBAL BUDGET SYSTEM
 
Tribal Priority Allocations..................................     $775,534,000     $775,534,000  ...............
Other Recurring Programs.....................................      596,192,000      595,642,000        -$550,000
Non-Recurring Programs.......................................       67,510,000       72,360,000       +4,850,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Tribal Budget System............................    1,439,236,000    1,443,536,000       +4,300,000
                                                              ==================================================
                        BIA OPERATIONS
 
Central Office Operations....................................       72,490,000       72,490,000  ...............
Regional Office Operations...................................       64,223,000       64,223,000  ...............
Special Programs and Pooled Overhead.........................      261,161,000      275,386,000      +14,225,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, BIA Operations..................................      397,874,000      412,099,000      +14,225,000
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, Operation of Indian Programs....................    1,837,110,000    1,855,635,000      +18,525,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Additional details on the funding for the Bureau's 
     Activities are provided in a table in the back of this 
     report.
       Tribal priority allocation.--The Committee recommends 
     $775,534,000 for tribal priority allocations (TPA), an 
     increase of $23,378,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level and fully commensurate with the budget estimate. The 
     increase above the enacted level includes $6,637,000 in 
     internal transfers and fixed costs.
       Other recurring programs.--The Committee recommends 
     $595,642,000 for other recurring programs, an increase of 
     $8,674,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     $550,000 below the budget estimate. The amount provided 
     includes $5,993,000 in internal transfers and fixed costs. 
     Increases above the budget estimate include $4,000,000 for 
     operating grants for Tribally Controlled Community Colleges, 
     $550,000 for the western Washington shellfish program (Boldt 
     decision), $3,100,000 for the Timber-Fish-Wildlife project, 
     $300,000 for the Great Lakes Area Resource Management (Circle 
     of Flight) program, and $3,400,000 for the following Tribal 
     Management/Development programs: the Alaska Sea Otter 
     Commission ($100,000), the Wetlands/Waterfowl Management 
     program ($600,000), the Upper Columbia United Tribes 
     ($320,000), the Bering Sea Fishermen's Association 
     ($800,000), the Lake Roosevelt Management program ($630,000), 
     the bison program ($600,000), and the Chugach Regional 
     Resources Commission ($350,000). Decreases below the budget 
     estimate are $11,900,000 for the proposed school 
     privatization which includes $5,000,000 from ISEP (Program 
     Adjustments), $2,000,000 from student transportation, 
     $1,900,000 from facilities operations and maintenance, and 
     $3,000,000 from administrative cost grants.
       Non-recurring programs.--The Committee recommends 
     $72,360,000 for non-recurring programs, a decrease of 
     $438,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and an 
     increase of $4,850,000 above the budget estimate. The amount 
     provided includes a decrease of $554,000 in internal 
     transfers and fixed costs. Increases above the budget 
     estimate include

[[Page 799]]

     $2,000,000 for the Rocky Mountain Technology Foundation's 
     distance learning project, $1,000,000 for the rural Alaska 
     fire program, $1,500,000 for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe's 
     prairie management plan, and $350,000 for legal services 
     provided by the Alaska Legal Services program.
       Central office operations.--The Committee recommends 
     $72,490,000 for central office operations, an increase of 
     $14,384,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     fully commensurate with the budget estimate. The amount 
     provided includes $230,000 in internal transfers and fixed 
     costs. Major programmatic increases above the enacted level 
     include $5,700,000 for trust services, and $5,500,000 for 
     information resources technology.
       Regional office operations.--The Committee recommends 
     $64,223,000 for regional office operations, an increase of 
     $1,544,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     fully commensurate with the budget estimate. The amount 
     provided includes $44,000 in internal transfers and fixed 
     costs.
       Special programs/pooled overhead.--The Committee recommends 
     $275,386,000 for special programs/pooled overhead, an 
     increase of $8,284,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level, and $14,225,000 above the budget estimate. The amount 
     provided includes $1,031,000 in internal transfers and fixed 
     costs. Increases above the budget estimate included the 
     following: In education, $200,000 for the pre-law preparatory 
     course conducted by the Law Institute for American Indians; 
     in public safety and justice, $3,000,000 for additional 
     detention center services, and $2,175,000 for additional 
     costs associated with existing law enforcement 
     responsibilities along the Canadian and Mexican borders; in 
     community development, $3,000,000 for the United Tribes 
     Technical College, $350,000 for the United Sioux Tribes 
     Development Corporation, $1,500,000 for the Crownpoint 
     Institute of Technology, $1,500,000 for the Western Heritage 
     Center's tribal history and distance learning project, 
     $500,000 for the American Indian and Alaska Native child 
     abuse/child welfare study, $1,000,000 for the Alaska Native 
     Aviation Training program, and $1,000,000 for continuation of 
     work on the Yuut Elitnauviat People's Learning Center. 
     Funding for the aviation training program and the Learning 
     Center is contingent upon compliance with the reporting 
     requirements mandated in House Report 107-234 and Senate 
     Report 107-36, respectively. Funding is provided to the 
     Bureau to formulate and pilot an American Indian and Alaska 
     Native child abuse/child welfare program which addresses the 
     adverse effects of child abuse on American Indians and Alaska 
     Natives. In developing the program, the Bureau is instructed 
     to consult with tribes and social service agencies to 
     identify communities willing to participate in the 
     development of and execution of a pilot project aimed at 
     reducing child abuse and addressing the effects of child 
     abuse. The Committee is aware of interest expressed by the 
     Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Alaska Children's Alliance. The 
     Committee recommends that the Bureau strongly consider 
     utilizing partnerships with these entities, other tribal 
     organizations, State social services and/or non-profit 
     agencies for execution of the program.
       General.--The Committee directs the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs to establish a Tribal Service Area for the Samish 
     Indian Nation consistent with the tribe's existing Tribal 
     Service Area for services provided by the Indian Health 
     Service. When the service area is completed, the Samish 
     Indian Nation shall be included in the Bureau's budget for 
     services and programs offered to Samish tribal members, in 
     addition to the tribe's existing funding for ``Other Aid to 
     Tribal Government.'' The Committee directs the Secretary to 
     report to the Congress within 60 days of enactment of this 
     Act on the status of the actions taken in regard to the 
     Samish Indian Nation.
       Fractionated ownership of trust assets continues to be one 
     of the primary hurdles to implementing effective trust 
     management within BIA. Consolidating these fractionated 
     interests is one of the most effective means of ameliorating 
     a problem that grows worse every year. The Indian Land 
     Consolidation Pilot has been successful on those few 
     reservations where it has been implemented. No additional 
     funds were requested for fiscal year 2003 because of past 
     years' unexpended balances being carried over. Not later than 
     September 30, 2003, the Department should report to the 
     Congress on the obstacles that are preventing the full 
     implementation of not only the pilot but the implementation 
     of the Indian Land Consolidation Act Amendments of 2000.

                              construction

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$357,132,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................345,252,000
Committee recommendation....................................348,252,000

       The Committee recommends $348,252,000 for construction, a 
     decrease of $8,880,000 from the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level, and an increase of $3,000,000 from the budget 
     estimate. The following table provides a comparison of the 
     budget estimate with the Committee recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education....................................................     $292,717,000     $295,717,000      +$3,000,000
Public safety and justice....................................        5,046,000        5,046,000  ...............
Resources management.........................................       39,173,000       39,173,000  ...............
General administration.......................................        2,182,000        2,182,000  ...............
Construction management......................................        6,134,000        6,134,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Construction....................................      345,252,000      348,252,000       +3,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee's recommendation for education construction 
     includes $125,223,000 for replacement school construction. 
     This amount will address the needs of the next six schools on 
     the Bureau's priority list. Those schools are: Santa Fe 
     Indian School, Kayenta Boarding School, Tiospa Zina Tribal 
     School, Wide Ruins Boarding School, Low Mountain Boarding 
     School, and St. Francis Indian School. In addition, the 
     Committee has recommended $3,000,000 for the tribal school 
     construction demonstration program established in fiscal year 
     2001.

indian land and water claims settlements and miscellaneous payments to 
                                indians

Appropriations, 2002........................................$60,949,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................57,949,000
Committee recommendation.....................................57,949,000

       The Committee recommends $57,949,000 for Indian land and 
     water claims settlements and miscellaneous payments to 
     Indians. Funding is provided as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White Earth Land Settlement Act (Admin)......................         $625,000         $625,000  ...............
Hoopa-Yurok settlement fund..................................          250,000          250,000  ...............
Pyramid Lake water rights settlement.........................          142,000          142,000  ...............
Ute Indian water rights settlement...........................       24,728,000       24,728,000  ...............
Rocky Boy's..................................................        5,068,000        5,068,000  ...............
Shivwits Band Settlement.....................................       16,000,000       16,000,000  ...............
Santo Domingo Pueblo Settlement..............................        3,136,000        3,136,000  ...............
Colorado Ute Settlement......................................        8,000,000        8,000,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................       57,949,000       57,949,000  ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee understands that the funding provided for the 
     Santa Domingo Pueblo settlement is in the second year of a 3-
     year obligation. The Committee also understands that, 
     following the provision of funds in fiscal year 2003, the 
     Bureau's remaining obligation is approximately $10,000,000. 
     As such, the Committee expects the Bureau to include this 
     final installment in its fiscal year 2004 budget.

                 indian guaranteed loan program account

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,986,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,493,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,493,000

       The Committee recommends $5,493,000 for the Indian 
     guaranteed loan program, an increase of $507,000 over the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level and commensurate with the 
     budget request.

                          Departmental Offices

                            Insular Affairs

                       assistance to territories

Appropriations, 2002........................................$78,950,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................70,217,000
Committee recommendation.....................................75,217,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $75,217,000, 
     which is $5,000,000 above

[[Page 800]]

     the budget request. The amounts recommended by the Committee 
     compared to the budget estimate are shown in the following 
     table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Territorial assistance:
    Office of Insular Affairs................................       $5,295,000       $5,295,000  ...............
    Technical assistance.....................................        7,461,000       12,461,000      +$5,000,000
    Maintenance assistance fund..............................        2,300,000        2,300,000  ...............
    Brown tree snake.........................................        2,350,000        2,350,000  ...............
    Insular management controls..............................        1,491,000        1,491,000  ...............
    Coral reef initiative....................................              500              500  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, territorial assistance.......................       19,397,000       24,397,000       +5,000,000
                                                              ==================================================
American Samoa: Operations grants............................       23,100,000       23,100,000  ...............
Northern Mariana Islands: Covenant grants....................       27,720,000       27,720,000  ...............
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, assistance to territories.......................       70,217,000       75,217,000       +5,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Territorial assistance.--The Committee recommends 
     $24,397,000 for territorial assistance, which is $5,000,000 
     above the request.
       The increase above the request is for Impact of Compact aid 
     to the State of Hawaii and Healthcare Association of Hawaii.
       American Samoa operations grants/American Samoa 
     construction.--The Committee recommends $23,100,000 for 
     operations grants to American Samoa, which is equal to the 
     request.
       CNMI/Covenant grants.--The Committee recommends $27,720,000 
     for covenant grants. Included in this amount is $11,000,0000 
     for CNMI construction, $4,580,000 for impact aid to Guam, 
     $840,000 for impact aid to CNMI, $10,140,000 for American 
     Samoa, and $1,160,000 for the CNMI immigration, labor, and 
     law enforcement initiative. The Committee understands that 
     the statutory matching requirement for CNMI construction 
     funds will expire during fiscal year 2003 so that $5,580,000 
     of these funds will be available without any match from the 
     CNMI. Given the economic difficulties facing the 
     Commonwealth, the Committee has chosen not to reinstitute the 
     matching requirement at this time.
       The Committee is aware of the serious challenges facing the 
     Virgin Islands in complying with certain environmental 
     standards. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Deputy Assistant 
     Secretary for Insular Affairs, to develop, in consultation 
     with the Government of the Virgin Islands and other relevant 
     Federal agencies, a Federal-local financing plan to 
     accomplish the environmental infrastructure improvements 
     required by Federal law. Such plan shall be submitted to the 
     authorizing committees of jurisdiction and to the committees 
     on appropriations of the Congress no later than June 15, 
     2003.

                      compact of free association

Appropriations, 2002........................................$23,245,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................20,745,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,925,000

       The Committee recommends $20,925,000 for compact of free 
     association, which is $180,000 above the request. A 
     comparison of the Committee recommendation to the budget 
     estimate follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compact of free association--Federal services................       $7,354,000       $7,354,000  ...............
Mandatory payments--Program grant assistance.................       12,000,000       12,000,000  ...............
Enewetak support.............................................        1,391,000        1,571,000        +$180,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, compact of free association.....................       20,745,000       20,925,000         +180,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Federal services assistance.--The Committee recommends 
     $7,354,000 for Federal services assistance, equal to the 
     budget request.
       Program grant assistance.--The Committee recommends 
     $12,000,000 for program grant assistance, equal to the budget 
     request.
       Enewetak support.--The Committee recommends $1,571,000 for 
     Enewetak support, which is $180,000 above the request. The 
     additional funds shall be used for repairs to the shipping 
     vessel which provides food to Enewetak as part of the 
     Enewetak Food and Agriculture Program.

                        Departmental Management

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$69,946,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................78,596,000
Committee recommendation.....................................72,427,000

       The Committee recommends $72,427,000 for departmental 
     management, an increase of $2,481,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level of $69,946,000, and a decrease of 
     $6,169,000 from the budget estimate. The amount provided 
     includes $2,176,000 in fixed costs. A comparison of the 
     Committee recommendations and the budget estimate follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Departmental direction.......................................      $13,405,000      $13,405,000  ...............
Management and coordination..................................       26,455,000       26,455,000  ...............
Hearings and appeals.........................................        8,198,000        8,198,000  ...............
Central services.............................................       26,429,000       23,528,000      -$2,901,000
Bureau of Mines workers compensation/unemployment............        4,109,000          841,000       -3,268,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................       78,596,000       72,427,000       -6,169,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Pursuant to the Cardiac Arrest Survival Act of 2000, the 
     Department of Health and Human Services and the General 
     Services Administration have released guidelines for agencies 
     wishing to implement automated external defibrillator (AED) 
     programs. The Department of the Interior is in the process of 
     ordering additional AED units, and has already installed more 
     than 450 AEDs at various locations. The Committee feels that 
     a comprehensive review of the Department's AED program is 
     appropriate at this time. The Department should submit a 
     report to the Committee that describes the number of AEDs 
     currently in place or on order for DOI facilities, their 
     geographic distribution, their distribution among DOI 
     bureaus, current maintenance and training costs, and the 
     Department's long term plans for AED placement, service and 
     training. This report should be submitted by March 1, 2003.

                        Office of the Solicitor

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$45,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................47,773,000
Committee recommendation.....................................47,773,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $47,773,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the Office of the Solicitor, an 
     increase of $2,773,000 over the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level. Within the funds provided, the Solicitor's Office 
     shall hire one full time attorney to work exclusively with 
     the Indian Arts and Crafts Board in enforcement of the Indian 
     Arts and Crafts Act. The office shall report to the Committee 
     upon the hiring of this attorney.

                      Office of Inspector General

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$34,302,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................36,659,000
Committee recommendation.....................................36,239,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $36,239,000 
     for the Office of Inspector General.
       The amount provided includes the program changes proposed 
     in the budget request and $861,000 for fixed costs, an amount 
     consistent with that provided for other departmental bureaus.

[[Page 801]]



           Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians


                         FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2002........................................$99,224,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................151,027,000
Committee recommendation....................................151,027,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $151,027,000 
     for the Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians, 
     which is the same level as the budget request and $51,803,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The Committee 
     continues to recognize the dire need for the Federal 
     Government to improve Indian trust management and continues 
     to support the Bureau's efforts in this regard.


                   INDIAN LAND CONSOLIDATION PROJECT

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,980,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,980,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,980,000

       The Committee recommends $10,980,000 for Indian land 
     consolidation, which is the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and $3,000,000 above the budget request. The 
     increase reflects the Committee's decision to consolidate the 
     proposed Federal priority land acquisitions and exchanges 
     program with the Indian land consolidation program.

           Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration


                natural resource damage assessment fund

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,497,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,538,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,538,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,538,000 for 
     natural resource damage assessments, which is the same as the 
     request.

                           General Provisions

                       department of the interior

       The Committee has included in ``General Provisions, 
     Department of the Interior'' various legislative provisions 
     affecting the Department of the Interior. Several of these 
     provisions have been carried in previous years and others are 
     proposed new this year. The provisions are:
       Sec. 101. Provides Secretarial authority to transfer 
     program funds for expenditures in cases of emergency when all 
     other emergency funds are exhausted.
       Sec. 102. Provides for expenditure or transfer of funds by 
     the Secretary in the event of actual or potential emergencies 
     including forest fires, range fires, earthquakes, floods, 
     volcanic eruptions, storms, oilspills, grasshopper and Mormon 
     cricket outbreaks, and surface mine reclamation emergencies.
       Sec. 103. Provides for use of appropriated funds for 
     operation of garages, shops, warehouses, and similar 
     facilities.
       Sec. 104. Provides for use of appropriated funds for 
     contracts, rental cars and aircraft, certain library 
     memberships, and certain telephone expenses.
       Sec. 105. Provides for use of appropriated funds to 
     purchase uniforms or to provide a uniform allowance.
       Sec. 106. Provides that contracts issued for services and 
     rentals with appropriated funds be in effect for a period not 
     to exceed 12 months.
       Secs. 107-110. Prohibits the use of funds provided in the 
     act for certain offshore leasing and related activities 
     pursuant to the revised 5-year plan for Outer Continental 
     Shelf oil and gas leasing.
       Sec. 111. Provides that advance payments under the Indian 
     Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act may be (1) 
     invested only in obligations of the United States, or in 
     obligations or securities that are guaranteed or insured by 
     the United States, or mutual (or other) funds registered with 
     the Securities and Exchange Commission and which only invest 
     in obligations of the United States or securities that are 
     guaranteed or insured by the United States; or (2) deposited 
     only into accounts that are insured by an agency or 
     instrumentality of the United States, or are fully 
     collateralized to ensure protection of the funds, even in the 
     event of a bank failure.
       Sec. 112. Provides for the transfer of unobligated balances 
     from the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the Office of the 
     Special Trustee for American Indians for expenditure or 
     transfer for Indian trust management activities.
       Sec. 113. Allows the hiring of administrative law judges to 
     address the Indian probate backlog.
       Sec. 114. Permits the redistribution of tribal priority 
     allocation and tribal base funds to alleviate funding 
     inequities.
       Sec. 115. Continues a provision requiring the allocation of 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs postsecondary schools funds 
     consistent with unmet needs.
       Sec. 116. Provides for the protection of lands of the Huron 
     Cemetery for religious and cultural uses and as a burial 
     ground.
       Sec. 117. Continues a provision that land and other 
     reimbursement the Secretary may receive in the conveyance of 
     the Twin Cities Research Center may be used for the benefit 
     of the National Wildlife Refuge System in Minnesota and for 
     activities authorized by Public Law 104-134.
       Sec. 118. Authorizes the National Park Service to enter 
     into a cooperative agreement with the Golden Gate National 
     Parks Association to provide fee-based education, 
     interpretive and visitor service functions within the Crissy 
     Field and Fort Point areas of the Presidio.
       Sec. 119. Allows the Bureau of Land Management to retain 
     revenues derived from the sale of surplus seedlings.
       Sec. 120. Continues a cost-shared tribal school 
     construction program. This item is discussed in more detail 
     under the Bureau of Indian Affairs construction account.
       Sec. 121. Permits the sale of improvements and equipment at 
     the White River Oil Shale Mine in Utah, and the retention and 
     use of those funds by the Bureau of Land Management and the 
     General Services Administration.
       Sec. 122. Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to use 
     helicopters or motor vehicles to capture and transport horses 
     and burros at the Sheldon and Hart National Wildlife Refuges.
       Sec. 123. Prohibits use of funds to approve the transfer of 
     lands on South Fox Island, Michigan, until Congress has 
     authorized such transfer.
       Sec. 124. Provides certain contract authority regarding 
     transportation at Zion National Park in Utah and Rocky 
     Mountain National Park in Colorado.
       Sec. 125. Removes outdated grant restriction on a heritage 
     education park in Fairbanks, Alaska to allow for 
     rehabilitation of the park.
       Sec. 126. Prohibits the use of funds to issue a Record of 
     Decision or to take any action to issue a right-of-way grant 
     for a pipeline or associated facilities related to the Cadiz 
     groundwater storage and dry-year supply program.
       Sec. 127. Authorizes use of previously appropriated funds 
     to plan the John Adams Presidential Memorial.
       Sec. 128. Provides that funds appropriated and remaining 
     available in the Construction (Trust Fund) account of the 
     National Park Service at the completion of all authorized 
     projects shall be available for the rehabilitation and 
     improvement of Going-to-the-Sun Road in Glacier National 
     Park.
       Sec. 129. Directs the National Park Service to make interim 
     payments as part of the Glacier Bay compensation program. The 
     Committee notes that the Park Service has been developing 
     this program for more than three years, and most fishermen, 
     fishing-dependent businesses, and local communities have 
     still not received compensation.
       Sec. 130. Extends certain authorities applicable to the 
     Department of Interior's National Business Center.
       Sec. 131. Clarifies the effect of section 134 of the 
     Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2002 regarding certain lands in the State 
     of Kansas.
       Sec. 132. Makes technical correction to Public Law 99-548 
     regarding the conveyance of land to the city of Mesquite, 
     Nevada.
       Sec. 133. Authorizes transfer of funds to meet operational 
     needs at Midway Atoll National Wildlife refuge.
       Sec. 134. Amends Public Law 107-331, which authorizes 
     appropriations for the construction of the Native American 
     Cultural Center and Museum.
       Sec. 135. Modifies authorities applicable to the Department 
     of the Interior franchise fund.

                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

                             Forest Service

       The Committee notes the Administration's proposal to 
     eliminate funding for prior year Congressional earmarks in 
     favor of its own priorities. The Committee does not accept 
     the Administration's action to present a budget that does not 
     continue these worthwhile and significant projects, and 
     expects the agency to continue funding those programs to a 
     level that will assure projects are completed and objectives 
     accomplished. Except as otherwise noted in this report, the 
     agency is directed to continue funding of the congressional 
     priorities noted in prior years where work remains to be 
     accomplished or where such priorities require several years 
     to accomplish.

                     forest and rangeland research

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$241,304,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................242,798,000
Committee recommendation....................................247,804,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $247,804,000, 
     which is an increase of $5,006,000 above the budget request, 
     $6,500,000 above the enacted level.
       The administration proposed redirections of $35,900,000 of 
     ongoing research in order to fund a number of its new 
     initiatives. The Committee does not concur with this proposal 
     which would have led to the closure of a number of critical 
     research facilities and required the termination or 
     reassignment of 275 employees. Over the past 15 years the 
     research program has lost approximately half of its research 
     scientists and the Committee cannot concur with a proposal to 
     further erode the base research program. Accordingly, funding 
     for activities in the research program shall not be reduced 
     from the enacted level, including funding levels for all 
     prior year congressional projects that were

[[Page 802]]

     proposed for elimination in fiscal year 2003 such as 
     $2,000,000 for the Northeastern States Research Cooperative, 
     and $1,130,000 for the research laboratory in Sitka, Alaska.
       Increases above the enacted level are $5,000,000 for the 
     Forest Inventory and Analysis program in order to further the 
     goal of reducing cycle times for completing inventory work 
     and to expand the program to additional States, $1,000,000 
     for the global climate change initiative as proposed in the 
     budget request, and $500,000 to improve research and 
     technology development capacity for the Northeastern Research 
     Station at Morgantown, WV to reduce the impacts to eastern 
     forests from invasive pathogens, parasites, and insects. 
     Within the increase for the Forest Inventory and Analysis 
     program, $500,000 shall be provided to support programs at 
     the Mississippi Institute for Forest Inventory. The Committee 
     believes the Institute offers a unique opportunity to 
     interpret, expand, and process Forest Inventory and Analysis 
     data in a manner making data more readily available and 
     useful to non-Federal entities. Within the funds provided for 
     research $500,000 shall be granted to the Joe Skeen Institute 
     for Rangeland Restoration to perform research work on 
     significant rangeland restoration initiatives.

                       state and private forestry

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$291,221,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................277,363,000
Committee recommendation....................................297,472,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $297,472,000, 
     an increase of $6,251,000 above the enacted level, and 
     $20,109,000 above the request.
       The following table provides a comparison of the budget 
     estimate with the Committee recommendations. Additional 
     details on funding for activities below the budget line item 
     level are provided in a table in the back of this report.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forest health management.....................................      $81,380,000      $83,412,000      +$2,032,000
Cooperative fire protection..................................       30,393,000       30,893,000         +500,000
Cooperative forestry.........................................      160,554,000      177,667,000      +17,113,000
International forestry.......................................        5,036,000        5,500,000         +464,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, State and private forestry......................      277,363,000      297,472,000      +20,109,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Forest Health Management.--The Committee recommends 
     $83,412,000 for forest health management, which is 
     $15,108,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has 
     provided $44,374,000, an increase of $1,070,000 above the 
     enacted level, for Federal lands forest health management 
     which is for fixed cost increases.
       The Committee continues support of the cooperative effort 
     between the State of Vermont and the University of Vermont 
     for the Vermont forest monitoring cooperative, and has 
     provided $300,000 for this effort.
       The Committee has provided $14,000,000 to support the 
     administration's new proposed fund to rapidly respond to 
     invasive species problems. This is $2,032,000 more than the 
     request. The Committee has included bill language that 
     assures these funds are available for the full spectrum of 
     invasive species including pests, pathogens, and plants. 
     Within the funds provided is $5,000,000 for research and 
     control of Sudden Oak Death, including $2,500,000 for control 
     and containment activities and $2,500,000 for research. The 
     Committee expects the Forest Service to focus these 
     activities in States which have had Sudden Oak Death 
     outbreaks such as California, Arkansas, and Mississippi or in 
     States where the risk of outbreaks is high due to the high 
     concentration of oak species.
       The Committee is disappointed that the Forest Service has 
     not fulfilled its stewardship responsibility of controlling 
     leafy spurge on its land, particularly in the Dakota 
     Grasslands. Within the funds provided, the Committee 
     encourages the Forest Service to make controlling leafy 
     spurge a priority. The Committee has included $300,000 for 
     the Dakota Prairie Grasslands Unit to control leafy spurge on 
     the National Grasslands. The Committee urges the Forest 
     Service to spend these additional funds on management 
     activities on the ground.
       Cooperative Fire Protection.--The Committee recommends 
     $30,893,000 for cooperative fire protection, which is 
     $530,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has provided 
     $25,853,000 for State fire assistance and $5,040,000 for 
     volunteer fire assistance. Additional funding for these 
     programs is also included under the Wildland Fire Management 
     heading.
       Within the funds provided for State fire assistance, 
     $500,000 shall be provided to the Cook Inlet Tribal Council 
     in the form of an advance direct lump sum payment to perform 
     work in areas infested by the spruce bark beetle which has 
     caused severe fire danger on the Kenai Peninsula.
       Cooperative Forestry.--The Committee recommends 
     $177,667,000 for cooperative forestry, which is $9,624,000 
     below the enacted level.
       The Committee has provided $32,221,000 for the forest 
     stewardship program which is $950,000 below the enacted 
     level. Within the funds provided, $1,000,000 is for the 
     Chesapeake Bay program to support forestry efforts in the 
     Chesapeake Bay watershed, and $300,000 above the normal 
     allocation for Utah is to support forestry education for 
     private landowners with timber resources on their lands.
       The Committee has provided $74,000,000 for the forest 
     legacy program which is $9,000,000 above the enacted level. 
     The distribution of these funds is set out in the table 
     below.

        Project Name                                             Senate

Coon Gulf, phase 2, AL.......................................$2,000,000
Perdido River, AL.............................................2,000,000
East Sacramento Oak Woodlands, phase 1, CA....................2,600,000
Spruce Mountain Ranch, CO.....................................1,875,000
Stone House Brook Project, CT.................................1,100,000
Green Horizons, phase 2, CT...................................2,000,000
Sheffield, GA...................................................100,000
McCandless Ranch, HI..........................................1,300,000
Yellow River Forest Project, IA.................................700,000
Coon Creek Woods, IL.............................................95,000
Kyte River, IL..................................................305,000
Mt. Tea Ridge, IN.............................................1,600,000
Eagleville Pines, MA............................................835,000
Karner Brook Ridge, MA..........................................525,000
Pintail, MD.....................................................150,000
Deer Creek, MD..................................................150,000
Leavitt Plantation, ME..........................................600,000
West Branch, phase 2, ME......................................2,900,000
North Duluth, phase 1&2, MN.....................................400,000
Schiemann, MT...................................................600,000
Thompson Fisher, phase 4, MT..................................4,000,000
Blue Ridge Parkway Buffer, phase 2, NC........................1,500,000
RPM project, NC...............................................3,000,000
Connecticut Lakes Headwaters, NH..............................8,000,000
Lake Gerard, NJ...............................................3,000,000
Arcadia Lake, NJ................................................330,000
Lagunas Bonitas, NM...........................................2,000,000
East Branch Fish Creek, phase 2, NY...........................1,500,000
Pochuk Mountain, NY...........................................1,300,000
Weetamoe Woods, phase 2, RI.....................................250,000
DuVal Trail Corridor, RI........................................200,000
Coastal Forest Ecosystem Restoration Initiative, phase 3, SC..5,000,000
Anderson--Tully, TN...........................................2,500,000
Castle Rock, phase 2, UT......................................2,000,000
Chalk Creek (Blonquist), UT...................................1,600,000
Romine project, VA..............................................600,000
Buffalo River Crossing, VA......................................200,000
Sandy Point, VA.................................................575,000
Mendon Brook, VT................................................200,000
Bull & Sable, VT..............................................2,600,000
Skykomish River Landscape, phase 2, WA..........................920,000
Yakama River, WA..............................................1,000,000
Tomahawk Northwoods, phase 3, WI..............................4,000,000
Baraboo Hills, WI.............................................1,000,000
New State start-up, AK..........................................500,000
New State start-up, ID..........................................500,000
Forest Service program administration and AON Planning........3,890,000
                                                             __________
                                                             
    Total....................................................74,000,000

       The Committee has provided $37,750,000 for the urban and 
     community forestry program which is $1,750,000 above the 
     enacted level. Increases above the enacted level are $250,000 
     for the Chicago Green Streets program, $400,000 for a total 
     of $750,000 for the Cook County Forest Preserve to conduct 
     environmental and technical work associated with the 
     Preserve's forestry programs in Illinois, $300,000 for tree 
     planting work in cooperation with the city of Milwaukee, 
     Wisconsin, and $800,000 to establish the Urban Watershed 
     Forest Research and Demonstration Project Cooperative to help 
     support existing applied research, technology transfer, and 
     urban natural resources stewardship in Baltimore, Maryland. 
     The Committee directs that $350,000 of the amount for the 
     Cooperative be provided to the Northeastern Research Station 
     for work associated with the Baltimore Ecosystem Study and 
     the remainder of the funds be provided to the Parks and 
     People Foundation of Baltimore.
       The Committee notes that the administration proposed to 
     eliminate the Economic Action Program for fiscal year 2003. 
     However, the Committee believes that the EAP programs are 
     crucial to assisting rural timber-dependent communities, many 
     of which have acute economic problems. Accordingly, the 
     Committee recommends $28,700,000 for the Economic Action 
     Programs (EAP), which is $28,700,000 above the request and 
     $5,980,000 below the enacted level. The allocation of funds 
     for EAP is set out in the table below:

Economic Recovery Program....................................$6,730,000
Rural Development Program.....................................4,400,000

[[Page 803]]

Forest Products Conservation & Recycling Program..............1,300,000
Wood in Transportation Program................................1,920,000
                                                       ================

Special Projects:
  Four Corners Sustainable Forestry, NM.......................1,000,000
  Kake Land Exchange, AK......................................2,000,000
  KY mine reforestation.......................................1,000,000
  Mountain Studies Institute, CO................................500,000
  Envir. Sci. & Public Policy Research, ID......................500,000
  Rural Technology Transfer Initiative, WA......................900,000
  Fuels-in-schools biomass program, MT..........................750,000
  Wood Education & Resource Center, WV........................2,700,000
  Lake Tahoe erosion control grants, CA.......................3,000,000
  Little Sandy River, fish passage improvements, OR...........2,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal special projects................................14,350,000
                                                       ================

    Total Economic Action Programs...........................28,700,000

       The Committee notes that the administration also proposed 
     eliminating the Pacific Northwest Assistance program for 
     fiscal year 2003. While the Committee has not provided a 
     separate budget line for the Pacific Northwest Assistance 
     programs as in prior years, it has added an additional 
     $3,045,000 above the enacted level for the economic recovery 
     program component of EAP. The Committee expects that the 
     agency will allocate these funds with special consideration 
     for projects in the Pacific Northwest.
       The Committee directs that no less than $2,500,000 of the 
     funds provided for Rural Development Through Forestry shall 
     be allocated to the Northeast-Midwest program.
       The Committee has included bill language to facilitate the 
     transfer of the $2,000,000 provided within Economic Action 
     Programs to Kake Tribal Corporation in order to implement the 
     Kake Tribal Corporation Land Transfer Act.
       International Forestry.--The Committee recommends 
     $5,500,000 for the international forestry program which is 
     $237,000 above the enacted level. The Committee encourages 
     continued focus of the program on efforts to protect the 
     habitat of migratory birds and on invasive species control.

                         national forest system

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,331,439,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,366,475,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,352,999,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $1,352,999,000, an increase of $21,560,000 above the enacted 
     level, and a decrease of $13,476,000 compared to the request.
       The distribution of the Committee's recommendations are as 
     follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land management planning.....................................      $72,195,000      $72,195,000  ...............
Inventory and monitoring.....................................      176,306,000      176,306,000  ...............
Recreation, heritage and wilderness..........................      252,444,000      252,444,000  ...............
Wildlife and fish habitat management.........................      133,506,000      133,506,000  ...............
Grazing management...........................................       35,850,000       35,850,000  ...............
Forest products..............................................      264,753,000      263,753,000      -$1,000,000
Vegetation and watershed management..........................      190,644,000      190,644,000  ...............
Minerals and geology management..............................       53,635,000       53,635,000  ...............
Landownership Management.....................................       91,016,000       91,016,000  ...............
Law enforcement operations...................................       80,142,000       80,500,000         +358,000
Valles Caldera National Preserve.............................          984,000        3,150,000       +2,166,000
Expedited consultations......................................       15,000,000  ...............      -15,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Forest System..........................    1,366,475,000    1,352,999,000      -13,476,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Land Management Planning.--The Committee recommends 
     $248,501,000 for land management planning activities, 
     including inventorying and monitoring, which is $4,827,000 
     above the enacted level. The Committee has provided 
     $72,195,000 for land management planning, for national forest 
     and grassland planning activities and $176,306,000 for 
     inventorying and monitoring. The increases above the enacted 
     level are $4,827,000 for fixed costs. Within the funds 
     provided, a total of $600,000 is to support adaptive 
     management activities at Lake Tahoe.
       Recreation, heritage, and wilderness.--The Committee 
     recommends $252,444,000 for recreation, heritage, and 
     wilderness programs, which is an increase of $6,944,000 above 
     the enacted level. Increases above the enacted level are 
     $6,444,000 for fixed costs, and $500,000 to prepare an 
     Environmental Impact Statement to identify ways to mitigate 
     the impacts of helicopter charter flights in the Tongass 
     National Forest on the community of Juneau, Alaska. Within 
     the funds provided for recreation, $450,000 shall be 
     allocated to the Arthur Carhart Wilderness Training Center, 
     in Missoula, Montana.
       Wildlife and fish habitat management.--The Committee 
     recommends $133,506,000 for wildlife and fisheries habitat 
     management, which is an increase of $1,659,000 above the 
     enacted level. The increase is for fixed costs. Within the 
     funds provided, $250,000 shall be allocated to efforts to 
     protect and improve river, stream banks and habitat areas of 
     the Batten Kill river.
       Grazing management.--The Committee recommends $35,850,000 
     for grazing management, an increase of $1,075,000 above the 
     enacted level. The increase is for fixed costs.
       Forest products.--The Committee recommends $263,753,000 for 
     forest products, a decrease of $2,587,000 below the enacted 
     level, and $1,000,000 below the budget request. The Committee 
     has retained bill language included in prior years which 
     allows the funds provided for timber pipeline supply above 
     the normal regional allocation on the Tongass National Forest 
     to be allocated between the Capital Improvement and 
     Maintenance and the National Forest System appropriation. The 
     amount provided this purpose is $4,000,000.
       The Committee expects the Forest Service to continue 
     preparing and submitting its quarterly reports on the timber 
     sales program. The Committee recommends that the agency 
     identify the volumes that are offered, sold, and harvested 
     categorized as net merchantable sawtimber in its quarterly 
     reports.
       Vegetation and watershed management.--The Committee 
     recommends $190,644,000 for vegetation and watershed 
     management, which is an increase of $531,000 above the 
     enacted level. Increases above the enacted level are for 
     fixed costs. Within the funds provided, $305,000 is for pine 
     restoration work on the Mark Twain National Forest, $300,000 
     is for the Wasatch Canyon Water Quality Initiative, $135,000 
     is for a hydrology study on the Monongahela National Forest, 
     and $1,000,000 for a total of $4,550,000 is for wetland and 
     riparian restoration, urban lot management, and other 
     activities at Lake Tahoe.
       Minerals and geology management.--The Committee recommends 
     $53,635,000 which is $4,679,000 above the enacted level. The 
     increase is for fixed costs.
       Land ownership management.--The Committee recommends 
     $91,016,000 for land ownership management, which is 
     $2,582,000 above the enacted level. The increase is for fixed 
     costs.
       Law enforcement operations.--The Committee recommends 
     $80,500,000 for law enforcement operations, which is 
     $1,500,000 above the enacted level. Within the funds 
     provided, a total of $950,000 is for counterdrug operations 
     on the Daniel Boone National Forest.
       Valles Caldera.--The Committee has provided $3,150,000 for 
     the Valles Caldera Trust for management activities at the 
     Baca Ranch, New Mexico. This is equal to the enacted level.
       Expedited consultations.--The Committee has not established 
     a new budget line item in the amount of $15,000,000 as 
     proposed by the administration for expedited Endangered 
     Species Act consultations. The agency received $11,000,000 
     for such consultations in fiscal year 2001 under the wildland 
     fire management appropriation and was unable to spend more 
     than $1,000,000 of these funds. If the agency demonstrates 
     the ability to efficiently utilize funds for consultation 
     purposes in the future, the Committee would reconsider such a 
     request. While the Committee has not established a new budget 
     line item with additional consultations, it has given the 
     agency the authority to transfer up to $15,000,000 within the 
     existing budget structure for this purpose in the 
     administrative provisions section.
       Quincy Library Group.--The Committee recommends $26,000,000 
     for the Quincy Library Group project, which is equal to the 
     enacted level and the request. Funding for this project is 
     included in both the national forest system and wildland fire 
     management appropriation accounts.
       Land Between the Lakes NRA.--The Committee has included 
     funding in various accounts such that not less than 
     $8,400,000 shall be used by the Forest Service for management 
     of the Land Between the Lakes NRA.
       Lake Tahoe.--The Committee notes that it has provided a 
     total of $22,000,000 for activities in the Lake Tahoe Basin. 
     This is an increase of $980,000 above the enacted level and 
     $15,150,000 above the budget request. Within the National 
     Forest System appropriation

[[Page 804]]

     these amounts are allocated as follows, $600,000 within 
     inventorying and monitoring to support adaptive management 
     work, $150,000 within recreation, heritage, and wilderness 
     management, $50,000 within wildlife and fisheries management, 
     $4,550,000 within vegetation and watershed management, and 
     $350,000 for landownership management. To the extent that a 
     change in the program of work is necessitated by a change in 
     priorities in the field the distribution of these funds may 
     be revised upon notification and consultation with the 
     Committee.
       The Committee has also provided $3,000,000 within the State 
     and Private Forestry appropriation, $3,000,000 in the Capital 
     Improvement and Maintenance appropriation, $3,000,000 within 
     the Wildland Fire Management Appropriation, $350,000 from the 
     Roads and Trails fund, and approximately $6,950,000 within 
     the Land Acquisition appropriation for activities at Lake 
     Tahoe.

                        wildland fire management

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,560,349,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,369,138,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,349,291,000

       The Committee recommends a total appropriation of 
     $1,349,291,000 for wildland fire management activities, which 
     is $19,847,000 below the budget request.
       The Committee recommendation includes full funding of the 
     request for wildland fire preparedness in the amount of 
     $600,703,000. The Committee has also provided a total of 
     $420,699,000 for wildland fire suppression which is equal to 
     the request.
       The Committee has provided a total of $327,889,000 for 
     other fire operations which is $19,847,000 below the budget 
     request. Within this amount, the Committee has fully funded 
     the hazardous fuels reduction request of $228,109,000. Of the 
     funds provided for hazardous fuels, a total of $3,000,000 
     shall be allocated for fuels reduction work at Lake Tahoe, 
     including work on urban lots, and $1,500,000 shall be 
     allocated to the Santa Fe National Forest for the 
     implementation of the Santa Fe Watershed Thinning Project.
       The Committee continues to believe that reduction of fuel 
     loads on national forests and in areas adjacent to 
     communities in the wildland-urban interface is critical for 
     protecting the environment and the safety of the public. The 
     Committee also believes that the agency should focus on 
     treating acres in the urban interface where lives and 
     property are most at risk. Accordingly, the agency is 
     directed to spend 70 percent of its hazardous fuels funds on 
     treating acres in the wildland urban interface as proposed in 
     the agency's budget request. If for any reason the Forest 
     Service is unable to attain these levels, it shall promptly 
     notify the Committee explaining why the agency was unable to 
     expend such sums.
       The remaining funds within the other fire operations 
     appropriations account are allocated as follows, $3,624,000 
     for rehabilitation and restoration as proposed in the 
     request; $21,427,000 for research and development; $8,000,000 
     for the joint fire science program as proposed in the 
     request; $46,555,000 for the State fire assistance program; 
     $8,240,000 for volunteer fire assistance as proposed in the 
     request; and $11,934,000 for forest health activities as 
     proposed in the request.
       Within the funds provided for research and development, 
     $1,700,000 shall be allocated to the National Center for 
     Landscape Fire Analysis at the University of Montana for the 
     Forest Service share of this cooperative project. Of these 
     funds, $200,000 shall be used for the FRAMES project in 
     conjunction with the University of Idaho.
       Within the amounts provided for State fire assistance, 
     $6,000,000 is for the Municipality of Anchorage and the 
     Matanuska Susitna Borough in the form of an advance direct 
     lump sum payment to perform work in areas affected by the 
     spruce bark beetle which has created a severe fire risk to 
     large areas of Southcentral Alaska.

                  capital improvement and maintenance

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$546,188,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................552,088,000
Committee recommendation....................................543,656,000

       The Committee recommends $543,656,000 for capital 
     improvement and maintenance, which is $2,532,000 below the 
     enacted level.
       The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
     funds:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee
                                                             Budget estimate   recommendation        Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facilities................................................      $200,500,000      $168,652,000      -$29,848,000
Roads.....................................................       231,893,000       235,566,000        +3,673,000
Trails....................................................        68,829,000        69,572,000          +743,000
Infrastructure improvement................................        50,866,000        69,866,000       +19,000,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, capital improvement and maintenance..........       552,088,000       543,656,000        -8,432,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Facilities.--The Committee recommends $168,652,000 for 
     facilities maintenance and capital improvement, which is a 
     decrease of $16,795,000 below the enacted level. The funding 
     allocations are set out below.

Facilities Maintenance/Capital Improvement.................$153,413,000
Franklin County Lake, MS......................................2,400,000
Mystic Ranger District Station, SD............................1,500,000
Old Stoney feasibility study, WY................................300,000
Green Mountain NF, Supervisor's Office........................1,000,000
Camp Ouachita, Ouachita NF, AR................................1,500,000
Washita Battlefield, OK.........................................500,000
Backcountry Hut repairs, AK.....................................500,000
Log Transfer Facilities, Tongass NF, AK.......................1,000,000
Forestry Science Bldg repairs, Princeton WV.....................315,000
Monongahela facilities improvements, WV.......................1,340,000
Hardwood Technology Ctr., Purdue Univ., IN....................3,100,000
Durability Test Facility, FPL, WI...............................500,000
Chugach NF, visitor center, AK................................1,000,000
Lewis & Clark Ctr., MT..........................................284,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total...................................................168,652,000

       The funds provided for construction of backcountry huts in 
     Alaska shall be used to contract with the Alaska Mountain and 
     Wilderness Huts Association at Snow River to perform the 
     work.
       The Committee has included bill language authorizing the 
     Forest Service to transfer previously appropriated funds in 
     addition to the $3,100,000 provided for fiscal year 2003, to 
     Purdue University for construction of the Hardwood Tree 
     Improvement and Regeneration Center.
       Within the funds provided for facilities capital 
     improvement and maintenance, $1,000,000 is for the Institute 
     of Pacific Island Forestry, HI.
       The Committee recommends that the agency continue to lease 
     the administrative buildings in Newcastle, Wyoming until a 
     permanent facility is established to provide continued 
     operations within the community of Newcastle.
       The Committee has been informed that the Forest Service has 
     utilized funds appropriated in fiscal year 2001 for the 
     Seward multi-agency administrative facility for other 
     purposes without seeking authority from the Committee. The 
     Committee directs the Forest Service to replace the funds 
     appropriated for the Seward facility by using funds from 
     general administrative functions and to expedite this 
     project. The Committee notes that the funds for the Chugach 
     NF visitor center in Cordova shall be the final amount 
     provided by the Forest Service. In addition, the agency shall 
     be given a share of the space in this facility proportional 
     to the agency's share of the construction cost.
       Roads.--The Committee recommends $235,566,000 for road 
     maintenance and capital improvement, which is an increase of 
     $3,673,000 above the budget request, and $5,900,000 above the 
     enacted level. The funding allocations are set out below.

Road Maintenance/Capital Improvement.......................$229,666,000
Highland Scenic Highway, Williams River Improvements, WV......1,300,000
Road Improvements, Tongass NF, AK.............................4,000,000
Avalanche Control, Chugach NF, AK...............................600,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total...................................................236,566,000

       The Committee has included $4,000,000 for construction and 
     reconstruction of roads on the Tongass National Forest. 
     Within the funds provided, $3,000,000 shall be allocated for 
     retrofitting and road decommissioning in the Lake Tahoe 
     Basin.
       Trails.--The Committee recommends $69,572,000 for trail 
     maintenance and capital improvement, which is $503,000 below 
     the enacted level, and $743,000 above the request. The 
     funding allocations are set out below.

Trail Maintence/Improvement.................................$68,712,000
San Sophia Station, CO..........................................500,000
Pinhoti Trail, AL...............................................360,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total....................................................69,572,000

       Infrastructure improvement.--The Committee recommends 
     $69,866,000 for infrastructure improvements which is 
     $19,000,000 above the request.
       The Committee has not provided the $10,000,000 for office 
     collocations with the Bureau of Land Management as proposed 
     in the budget request. Before providing these funds, the 
     Committee believes a more prudent course is for the Forest 
     Service to analyze

[[Page 805]]

     the number of sites where such collocations would be 
     beneficial and provide the Committee with a report indicating 
     the locations of these sites and the funds necessary to 
     accomplish this objective.

                            land acquisition

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$149,742,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................130,510,000
Committee recommendation....................................148,263,000

       The Committee recommends $148,263,000 for land acquisition, 
     $17,753,000 above the budget request.
       The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
     funds:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Committee
                     Project                                          Forest                      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkansas Rivers and Streams (incl. Stumpy Point   Ozark-St. Francis NF (AR).....................      $3,000,000
 and Lake Winona).
Big Sur Ecosystem...............................  Los Padres NF (CA)............................       3,000,000
Black Hills Critical inholdings.................  Black Hills NF (SD)...........................       3,700,000
Bonneville Shoreline Trail......................  Wasatch-Cache NF (UT).........................       2,265,000
Bridger-Teton...................................  Bridger-Teton NF (WY).........................       4,584,000
Broad River Corridor............................  Sumter NF (SC)................................       5,000,000
Chattooga W&SR/Chattooga River..................  Chattahoochee NF/Nantahala NF (SC/GA/NC)......       2,000,000
Clinch Ranch District and New Castle Ranger       Jefferson NF (VA).............................       2,600,000
 District.
Columbia River Gorge NSA........................  CRGNSA (OR/WA)................................      10,000,000
Critically Sensitive Lands......................  Lake Tahoe Basin (CA/NV)......................       6,700,000
Daniel Boone Assorted Inholdings................  Daniel Boone NF (KY)..........................       2,500,000
Florida National Scenic Trail...................  Multiple (FL).................................         500,000
Francis Marion..................................  Francis Marion NF (SC)........................       4,000,000
Gascon Point (Sawyer)...........................  Santa Fe NF (NM)..............................       5,500,000
Georgia Mountains...............................  Chattahoochee NF (GA).........................       3,200,000
Greater Yellowstone Area........................  Multiple (MT).................................       9,300,000
Green Mountain Recreation & Water Enhancement...  Green Mountain NF (VT)........................       1,750,000
High Uintas.....................................  Wasatch-Cache NF (UT).........................       4,250,000
Hoosier Unique Areas............................  Hoosier NF (IN)...............................       2,500,000
I-90 Corridor/Plum Creek & Cascade Conservation   Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie NF ( WA).................       6,000,000
 Partnership.
La Madera.......................................  Cibola NF (NM)................................       3,800,000
Lake Labish Restoration Project.................  Willamette NF (OR)............................         500,000
Minnesota Wilderness/Water/Wildlife.............  Chippewa NF/Superior NF (MN)..................       1,650,000
Mount Sentinel..................................  Lolo NF (MT)..................................         800,000
Northwest Wild & Scenic Rivers (incl. Illinois    Multiple (OR/WA)..............................       2,500,000
 WSR and Skagit).
Ozarks Mountain Streams and Rivers..............  Mark Twain NF (MO)............................       2,000,000
Pacific Crest Trail.............................  Multiple (CA/OR/WA)...........................       3,000,000
Pacific Northwest Streams (incl. Salmon Streams   Multiple (OR/WA)..............................       4,000,000
 of the Siuslaw and Arrowleaf).
Red Mountain....................................  Uncompahgre NF/San Juan NF (CO)...............       5,000,000
Sedona/Red Rocks (incl. Thomas Point & Woo        Coconino NF (AZ)..............................       2,500,000
 Ranch).
Ottawa NF.......................................  Ottawa NF (MI)................................       6,000,000
SPI, North Fork American River..................  Tahoe NF (CA).................................       2,000,000
Swan Valley.....................................  Flathead NF (MT)..............................       8,000,000
Talladega.......................................  Talladega NF (AL).............................         700,000
Tennessee Mountains.............................  Cherokee NF (TN)..............................       4,400,000
Thunder Mountain................................  Payette NF (ID)...............................       2,000,000
Watershed, RY Timber............................  Beaverhead-Deerlodge NF (MT)..................       5,700,000
White Mountain..................................  White Mountain NF (NH)........................         500,000
White Sulphur Springs/John Lee Hollow...........  Monongahela NF (WV)...........................       4,100,000
Critical Inholdings/Wilderness Protection.......  Multiple......................................       3,000,000
Use of carryover/anticipated slippage...........  ..............................................     -14,000,000
                                                                                                 ---------------
      Subtotal, Line Item Acquisitions..........  ..............................................     130,499,000
                                                                                                 ===============
Acquisition Management (incl. Cash Equalization)  ..............................................      17,764,000
                                                                                                 ---------------
      Total, FS Land Acquisition................  ..............................................     148,263,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Consistent with the budget request, the Committee has 
     provided a substantial increase for acquisition management. 
     The Committee expects that the additional amounts provided 
     will be sufficient to execute the acquisition program in an 
     efficient manner, and that the Forest Service will ensure 
     that acquisition management funds are being spent 
     appropriately and that project dollars are not being used for 
     acquisition management or otherwise misallocated.
       The Committee understands negotiations are ongoing between 
     the Forest Service and outside parties to purchase Snow 
     Country byways in the Ottawa NF. Should an agreement 
     satisfactory to all parties be reached, the funds designated 
     for the Ottawa NF in this report should be used for those 
     lands.

        acquisition of lands for national forests, special acts

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,069,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,069,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,069,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,069,000 
     which is equal to the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. These 
     funds are derived from receipts at certain forests.

            acquisition of lands to complete land exchanges

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$234,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................234,000
Committee recommendation........................................234,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $234,000, 
     which is equal to the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. This 
     amount is derived from funds deposited by State, county, and 
     municipal governments or public school authorities pursuant 
     to the Act of December 4, 1967, as amended (16 U.S.C. 484a).

                         range betterment fund

                       (Special Fund, Indefinite)

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,290,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,402,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,402,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,402,000, 
     which is equal to the request. This amount is for range 
     rehabilitation, protection, and improvement, and is derived 
     from fees received for livestock grazing on National Forests 
     pursuant to section 401(b)(1) of Public Law 94-579, as 
     amended.

    gifts, donations and bequests for forest and rangeland research

Appropriations, 2002............................................$92,000
Budget estimate, 2003............................................92,000
Committee recommendation.........................................92,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $92,000, the 
     same as the budget estimate and the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level. This amount is derived from the fund established under 
     16 U.S.C 1643(b).


 management of national forest lands for subsistence uses subsistence 
                       management, forest service

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,488,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,542,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,542,000

       The Committee recommends $5,542,000 for subsistence 
     management of forest lands in the State of Alaska, which is 
     the same as the budget request.

               Administrative Provisions, Forest Service

       The Committee has continued many of the same administrative 
     provisions as provided in prior years.
       Language is included which authorizes the Forest Service to 
     provide funds to the National Forest Foundation to match up 
     to $2,250,000 in private contributions on a 1-for-1 basis for 
     projects on National Forest System lands or related to Forest 
     Service programs. The Committee has authorized up to $400,000 
     of Federal funds provided, may be used for administrative 
     expenses of the Foundation.
       Language is included which provides funds for the National 
     Fish and Wildlife Foundation in the amount of $2,650,000 on a 
     1-for-1 matching basis with private contributions for 
     projects on or benefiting National Forest System lands.
       Language is included which allows the Forest Service to 
     transfer appropriated funds to the Bureau of Land Management 
     from the National Forest System account for work related to 
     the management of wild horses and burros. The amount of funds 
     transferred with this authority should be displayed in 
     subsequent budget justifications.
       Language is included which permits the Secretary of 
     Agriculture to sell excess buildings and other facilities on 
     the Green Mountain National Forest and to retain the revenues 
     for maintenance and rehabilitation activities on the forest.

[[Page 806]]

       Language is included allowing up to $15,000,000 to be 
     transferred to the Secretary of Commerce or the Secretary of 
     the Interior for Endangered Species Act consultations.
       The Committee notes the expected increases in indirect 
     costs for the Forest Service despite the administration's 
     emphasis on streamlining agency operations and reducing such 
     costs. While the Committee is skeptical that such costs can 
     be reduced by 50 percent, as proposed by the administration, 
     it is imperative that substantial reductions occur in order 
     to increase the availability of funds for on-the-ground work. 
     Although the Committee has eliminated prescriptive bill 
     language regarding management of indirect costs, the 
     Committee directs the Forest Service to continue to display 
     agency indirect costs in future budget justifications, 
     continue its use of standard definitions for such costs, and 
     report to the Committee any changes in such definitions. 
     Further, the Committee directs that indirect expenses charged 
     to the Knutson-Vandenberg, Brush Disposal, Cooperative Work-
     Other, and Salvage Sale funds shall be limited to no more 
     than 20 percent of total obligations.

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


                          Budget Documentation

       The Committee continues to be deeply concerned with the 
     quality and content of the Department's budget justification 
     and related documents. The information presented to 
     Congress--information on which it must base critical funding 
     decisions--is often incomplete, frequently uninformative, and 
     generally lacking in clarity and specificity. Proposed 
     changes in activities from one fiscal year to another are 
     regularly left unexplained. Indeed, the Department's budget 
     documents are replete with examples where funding levels have 
     been proposed for change, including the outright termination 
     of ongoing activities, yet no justification or explanation is 
     offered. Particularly troublesome are the proposed changes in 
     statutory language which are presented to Congress without 
     explanation.
       Unfortunately, these concerns are not new, nor is this the 
     first time the Committee has advised the Department of this 
     ongoing problem. Consequently, the Committee directs the 
     Department to evaluate its current budget formulation and 
     request process, and, within 90 days of enactment of this 
     Act, present the Committee with a plan for addressing this 
     problem. At a minimum, the Committee expects future budget 
     justifications to include a full explanation of any funding 
     change of $50,000 or more within a specific activity, and 
     fiscal year crosswalks detailing, at the activity level, any 
     project initiations or terminations. In addition, the 
     Department is directed to fully explain in future 
     justifications proposed changes to statutory language, 
     including a detailed description of the need for such changes 
     and the history of any statutes and regulations affected. 
     This directive was included on page 85 of Senate Report 106-
     312, but has been utterly ignored by the Department and the 
     Office of Management and Budget despite the fact that such 
     explanations are required by OMB itself.

                         clean coal technology


                               (Deferral)

       The Committee recommends a deferral of $70,000,000 in 
     previously appropriated funding for the Clean Coal Technology 
     program. The Committee understands that the projects for 
     which this funding will be used are progressing, but at a 
     somewhat slower pace than originally anticipated.

                 fossil energy research and development

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$622,490,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................529,305,000
Committee recommendation....................................625,665,000

       The Committee recommends $625,665,000 for fossil energy 
     research and development, an increase of $3,175,000 over the 
     equivalent enacted level in fiscal year 2002. More than 
     $77,700,000 in programmatic increases above the budget 
     request were necessitated by the Department's proposed early 
     termination of valuable research projects, many of which, in 
     the opinion of the Committee, are central to our Nation's 
     energy security. In addition, the Committee has not agreed to 
     the use of $14,000,000 in previously appropriated funds. The 
     amounts recommend by the Committee as compared to the budget 
     estimate are shown below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clean coal power initiative (new budget auth.)...............     $110,000,000     $150,000,000         +$40,000
    (By transfer)............................................       40,000,000  ...............      -40,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................      150,000,000      150,000,000  ...............
                                                              ==================================================
Coal and Power Systems:
    Central Systems..........................................       84,950,000       95,250,000      +10,300,000
    Distributed Generation Systems--Fuel Cells...............       49,500,000       64,525,000      +15,025,000
    Sequestration R&D........................................       54,000,000       41,965,000      -12,035,000
    Fuels....................................................        5,000,000       27,300,000      +22,300,000
    Advanced Research........................................       31,650,000       34,150,000       +2,500,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Coal and Power Systems.......................      225,100,000      263,190,000      +38,090,000
                                                              ==================================================
Gas..........................................................       22,590,000       46,320,000      +23,730,000
Petroleum--Oil Technology....................................       35,400,000       44,300,000       +8,900,000
Cooperative R&D..............................................        6,000,000        8,340,000       +2,340,000
Fossil energy environmental restoration......................        9,715,000        9,715,000  ...............
Import/export authorization..................................        2,500,000        3,000,000         +500,000
Headquarters program direction...............................       15,820,000       18,900,000       +3,080,000
Energy Technology Center program direction...................       54,880,000       69,900,000      +15,020,000
General plant projects.......................................        2,000,000        6,000,000       +4,000,000
Advanced Metallurgical Processes: Advanced metallurgical             5,300,000        6,000,000         +700,000
 processes...................................................
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Fossil Energy Research and Development..........      529,305,000      625,665,000      +82,360,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Clean Coal Power Initiative.--The Committee recommends 
     $150,000,000 in new budget authority for the clean coal power 
     initiative in keeping with the President's stated commitment 
     to provide $2,000,000,000 over 10 years for clean coal 
     technologies. The Committee does not agree to the 
     Department's proposal to use $40,000,000 in previously 
     appropriated clean coal funds.
       The Committee is aware of promising results from a pilot 
     test of electro-catalytic oxidation (ECO) multi-pollutant 
     control technology for fossil fuel-fired power plants 
     previously supported by Congress. The Department of Energy 
     has supported mercury removal testing as part of this pilot 
     and the Ohio Coal Development Office is supporting a 50 
     megawatt (MW) demonstration of this technology. Full scale 
     (several hundred MW) demonstration of this type of multi-
     pollutant technology would be an appropriate use of Clean 
     Coal Technology funds.
       Fuels and Power Systems.--The Committee recommends 
     $263,190,000 for fuels and power systems, an increase of 
     $16,689,000 over the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
     $38,090,000 over the budget request. In Central Systems, 
     increases above the budget request total $10,300,000, of 
     which $1,000,000 is to support an evaluation program of 
     elemental mercury emissions reduction from North Dakota 
     lignite-fired power plants, $4,000,000 is for IGGC including 
     continued support of the ion transport membrane (ITM) oxygen 
     project, $2,300,000 is for advanced combustion systems, and 
     $3,000,000 is for turbines. In Distributed Generation, 
     increases above the request total $15,025,000, of which 
     $1,000,000 is for advanced research (continuation of the 
     electrochemical engineering program at MSU), $2,000,000 is 
     for Vision 21 hybrids, $11,500,000 is for innovative systems 
     concepts (for the SECA program), and $525,000 is for novel 
     generation (ramgen). Within the amount provided for Fuel Cell 
     Systems, $3,000,000 is to continue work on the Molten 
     Carbonate Hybrid project started in fiscal year 2002. In 
     Sequestration Research and Development, there is a decrease 
     below the budget request of $12,035,000. In Fuels, increases 
     above the budget request total $22,300,000, of which 
     $15,000,000 is for transportation fuels and chemicals (of 
     which $7,000,000 is for ultra clean fuels), $4,000,000 is for 
     solid fuels and feedstocks (of which $1,000,000 is for CPCPC 
     and $3,000,000 is for CAST), and $3,300,000 is for advanced 
     fuels research (of which $2,000,000 is for the C-1 chemistry 
     program and $1,300,000 is for the carbon products program). 
     And, in Advanced Research, increases above the budget request 
     total $2,500,000, of which $1,000,000 is for coal utilization 
     science (continuation of the Arctic Energy Office), 
     $1,000,000 is for materials, and $2,000,000 is for technology 
     crosscut (for continuation of the supercomputing program). 
     Decreases below the budget request total $1,500,000, of which 
     $1,000,000 is from University Coal Research and $500,000 is 
     from HBCU Research Activities.
       The Committee is aware of the ongoing work between NETL, 
     Western Kentucky University, and other institutions to 
     initiate a Consortium to Study Coal Combustion. The 
     Department is encouraged to use a portion of

[[Page 807]]

     the $2,300,000 increase in Advanced Combustion Systems to 
     begin development of this Consortium.
       Within the increase provided for Transportation Fuels and 
     Chemicals, the Department should continue ongoing projects 
     including the clean diesel fuels program in cooperation with 
     the University of Alaska, small footprint plant conversion 
     technology and the ITM syngas project.
       Natural Gas Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
     $46,320,000 for natural gas technologies, an increase of 
     $1,120,000 over the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     $23,730,000 over the budget request. In Exploration and 
     Production, increases above the budget request total 
     $7,000,000, of which $3,000,000 is for the Deep Trek program, 
     $1,000,000 is for continuation of the lab/industry 
     partnerships, and $3,000,000 is for the Arctic Energy Office 
     (of which $2,000,000 is directed toward research on the 
     Alaska gas pipeline). In Gas Hydrates, increases above the 
     budget request total $5,000,000. In Infrastructure, increases 
     above the request total $9,050,000, of which $2,000,000 is 
     for storage technology and $7,000,000 is for infrastructure 
     technology. In Emerging Processing Technology, increases 
     above the budget total $2,680,000 (for the final phase of the 
     coal mine methane demonstration program).
       Oil Technologies.--The Committee recommends $44,300,000 for 
     oil technologies, a decrease of $11,699,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level and an increase of $8,900,000 from 
     the budget request. In Exploration and Production, increases 
     above the budget request total $9,000,000, of which $500,000 
     is for advanced drilling, $1,500,000 is for advanced 
     diagnostics, $2,000,000 is for the lab/industry partnerships, 
     $2,000,000 is for reservoir efficiency, $1,500,000 is for 
     PRIME, and $1,500,000 is for the Arctic Energy Office of 
     which $500,000 is to continue oxygen transport ceramic 
     membrane research. In Reservoir Life Extension, Reservoir 
     Life Extension includes an overall reduction of $500,000 from 
     the budget request level, including a decrease of $1,500,000 
     from Technology Transfer and an increase of $1,000,000 for 
     PUMP. And, in Effective Environmental Protection, increases 
     above the budget request total $400,000 for the risk 
     assessment program split equally between the RBDMS Base 
     Program and the coalbed methane interface for MT and Alaska.
       Cooperative Research and Development.--The Committee 
     recommends $8,340,000 for cooperative research and 
     development, an increase of $100,000 over the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level, and $2,340,000 above the budget request.
       Environmental Restoration.--The Committee recommends 
     $9,715,000 for environmental restoration, and increase of 
     $215,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and fully 
     commensurate with the budget request.
       Program Direction and Management Support.--The Committee 
     recommends $88,800,000 for program direction and management 
     support, an increase of $2,800,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level, and $18,100,000 above the budget request. The 
     sizable increase above the budget request is attributable to 
     the fact that the Committee has not followed the Department's 
     practice of counting previously appropriated program 
     direction funding. Of the funds provided, $18,900,000 is for 
     headquarters program direction and $69,900,000 is for field 
     program direction.
       Plant and Capital Equipment.--The Committee recommends 
     $6,000,000 for plant and capital equipment, a decrease of 
     $7,450,000 from the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and an 
     increase of $4,000,000 above the budget request. Of the funds 
     made available, $2,000,000 is for general plant projects 
     (including the Albany Research Center) and $4,000,000 is for 
     the second installment of the infrastructure improvement 
     program at the National Energy Technology Laboratory. The 
     Committee is hopeful that the Department will heed its 
     direction of last year and include the NETL funding as part 
     of the base in future years.
       Advanced Metallurgical Processes.--The Committee recommends 
     $6,000,000 for advanced metallurgical processes, an increase 
     of $800,000 from the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, and 
     $700,000 above the budget request.

                 naval petroleum and oil shale reserves

Appropriations, 2002........................................$17,371,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................20,831,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,831,000

       The Committee recommends $20,831,000 for the Naval 
     Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves, the same as the budget 
     request.


                      elk hills school lands fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$36,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................36,000,000
Committee recommendation (advance appropriation).............36,000,000

       The Committee recommends $36,000,000 for the Elk Hills 
     school lands fund, the same as the budget request and the 
     fiscal year 2002 level. These funds will become available on 
     October 1, 2003.


                          Energy Conservation

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$912,805,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................901,651,000
Committee recommendation....................................884,293,000

       The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
     budget estimates by activity are shown in the following 
     table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                                                               Budget estimate   recommendation       Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Building Technology, State and Community Sector..............     $408,791,000     $366,993,000     -$41,798,000
Federal Energy Management Program............................       27,880,000       26,880,000       -1,000,000
Industry Sector..............................................      138,359,000      140,859,000       +2,500,000
Power Technologies...........................................       63,904,000       65,154,000       +1,250,000
Transportation...............................................      222,664,000      244,354,000      +21,690,000
Policy and management........................................       40,053,000       40,053,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, Energy Conservation.............................      901,651,000      884,293,000      -17,358,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The detail table at the back of the report displays the 
     distribution of funds among the activities in energy 
     conservation. Changes to the budget request are detailed 
     below.
       Building, Technology, State and Community Sector.--In 
     buildings, research, and standards, increases include 
     $5,000,000 in equipment, materials, and tools, of which 
     $4,000,000 is for the Next Generation of Lighting Initiative 
     and $1,000,000 is for window technologies, and $1,000,000 for 
     lighting and appliance standards. Decreases include $700,000 
     for technical and program management support.
       In building technology assistance, there is an increase of 
     $6,202,000 for the State energy program, a decrease of 
     $52,100,000 for weatherization assistance and a decrease of 
     $1,000,000 for Energy Star.
       Federal Energy Management Program.--The Committee 
     recommends a reduction of $1,000,000 from the budget request 
     for the Federal Energy Management Program.
       Industry Sector.--For industry sector research, the 
     Committee recommends a net increase of $2,500,000 above the 
     request for industries of the future (crosscutting). Within 
     the increase above the request, $1,000,000 is provided for 
     industrial materials of the future, $1,500,000 is provided 
     for the inventions and innovations program, and $2,000,000 is 
     provided to fund a regional bio-based products consortia. The 
     Committee encourages this organization to work toward 
     becoming self-sustaining. In industries of the future 
     (crosscutting), there are decreases of $1,000,000 for 
     industrial assessment centers and $1,000,000 for technical 
     and program management support. The Committee encourages the 
     mining vision to emphasize research that reduces the cost of 
     mineral production and to document best practices.
       Power Technologies.--For power technologies, increases 
     include $1,000,000 for gas turbines and $250,000 for fuel 
     flexibility to be dedicated to oil heat research. Within 
     available funds, the Department should consider funding for 
     the National Accounts Energy Alliance.
       Transportation Sector.--For transportation sector research, 
     there is an increase of $21,690,000. The Committee recommends 
     a $8,000,000 net increase for vehicle technologies research 
     and development, including $2,000,000 for combustion and 
     aftertreatment research and development, $1,000,000 for light 
     truck engines, $5,000,000 for heavy truck engines, $1,000,000 
     for gasoline boosting technology research, $1,500,000 for 
     off-highway engine research and development, including 
     research on locomotive engines, agricultural, and other off-
     highway equipment, and $1,000,000 for advanced battery 
     development. The Committee recommends decreases of $3,000,000 
     for fuel cell research and development (including $1,400,000 
     for systems, $1,000,000 for stack subsystems components, and 
     $600,000 for fuel processor storage), and $500,000 for 
     vehicle systems optimization. Within the funds provided, the 
     Northwest Alliance for Transportation Technologies (NATT) 
     should be expanded to support the continued development of 
     essential power systems advanced emissions technologies for 
     Light and Heavy Duty vehicles.
       Other transportation program increases include an increase 
     of $4,690,000 for fuels utilization research and development. 
     Within this increase, $990,000 is for alternative fuels for 
     automobiles and light trucks, $1,000,000 is for medium 
     trucks, and $1,000,000 is for heavy trucks. Also within this 
     increase is $1,700,000 for fueling infrastructure. The 
     Committee expects the Department to consider the natural gas 
     CNG Cylinder Safety Inspection and Certification Training 
     program within that increase.
       The Committee recommends a $8,000,000 increase for 
     materials technologies, including

[[Page 808]]

     $2,000,000 for automotive propulsion materials, $5,000,000 
     for automotive lightweight materials, and $1,000,000 for 
     heavy vehicle strength reduction materials to support 
     continued funding of on-going research on Metal Matrix 
     Composites.
       In technology deployment, the Committee recommends a 
     $2,000,000 increase for the Clean Cities program and 
     decreases of $500,000 for testing and evaluation and $500,000 
     for replacement fuels. The Committee is aware of work being 
     done by the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition to increase E-
     85 fueling capacity, and urges the Department to give careful 
     consideration to proposals that may be submitted to further 
     this goal.
       General.--By means of this report, the Committee approves 
     the reorganizational reprogramming submitted by the Office of 
     Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The Committee still 
     questions certain aspects of this proposal, particularly the 
     board of directors and it expects that its concerns will be 
     addressed when the new organization is in place.
       As is mentioned earlier in this report, the Committee 
     directs the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
     to revise and restructure the budget justification document 
     submitted to this subcommittee for fiscal year 2004. The 
     fiscal year 2004 budget justification should include a 
     detailed crosswalk table from the old budget structure and 
     organization to the new budget structure and organization, as 
     well as provide adequate explanations of programmatic 
     changes. The Office should not use the current format that 
     repeats the same program explanation each year. Instead, EERE 
     should detail and justify any changes made to the enacted 
     level.


                          economic regulation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,996,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,487,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,487,000

       The Committee recommends $1,487,000 for economic 
     regulation, equal to the budget request.

                      strategic petroleum reserve

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$179,009,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................168,856,000
Committee recommendation....................................172,856,000

       The Committee recommends $172,856,000 for the Strategic 
     Petroleum Reserve, a decrease of $6,153,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level, and an increase of $4,000,000 from 
     the budget request. Of the amount provided, the Committee 
     recommends $158,856,000 for storage facilities development 
     and operations, an increase of $4,000,000 over the budget 
     request. These funds are to be used for the electricity and 
     operational requirements directly associated with injecting 
     oil into the Reserve's caverns. The increase is offset by 
     reducing the SPR Petroleum Account by a corresponding amount. 
     This change will preserve consistency in accounting, and 
     allow comparability of costs over time. The Committee's 
     recommendation also includes $14,000,000 for management. 
     Finally, funding for the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve 
     has been retained in a separate account.


                         SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$11,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,000,000

       The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for the SPR Petroleum 
     Account, a decrease of $4,000,000 below the budget request. 
     This decrease is fully explained in the recommendations for 
     the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.


                   Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................8,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,000,000

       The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Northeast Home 
     Heating Oil Reserve, a decrease of $2,000,000 from the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level and the budget request. The reduction 
     is to be offset by the use of carryover balances.

                   energy information administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$78,499,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................80,111,000
Committee recommendation.....................................80,111,000

       The Committee recommends $80,111,000 for the Energy 
     Information Administration, which is the same as the budget 
     estimate.
       The Committee is concerned about the quality, consistency, 
     and timeliness of the data published by EIA on coal 
     production and consumption as well as the electric utility 
     sector. EIA is directed to resolve and correct the problems 
     surrounding this data.
       The Committee is also aware that the EIA forecasts for 
     nuclear energy in the ``Annual Energy Outlook'' have required 
     significant revision over the past several years. EIA should 
     review its nuclear energy models to assess whether the 
     information presented is accurate, reliable, and based on 
     sound economic assumptions.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                         Indian Health Service

                         indian health services

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,389,614,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,452,997,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,455,881,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,455,881,000 
     for Health Services. This amount is $66,267,000 above the 
     current year enacted level and $2,884,000 above the budget 
     estimate. Increases above the budget estimate include: 
     $230,000 for the Ketchikan Native Corporation to correct a 
     reconciliation error that would have resulted in an 
     unintended decrease to the base funds available for the 
     operation of a clinic in Ketchikan; and $95,000 for the 
     Recruitment and Retention of American Indians into Nursing 
     (RAIN) program at the University of North Dakota. This 
     national program has proven to be highly successful in 
     recruiting and graduating American Indians with degrees in 
     nursing. A decrease of $500,000 has been taken from the 
     proposed $1,500,000 increase for the epidemiological centers. 
     Within Indian health professions, the Committee has continued 
     base funding of $250,000 for the University of Montana and 
     $250,000 for the University of North Dakota to continue their 
     InPsych programs, and $750,000 for the University of North 
     Dakota to continue its INMED program. Within urban health 
     services, an amount of $1,000,000 is retained in base funding 
     for the dental program run by First Nations Community Health 
     Sources in cooperation with the Southwest Indian Polytechnic 
     Institute. An amount of $4,000,000 remains in the base for 
     the Telehealth Initiative in Alaska. An amount of $4,150,000 
     for additional recruitment efforts proposed in the budget 
     estimate has not been included in the Committee's 
     recommendations because it is unclear why many of the 
     proposed activities could not be accomplished within existing 
     funds.
       The Committee has restored an amount of $9,709,000 in 
     proposed administrative reductions or transfers within the 
     Services account. The Committee does not agree to the 
     proposed reductions of $4,435,000 from tribal operations and 
     $4,436,000 from direct operations for managerial reforms. The 
     budget estimate indicates that these reductions are to be 
     taken from administrative positions and costs associated with 
     travel, training, copying, and similar activities. In the 
     time period from 1993-2001, the FTE levels at IHS 
     headquarters were reduced by 60 percent. Regional program 
     staffing levels were reduced by 58 percent. Given these 
     statistics, as well as the vast need for improved services, 
     the Committee cannot support these proposals. Further, the 
     Committee does not agree to the proposed transfer of $838,000 
     for consolidation of the Legislative Affairs Office at IHS 
     with that of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 
     (DHHS). The complexity and variety of issues that surround 
     the provision of health services to Native Americans and 
     Alaska Natives demand an unusual degree of expertise and 
     experience. It is the Committee's view that Native American 
     health issues merit greater emphasis and attention than would 
     be gained in a consolidation at the Department's headquarters 
     level. As in past years, language has been included in the 
     bill under Administrative Provisions requiring that any 
     changes to the appropriation structure of the Indian Health 
     Service be approved in advance by the House and Senate 
     Appropriations Committees. This language would pertain to any 
     consolidation plans the Department of Health and Human 
     Services may wish to implement that would redirect funds 
     appropriated to the IHS for specific functions.
       The Committee does not agree to the budget proposal that 
     would require the Indian Health Service to absorb $11,899,000 
     in retirement annuity payments for Commissioned Corps 
     Officers and, therefore, has included language in the bill 
     continuing the current system of non-reimbursable 
     contributions by the U.S. Department of Health and Human 
     Services to the Retirement Pay and Medical Benefits for 
     Commissioned Officers account. Given the enormous needs in 
     every area of health services for Native Americans, the 
     Committee cannot support a proposal that would use already 
     insufficient program dollars to cover the unfunded increase.
       Bill language has also been included regarding base funds 
     of $15,000,000 that are directed to the Alaska Federation of 
     Natives for alcohol control, prevention, and treatment. The 
     bill language would designate $100,000 of the overall amount 
     for an independent third party (1) to conduct an evaluation 
     of the program, including each grantee and contractor, which 
     will include by region the number of clients, including 
     recidivism rates, and the impact on overall alcoholism and 
     crime rates, and (2) to make recommendations for improvement, 
     provided that no more than 5 percent may be used by any 
     entity receiving funding for administrative overhead 
     including indirect costs.
       The Committee expects the Service to continue the diabetes 
     prevention and research activities centered at the National 
     Diabetes Prevention Center in Gallup, New Mexico, and jointly 
     funded by the Centers for Disease Control.
       Within 45 days of receiving a request to expand the 
     contract health service area of the Mississippi Band of 
     Choctaw Indians to cover members in the western Tennessee 
     counties

[[Page 809]]

     of Lauderdale, Shelby and Tipton, the Director of the Indian 
     Health Service shall rule on such request. If the request is 
     not approved, the Director shall report to the Committee 
     within 30 days of his ruling the specific reasons for the 
     denial. Prior to accepting the request for expansion of the 
     service area, the Service shall consult with the tribe 
     regarding the documentation and information required by the 
     Service in order to process the request.

                        indian health facilities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$369,487,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................362,571,000
Committee recommendation....................................365,390,000

       The Committee has provided an appropriation of $365,390,000 
     for Indian health facilities. This amount is $4,097,000 below 
     the enacted level and $2,819,000 above the budget request. 
     The detail table at the back of the report displays the 
     proposed distribution of funds among the Service's facilities 
     programs.
       Within health care facilities construction, the Committee 
     recommends the following distribution:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Budget         Committee
   Health care facilities construction       estimate     recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hospitals:
    Fort Defiance, AZ...................     $20,400,000     $16,400,000
    Winnebago, NE.......................       8,241,000       8,241,000
Outpatient Facilities:
    Pinon, AZ...........................      13,900,000      16,000,000
    Red Mesa, AZ........................       7,653,000       7,653,000
    Pawnee, OK..........................      10,639,000      12,633,000
    St. Paul, AK........................      11,167,000       5,584,000
    Metlakatla, AK......................  ..............         308,000
    Sisseton, SD........................  ..............       3,000,000
Staff quarters: Bethel..................  ..............       5,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       As indicated above, an amount of $308,000 for the health 
     clinic at Metlakatla, AK, is recommended by the Committee 
     with the understanding that an additional $5,000,000 will be 
     dedicated to the construction project from available 
     carryover funds.
       The Committee has included bill language that would 
     prohibit the use of Indian Health Service appropriated funds 
     for sanitation facilities construction associated with new 
     homes funded with grants by housing programs of the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development (DHUD). These 
     DHUD housing grant programs for new homes are able to fund 
     the sanitation facilities necessary for the homes.
       The Committee strongly encourages the Indian Health 
     Service, from its Sanitation Facilities Construction program, 
     to continue to fund at the highest level possible within the 
     current IHS priority list, construction of a new drinking 
     water system for the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall 
     Reservation in Idaho.
       Last year, the Committee instructed the Indian Health 
     Service to continue its review of the facilities priority 
     system with the goal of better reflecting the full range of 
     need for facilities in Indian country. Since that time, the 
     Committee understands that a work group assembled by the 
     facilities appropriations tribal advisory board has completed 
     a draft report for the board's consideration. That report is 
     available to the public through the Service's web site. Once 
     the board has had the opportunity to consider the group's 
     recommendations, a final report will be issued for 
     consideration by the tribes and the Service. Upon issuance of 
     the final report, the Committee expects that future budget 
     requests will better reflect the range of needs identified by 
     the report.
       The Committee is concerned about reports that the small 
     ambulatory grant program lacks representation from tribes in 
     the eastern region of the United States. While recognizing 
     that this is a competitive program, the Committee encourages 
     the Service to consider geographic distribution as one of the 
     criteria for selection in applications that are otherwise 
     similarly evaluated.

                         OTHER RELATED AGENCIES

              Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,148,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,491,000
Committee recommendation.....................................14,491,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $14,491,000 
     which is $657,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level and is the 
     same as the budget estimate.

    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts 
                              Development

                       payments to the institute

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,490,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,130,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,130,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,130,000, 
     which is the same as the budget estimate.

                        Smithsonian Institution

                         salaries and expenses


                         (including rescission)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$420,960,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................434,660,000
Committee recommendation....................................436,660,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $436,660,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the Smithsonian Institution. 
     This amount is $2,000,000 above the budget estimate. The 
     detail table at the back of the report displays the proposed 
     allocation of funds among the Institution's programs. The 
     increase to the budget estimate is provided to the National 
     Museum of American History for its 9/11 initiative.
       The Smithsonian's Inspector General found that for fiscal 
     years 1998 through 2000, the Board of Regents approved 
     $699,000,000 in trust fund expenditures while the Institution 
     spent $1,070,000,000. This discrepancy was due to the lack of 
     coherent and comprehensive budget proposals for the 
     Institution's trust funded activities. The Committee is 
     pleased that the Institution has developed a plan to address 
     this issue, and urges its timely implementation. The 
     Committee also urges the Institution to implement such 
     interim measures as are necessary to mitigate the risks 
     associated with incomplete trust budget proposals.

            repair, restoration and alteration of facilities

Appropriations, 2002........................................$67,900,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................81,300,000
Committee recommendation.....................................78,300,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $78,300,000 
     for the repair and restoration of facilities. This amount is 
     $3,000,000 below the budget request and an increase of 
     $10,400,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
     Committee has included bill language proposed in the budget 
     justification that would allow for funds from this 
     appropriation to be used for salaries of personnel assigned 
     to facilities projects. The bill also includes language 
     providing for the issuance of a single procurement contract 
     for the repair and renovation of the Patent Office Building. 
     Within funds provided, the Smithsonian should address the 
     need for a Mall entrance to the National Museum of Natural 
     History that meets the American with Disabilities Act 
     regulations.
       The Committee requested the National Academy of Public 
     Administration to examine the needs for restoration and 
     renovation of Smithsonian facilities, and a report was 
     received by the Committee in July, 2001 which recommends 
     $1,500,000,000 in repairs and renovations to ensure the 
     safety and security of the collections, facilities, employees 
     and visitors at the Smithsonian's 400 buildings. The 
     Committee is providing $78,300,000 for the repair and 
     restoration of facilities as a beginning to the 
     $1,500,000,000 that is needed over the next 10 years.

                              construction

Appropriations, 2002........................................$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................12,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................16,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,000,000 
     for construction of Smithsonian facilities. This amount 
     exceeds the budget estimate by $4,000,000 and is designated 
     in full for ongoing construction of the National Museum of 
     the American Indian. Based on the most recent information 
     provided to the Committee, these additional funds are 
     necessary to meet the Museum's remaining contractual 
     obligations.
       The Committee has included language proposed in the budget 
     justification that would allow the use of construction funds 
     for salaries of personnel required for construction projects.

                        National Gallery of Art

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$71,115,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................78,219,000
Committee recommendation.....................................77,219,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $77,219,000 
     for salaries and expenses at the National Gallery of Art. 
     This amount is $6,104,000 above the enacted level and 
     $1,000,000 below the budget estimate. The Committee does not 
     concur with the proposal to fund the special exhibitions 
     program at $807,000 and has provided an additional $2,199,000 
     in order to maintain the current operating level of 
     $3,026,000. An increase of $952,000 above the enacted level 
     has been included for preventive maintenance and facilities 
     repairs. Given the overall budget constraints faced by the 
     Committee, as well as the priority placed on restoring 
     special exhibitions funds, it was not possible to meet the 
     budget estimate for those activities in full. The detail 
     table at the back of the report displays the distribution of 
     funds among and Gallery's activities and, with the exceptions 
     noted above, is in agreement with the budget request.

            repair, restoration, and renovation of buildings

Appropriations, 2002........................................$14,220,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................16,230,000
Committee recommendation.....................................16,230,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,230,000 
     for the repair, restoration, and renovation of buildings. 
     This amount meets the budget estimate, and provides funding 
     to continue Master Facilities Plan projects, as well as 
     ongoing renovation and repair work. The Committee expects 
     that any proposal by the Gallery to apply these

[[Page 810]]

     funds in a manner that is not readily apparent from the 
     fiscal year 2003 budget presentation will be brought to the 
     Committee's attention before action is taken.

             John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts

                       operations and maintenance

Appropriations, 2002........................................$19,310,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................16,310,000
Committee recommendation.....................................16,310,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,310,000 to 
     meet the budget estimate for the operations and maintenance 
     of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

                              construction

Appropriations, 2002........................................$19,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................17,600,000
Committee recommendation.....................................17,600,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,600,000 to 
     meet the budget request for major construction and renovation 
     projects of the Kennedy Center.

            Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,796,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................8,488,000
Committee recommendation......................................8,488,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,488,000 for 
     the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, an 
     amount that meets the budget request. The detail table at the 
     back of the report displays the proposed distribution of 
     funding for the center's activities in the coming fiscal 
     year.

           National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities

                    National Endowment for the Arts

                       grants and administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$98,234,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................99,489,000
Committee recommendation.................................\1\116,489,000

\1\Includes funds previously appropriated separately through the 
Challenge America fund account.

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $116,489,000 
     for the National Endowment for the Arts. This total includes 
     an amount of $99,489,000 for grants and administration, and 
     $17,000,000 for the Challenge America Fund, which has been 
     folded into the NEA account to more accurately reflect 
     overall program levels. Both sums are in agreement with the 
     budget estimate.
       Language in title III of the bill retains provisions from 
     prior years regarding priority for rural and underserved 
     communities; priority for grants that encourage public 
     knowledge, education, understanding, and appreciation of the 
     arts; restrictions regarding individual grants, subgranting, 
     and seasonal support; a 15-percent cap on the total amount of 
     grant funds directed to any one State; designation of a 
     category for grants of national significance; and authority 
     to solicit and invest funds.
       The detail table at the back of the report displays the 
     proposed distribution among the endowment's activities.

                 National Endowment for the Humanities

                       grants and administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$108,382,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................109,632,000
Committee recommendation....................................109,632,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $109,632,000 
     for grants and administration of the National Endowment for 
     the Humanities, an amount that meets the budget estimate. The 
     detail table at the back of the report displays the 
     distribution of funds among the agency's various activities.
       As in prior years, the Committee has included bill language 
     providing the Endowment with the authority to solicit and 
     invest funds.

                            matching grants

Appropriations, 2002........................................$16,122,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................16,122,000
Committee recommendation.....................................16,122,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,122,000 
     for matching grants. This amount meets the budget request and 
     provides $10,436,000 for Challenge grants and $5,686,000 is 
     for Treasury funds.

                        Commission of Fine Arts

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,224,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,224,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,224,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,224,000 for 
     the Commission of Fine Arts, an amount that meets the fiscal 
     year 2003 budget estimate. The Committee expects that the 
     Commission of Fine Arts will continue to serve as the 
     administering agency for the National Capital Arts and 
     Cultural Affairs Program. It had been proposed in the budget 
     estimate to transfer this program to the D.C. Commission on 
     the Arts and Humanities.

               national capital arts and cultural affairs

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,000,000 for 
     the National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs Program. The 
     Committee does not agree with the proposal to administer 
     these funds through the D.C. Commission on the Arts and 
     Humanities and, therefore, expects the Commission of Fine 
     Arts to continue managing the program in the same manner as 
     it has in the past.

               Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,667,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,667,000

       The Committee recommends $3,667,000, the same as the budget 
     request.

                  National Capital Planning Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,011,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,253,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,253,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,253,000 for 
     the National Capital Planning Commission, which meets the 
     budget estimate.

                United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

                       holocaust memorial museum

Appropriations, 2002........................................$36,028,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................38,663,000
Committee recommendation.....................................38,663,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $38,663,000 
     for the Holocaust Memorial Museum. This amount meets the 
     fiscal year 2003 budget estimate, which includes funds for 
     fixed cost increases and additional maintenance needs.

                             Presidio Trust


                          presidio trust fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$23,125,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................21,327,000
Committee recommendation.....................................21,327,000

       The Committee recommends $21,327,000 for the Presidio 
     Trust, a decrease of $1,798,000 from the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and fully commensurate with the budget request.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       The Committee has recommended inclusion of several general 
     provisions in the bill including the following:
       Sec. 301. Provides that contracts which provide consulting 
     services be a matter of public record and available for 
     public review, except where otherwise provided by law.
       Sec. 302. Provides that appropriations available in the 
     bill shall not be used to produce literature or otherwise 
     promote public support of a legislative proposal on which 
     legislative action is not complete.
       Sec. 303. Provides that appropriations made available in 
     this bill will not remain available beyond the current fiscal 
     year unless otherwise provided.
       Sec. 304. Provides that appropriations made available in 
     this bill cannot be used to provide a cook, chauffeur, or 
     other personal servants.
       Sec. 305. Provides for restrictions on departmental 
     assessments unless approved by the Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       Sec. 306. Limits the actions of the Forest Service and the 
     Bureau of Land Management with regard to the sale of giant 
     sequoia trees to a manner consistent with such sales as were 
     conducted in fiscal year 2000.
       Sec. 307. Prohibits the National Park Service from 
     implementing a concession contract which permits or requires 
     the removal of the underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns 
     National Park.
       Sec. 308. Retains mining patent moratorium carried in 
     previous years.
       Sec. 309. Provides that funds appropriated to the Bureau of 
     Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service for contract 
     support costs for fiscal years 1994 through 2001 are the 
     total amounts available except that, for the Bureau of Indian 
     Affairs, tribes and tribal organizations may use their tribal 
     priority allocations for unmet indirect costs of ongoing 
     contracts, grants, self-governance compacts, or annual 
     funding agreements.
       Sec. 310. Includes language allowing competition for 
     watershed restoration projects through the ``Jobs in the 
     Woods'' component of the President's forest plan for the 
     Pacific Northwest or for the ``Jobs in the Woods'' program 
     for Alaska to be limited to individuals and entities in 
     historically timber-dependent areas covered by the plan.
       Sec. 311. Includes language defining the grantmaking 
     capabilities and responsibilities of the National Endowment 
     of the Arts. Grants to individuals may be made only for 
     literature fellowships, national heritage fellowships, or 
     American jazz masters fellowships. The Chairperson of the 
     Endowment will establish procedures to ensure that grants 
     made, except those to a State or local arts agency, will not 
     be used to make a further grant to any other organization or 
     individual to conduct activity independent of the

[[Page 811]]

     direct grant recipient. Grants for seasonal support may not 
     be awarded unless the application is specific to the contents 
     of the season.

       Sec. 312. Includes language allowing the National Endowment 
     for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities to 
     raise funds and receive gifts, to deposit such in an 
     interest-bearing account for the appropriate Endowment, and 
     to use such to further the functions of the respective 
     Endowments in accordance with the specified intent of the 
     donors.

       Sec. 313. Provides language for awarding financial 
     assistance to underserved populations under the National 
     Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965. With 
     funds appropriated to carry out section 5 of the act, the 
     chairman will establish a category of national significance 
     grants. With the exception of this grant category, the 
     chairman will not make grants exceeding 15 percent, in the 
     aggregate, of such funds to any single State.

       Sec. 314. Prohibits the use of appropriations to fund any 
     activities associated with the issuance of the 5-year program 
     under the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning 
     Act. Strategic planning activities carried out for that act 
     should now be completed as part of the agency's compliance 
     with the Government Performance and Results Act, Public Law 
     103-62.

       Sec. 315. Prohibits the use of funds to support Government-
     wide administrative functions unless they are justified in 
     the budget process and approved by the House and Senate 
     Appropriations Committees.

       Sec. 316. Prohibits the use of funds for GSA 
     telecommunication centers.

       Sec. 317. Prohibits the use of funds to make improvements 
     to Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House without 
     Committee approval.

       Sec. 318. Provides additional authority to use the roads 
     and trails funds for priority forest health related 
     management. The Committee recognizes that there is a serious 
     backlog in important road, trail and bridge work throughout 
     the national forest system just as there is a serious backlog 
     in needed management related to forest health.

       Sec. 319. Addresses timber sales involving Alaska western 
     red cedar. This language slightly modifies a provision 
     carried in the fiscal year 2002 bill, which deals with export 
     of certain western red cedar timber from Alaska. Mills which 
     process western red cedar in the Pacific Northwest have an 
     insufficient supply of western red cedar, and the national 
     forest in southeast Alaska sometimes has a surplus. This 
     provision continues a program by which Alaska's surplus 
     western red cedar is made available preferentially to U.S. 
     domestic mills outside Alaska, prior to export abroad.

       Sec. 320. Provides that the Forest Service may not 
     inappropriately use the Recreation Fee Demonstration program 
     to supplant existing recreation concessions on the national 
     forests.

       Sec. 321. Continues a provision providing that the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall not be considered in violation 
     of certain provisions of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable 
     Resources Planning Act solely because more than 15 years have 
     passed without revision of a forest plan, provided that the 
     Secretary is working in good faith to complete the plan 
     revision within available funds.

       Sec. 322. Prohibits oil, natural gas and mining related 
     activities within current national monument boundaries.

       Sec. 323. Authorizes the Forest Service to expand the 
     number of stewardship and end results contracts. These 
     projects are in addition to the projects authorized in Public 
     Law 106-291.

       Sec. 324. Makes employees of foundations established by 
     Acts of Congress to solicit private sector funds on behalf of 
     Federal land management agencies eligible to qualify for 
     General Service Administration contract airfares beginning in 
     fiscal year 2004.

       Sec. 325. Provides the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     Secretary of the Interior the authority to enter into 
     reciprocal agreements with foreign nations concerning the 
     personal liability of firefighters.

       Sec. 326. Modifies administration-proposed provision 
     addressing expiring grazing permits on BLM land to include 
     permits on Forest Service lands. This section allows existing 
     permit holders whose permits will or have expired due to 
     agency delays to continue grazing activities until the 
     Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior 
     completes an environmental review of these permits.

       Sec. 327. Allows the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     Secretary of the Interior to consider local contractors when 
     awarding contracts for certain activities on public lands.

       Sec. 328. Increases the cap on administrative costs for the 
     North Pacific Research Board established in the Interior and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998.

       Sec. 329. Limits the review of certain aspects of the 
     Tongass Land Management Plan.

                 LIMITATIONS AND LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Rule XVI, paragraph 7 requires that every report on a 
     general appropriation bill filed by the Committee must 
     identify each recommended amendment which proposes an item of 
     appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions 
     of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or 
     resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.

       Those items are as follows:

       --Sums provided to the Bureau of Land Management to 
         inventory, manage, and improve rangelands for domestic 
         livestock grazing pursuant to Public Law 95-514, the 
         Public Rangeland Improvement Act of 1978.
       --$212,456,000 for the endangered species program, U.S. 
         Fish and Wildlife Service.
       --$4,000,000 for the Yukon River Restoration and 
         Enhancement Fund, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
         pursuant to the Fisheries Act of 1995.
       --Sums provided to the Fish and Wildlife Service for the 
         conservation and protection of marine mammals pursuant to 
         Public Law 103-238, the Marine Mammal Protection Act 
         Amendments of 1994.
       --$2,250,000 for start-up and matching funds for projects 
         of the National Forest Foundation, U.S. Forest Service.
       --Sums provided to the Department of Energy for the 
         integration of fuel cells with hydrogen production 
         systems pursuant to the Hydrogen Future Act of 1996.
       --Sums provided to the Department of Energy for various 
         programs authorized in Public Law 102-486, Energy Policy 
         Act of 1992.
       --$1,487,000 for economic regulation and the Energy 
         Information Administration, Department of Energy, 
         pursuant to the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
         1981.
       --$14,491,000 for the Office of Navajo and Hopi Relocation.
       --$116,489,000 for the National Endowment for the Arts.
       --$125,754,000 for the National Endowment for the 
         Humanities.
       --$6,088,000 for the National Underground Railroad Freedom 
         Center.
       --$50,000 for the Cache La Poudre River Corridor 
         Commission.

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''

       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

[[Page 812]]



  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                  or -)
                  Item                         2002            Budget            House         Committee   --------------------------------------------------
                                           appropriation  estimate  allowance deg.  recommendation       2002            Budget            House
                                                                                                             appropriation  estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
   TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 
        BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
 
    Management of Lands and Resources
 
Land Resources:
    Soil, water and air management......         34,469           34,683           34,983            +514            +300
    Range management....................         70,697           69,754           71,754          +1,057          +2,000
    Forestry management.................          7,629            7,235            7,235            -394   ..............
    Riparian management.................         22,806           21,786           21,786          -1,020   ..............
    Cultural resources management.......         14,181           14,382           14,382            +201   ..............
    Wild horse and burro management.....         29,665           29,717           29,717             +52   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Land Resources..........        179,447          177,557          179,857            +410          +2,300
 
Wildlife and Fisheries:
    Wildlife management.................         25,318           22,086           22,086          -3,232   ..............
    Fisheries management................         12,110           11,669           11,669            -441   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Wildlife and Fisheries..         37,428           33,755           33,755          -3,673   ..............
 
Threatened and endangered species.......         21,618           21,288           21,288            -330   ..............
 
Recreation Management:
    Wilderness management...............         17,232           17,093           17,093            -139   ..............
    Recreation resources management.....         45,762           44,603           46,003            +241          +1,400
    Recreation operations (fees)........          1,295            1,000            1,000            -295   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Recreation Management...         64,289           62,696           64,096            -193          +1,400
 
Energy and Minerals:
    Oil and gas.........................         76,609           84,936           84,936          +8,327   ..............
    Coal management.....................          8,828            9,588            9,588            +760   ..............
    Other mineral resources.............         10,096           10,317           11,067            +971            +750
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Energy and Minerals.....         95,533          104,841          105,591         +10,058            +750
 
Alaska minerals.........................          4,000            2,228            4,000   ..............         +1,772
 
Realty and Ownership Management:
    Alaska conveyance...................         36,338           35,067           37,067            +729          +2,000
    Cadastral survey....................         14,546           14,022           15,872          +1,326          +1,850
    Land and realty management..........         33,813           36,161           36,911          +3,098            +750
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Realty and Ownership             84,697           85,250           89,850          +5,153          +4,600
       Management.......................
 
Resource Protection and Maintenance:
    Resource management planning........         33,035           47,301           48,051         +15,016            +750
    Resource protection and law                  11,947           12,112           12,112            +165   ..............
     enforcement........................
    Hazardous materials management......         16,709           16,814           16,814            +105   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Resource Protection and          61,691           76,227           76,977         +15,286            +750
       Maintenance......................
 
Transportation and Facilities
 Maintenance:
    Operations..........................          6,640            6,428            6,428            -212   ..............
    Annual maintenance..................         30,310           30,613           31,113            +803            +500
    Deferred maintenance................         12,917           11,889           12,889             -28          +1,000
    Infrastructure improvement..........  ..............  ................         29,028         +29,028         +29,028
    Conservation (infrastructure                 28,000           29,028    ..............        -28,000         -29,028
     improvement).......................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Transportation/                  77,867           77,958           79,458          +1,591          +1,500
       Facilities Maintenance...........
 
Land and resources information systems..         19,756           19,341           19,341            -415   ..............
 
Mining Law Administration:
    Administration......................         32,298           32,696           32,696            +398   ..............
    Offsetting fees.....................        -32,298          -32,696          -32,696            -398   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Mining Law                ..............  ................  ..............  ..............  ..............
       Administration...................
 
Workforce and Organizational:
    Support Information systems                  16,395           16,449           16,449             +54   ..............
     operations.........................
    Administrative support..............         49,266           50,111           50,111            +845   ..............
    Bureauwide fixed costs..............         63,645           66,316           66,316          +2,671   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Workforce and                   129,306          132,876          132,876          +3,570   ..............
       Organizational Support...........
 
Challenge cost share....................  ..............           8,973            8,973          +8,973   ..............
    Conservation........................  ..............          10,000    ..............  ..............        -10,000
Adjustment for conservation spending....         -1,000           -1,000    ..............         +1,000          +1,000
Conservation (Youth Conservation Corps).          1,000            1,000    ..............         -1,000          -1,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Management of Lands and            775,632          812,990          816,062         +40,430          +3,072
       Resources........................
          Appropriations................       (746,632)        (772,962)        (816,062)       (+69,430)       (+43,100)
          Conservation..................        (29,000)         (40,028)   ..............       (-29,000)       (-40,028)
                                         ===============================================================================================================
        Wildland Fire Management
 
Preparedness............................        280,807          277,213          277,213          -3,594   ..............
Fire suppression operations.............        127,424          160,351          160,351         +32,927   ..............
Other operations........................        216,190          216,190          216,690            +500            +500
Emergency suppression...................         34,000   ................  ..............        -34,000   ..............
Emergency other operations..............         20,000   ................  ..............        -20,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Wildland Fire Management...        678,421          653,754          654,254         -24,167            +500
                                         ===============================================================================================================
    Central Hazardous Materials Fund
 
Bureau of Land Management...............          9,978            9,978            9,978   ..............  ..............
 
              Construction
 
Construction............................         13,076           10,976           12,976            -100          +2,000
 

[[Page 813]]

 
        Payments in Lieu of Taxes
 
Payments to local governments...........        160,000          150,000          210,000         +50,000         +60,000
Conservation............................         50,000           15,000    ..............        -50,000         -15,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Payments in Lieu of Taxes..        210,000          165,000          210,000   ..............        +45,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 
            Land Acquisition
 
Land Acquisition:
    Acquisitions........................  ..............  ................         23,150         +23,150         +23,150
        Conservation....................         43,420           38,686    ..............        -43,420         -38,686
    Emergencies and hardships...........  ..............  ................          2,500          +2,500          +2,500
        Conservation....................          1,000            1,500    ..............         -1,000          -1,500
    Acquisition management..............  ..............  ................          4,000          +4,000          +4,000
        Conservation....................          5,000            4,000    ..............         -5,000          -4,000
    Land exchange equalization payment..  ..............  ................            500            +500            +500
        Conservation....................            500              500    ..............           -500            -500
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Land Acquisition.......         49,920           44,686           30,150         -19,770         -14,536
                                         ===============================================================================================================
    Oregon and California Grant Lands
 
Western Oregon resources management.....         85,949           86,355           86,355            +406   ..............
Western Oregon information and resource           2,195            2,206            2,206             +11   ..............
 data systems...........................
Western Oregon transportation and                10,919           10,958           10,958             +39   ..............
 facilities maintenance.................
Western Oregon construction and                     294              299              299              +5   ..............
 acquisition............................
Jobs in the woods.......................          5,808            5,815            5,815              +7   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Oregon and California Grant        105,165          105,633          105,633            +468   ..............
       Lands............................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
           Range Improvements
 
Improvements to public lands............          7,873            7,873            7,873   ..............  ..............
Farm Tenant Act lands...................          1,527            1,527            1,527   ..............  ..............
Administrative expenses.................            600              600              600   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Range Improvements.........         10,000           10,000           10,000   ..............  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
     Service Charges, Deposits, and
               Forfeitures
 
Rights-of-way processing................          1,115            1,115            1,115   ..............  ..............
Adopt-a-horse program...................          1,225            1,225            1,225   ..............  ..............
Repair of damaged lands.................          3,666            3,666            3,666   ..............  ..............
Cost recoverable realty cases...........            515              515              515   ..............  ..............
Timber purchaser expenses...............             50               50               50   ..............  ..............
Copy fees...............................          1,429            1,329            1,329            -100   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal (gross)..................          8,000            7,900            7,900            -100   ..............
 
Offsetting fees.........................  ..............          -7,900           -7,900          -7,900   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Service Charges, Deposits            8,000   ................  ..............         -8,000   ..............
       and Forfeitures..................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
        Miscellaneous Trust Funds
 
Current appropriations..................         12,405           12,405           12,405   ..............  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 
      TOTAL, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT..      1,872,597        1,825,422        1,861,458         -11,139         +36,036
          Appropriations................     (1,689,677)      (1,725,708)      (1,861,458)      (+171,781)      (+135,750)
          Conservation..................       (128,920)         (99,714)   ..............      (-128,920)       (-99,714)
          Contingent emergency                  (54,000)  ................  ..............       (-54,000)  ..............
           appropriations...............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
 
           Resource Management
 
Ecological Services:
    Endangered species:
        Candidate conservation..........          7,620            8,682            9,982          +2,362          +1,300
        Listing.........................          9,000            9,077            9,077             +77   ..............
        Consultation....................         45,501           47,770           47,970          +2,469            +200
        Recovery........................         63,617           60,215           64,427            +810          +4,212
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Endangered species..        125,738          125,744          131,456          +5,718          +5,712
 
    Habitat conservation................         83,409           74,623           84,423          +1,014          +9,800
    Environmental contaminants..........         10,579           10,780           10,780            +201   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Ecological Services.....        219,726          211,147          226,659          +6,933         +15,512
 
Refuges and Wildlife:
    Refuge operations and maintenance...        293,964          316,475          360,881         +66,917         +44,406
        Conservation (cooperative         ..............           5,000    ..............  ..............         -5,000
         conservation initiative).......
        Conservation (infrastructure             23,000           52,006    ..............        -23,000         -52,006
         improvement)...................
        Conservation (Youth Conservation          2,000            2,000    ..............         -2,000          -2,000
         Corps).........................
    Salton Sea recovery.................            993              998              998              +5   ..............
    Migratory bird management...........         28,616           28,310           28,885            +269            +575
    Law enforcement operations..........         48,411           49,928           51,928          +3,517          +2,000
        Conservation (infrastructure              2,000            2,000    ..............         -2,000          -2,000
         improvement)...................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Refuges and Wildlife        398,984          456,717          442,692         +43,708         -14,025
 
Fisheries:
    Hatchery operations and maintenance.         51,362           45,952           52,952          +1,590          +7,000
        Conservation (infrastructure              4,000            4,000    ..............         -4,000          -4,000
         improvement)...................
    Fish and wildlife management........         48,547           44,811           51,782          +3,235          +6,971
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Fisheries...............        103,909           94,763          104,734            +825          +9,971
 
General Administration:
    Central office administration.......         15,530           14,569           14,569            -961   ..............

[[Page 814]]

 
    Regional office administration......         24,792           24,217           24,217            -575   ..............
    Servicewide administrative support..         53,295           57,762           57,762          +4,467   ..............
    National Fish and Wildlife                    7,705            7,670            7,705   ..............            +35
     Foundation.........................
    National Conservation Training               15,526           15,592           16,192            +666            +600
     Center.............................
    International affairs...............          8,130            8,167            8,167             +37   ..............
    Conservation (cooperative             ..............          13,000    ..............  ..............        -13,000
     conservation initiative)...........
    Cost allocation methodology.........          3,000   ................  ..............         -3,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, General Administration..        127,978          140,977          128,612            +634         -12,365
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Resource Management........        850,597          903,604          902,697         +52,100            -907
          Appropriations................       (819,597)        (825,598)        (902,697)       (+83,100)       (+77,099)
          Conservation..................        (31,000)         (78,006)   ..............       (-31,000)       (-78,006)
                                         ===============================================================================================================
              Construction
 
Construction and rehabilitation:
    Line item construction..............  ..............          25,184           32,664         -10,387          +7,480
    Nationwide engineering services.....         12,492           10,218           10,218          -2,274   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Construction...............         55,543           35,402           42,882         -12,661          +7,480
                                         ===============================================================================================================
            Land Acquisition
 
Fish and Wildlife Service:
    Acquisitions--Federal refuge lands..  ..............  ................         63,555         +63,555         +63,555
        Conservation....................         80,135           53,884    ..............        -80,135         -53,884
    Inholdings..........................  ..............  ................          2,500          +2,500          +2,500
        Conservation....................          1,500            2,500    ..............         -1,500          -2,500
    Emergencies and hardships...........  ..............  ................          2,000          +2,000          +2,000
        Conservation....................          1,500            2,000    ..............         -1,500          -2,000
    Exchanges...........................  ..............  ................          1,000          +1,000          +1,000
        Conservation....................          1,000            1,000    ..............         -1,000          -1,000
    Acquisition management..............  ..............  ................         10,000         +10,000         +10,000
        Conservation....................         15,000            8,500    ..............        -15,000          -8,500
    Cost allocation methodology.........  ..............  ................          2,500          +2,500          +2,500
        Conservation....................  ..............           2,500    ..............  ..............         -2,500
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Land Acquisition.......         99,135           70,384           81,555         -17,580         +11,171
                                         ===============================================================================================================
       Landowner Incentive Program
 
Grants to States........................  ..............  ................            600            +600            +600
    Conservation........................         40,000           50,000    ..............        -40,000         -50,000
 
   Private Stewardship Grants Program
 
Stewardship grants......................  ..............  ................            200            +200            +200
    Conservation........................         10,000           10,000    ..............        -10,000         -10,000
 
     Cooperative Endangered Species
            Conservation Fund
 
Grants to States........................  ..............  ................         26,929         +26,929         +26,929
    Conservation........................         31,929           31,929    ..............        -31,929         -31,929
HCP land acquisition....................  ..............  ................         51,471         +51,471         +51,471
    Conservation........................         61,306           56,471    ..............        -61,306         -56,471
Administration..........................  ..............  ................          2,600          +2,600          +2,600
    Conservation........................          3,000            2,600    ..............         -3,000          -2,600
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Cooperative Endangered              96,235           91,000           81,000         -15,235         -10,000
       Species Fund.....................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      National Wildlife Refuge Fund
 
Payments in lieu of taxes...............         14,414           14,414           14,414   ..............  ..............
 
  North American Wetlands Conservation
                  Fund
 
Wetlands conservation...................  ..............  ................         36,818         +36,818         +36,818
    Conservation........................         41,760           41,818    ..............        -41,760         -41,818
Administration..........................  ..............  ................          1,742          +1,742          +1,742
    Conservation........................          1,740            1,742    ..............         -1,740          -1,742
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, North American Wetlands             43,500           43,560           38,560          -4,940          -5,000
       Conservation Fund................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
Neotropical Migratory Birds Conservation
                  Fund
 
Migratory bird grants...................          3,000   ................          2,000          -1,000          +2,000
 
 Multinational Species Conservation Fund
 
African elephant conservation...........          1,000            1,000            1,000   ..............  ..............
Rhinoceros and tiger conservation.......          1,000            1,000            1,200            +200            +200
Asian elephant conservation.............          1,000            1,000            1,000   ..............  ..............
Great ape conservation..................          1,000            1,000            1,000   ..............  ..............
Neotropical migratory bird conservation.  ..............           1,000    ..............  ..............         -1,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Multinational Species                4,000            5,000            4,200            +200            -800
       Conservation Fund................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
    State and Tribal Wildlife Grants
 
State wildlife grants...................  ..............  ................         45,000         +45,000         +45,000
    Conservation........................         85,000           60,000    ..............        -85,000         -60,000
    Rescission..........................        -25,000   ................  ..............        +25,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, State and Tribal Wildlife           60,000           60,000           45,000         -15,000         -15,000
       Grants...........................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE           1,276,424        1,283,364        1,213,108         -63,316         -70,256
       SERVICE..........................
          Appropriations................       (896,554)        (880,414)      (1,213,108)      (+316,554)      (+332,694)
          Conservation..................       (404,870)        (402,950)   ..............      (-404,870)      (-402,950)
          Rescission....................       (-25,000)  ................  ..............       (+25,000)  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================

[[Page 815]]

 
          NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
 
  Operation of the National Park System
 
Park Management:
    Resource stewardship................        318,312          334,923          340,227         +21,915          +5,304
    Visitor services....................        297,091          309,681          314,128         +17,037          +4,447
    Maintenance.........................        479,201          529,428          528,823         +49,622            -605
        Conservation (Youth Conservation          2,000            2,000    ..............         -2,000          -2,000
         Corps).........................
    Park support........................        275,025          278,297          279,651          +4,626          +1,354
        Conservation (cooperative         ..............          22,000    ..............  ..............        -22,000
         conservation initiative).......
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Park Management.....      1,371,629        1,476,329        1,462,829         +91,200         -13,500
 
External administrative costs...........        105,348          108,236          108,236          +2,888   ..............
Emergency supplemental (Public Law 107-          10,098   ................  ..............        -10,098   ..............
 117)...................................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Operation of the National        1,487,075        1,584,565        1,571,065         +83,990         -13,500
       Park System......................
          Appropriations................     (1,474,977)      (1,560,565)      (1,571,065)       (+96,088)       (+10,500)
          Conservation..................         (2,000)         (24,000)   ..............        (-2,000)       (-24,000)
          Emergency appropriations......        (10,098)  ................  ..............       (-10,098)  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
        United States Park Police
 
Park Police.............................         65,260           78,431           78,431         +13,171   ..............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law         25,295   ................  ..............        -25,295   ..............
     107-117)...........................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, United States Park Police..         90,555           78,431           78,431         -12,124   ..............
 
  National Recreation and Preservation
 
Recreation programs.....................            549              552              552              +3   ..............
Natural programs........................         10,930           10,948           11,198            +268            +250
Cultural programs.......................         20,769           19,748           19,748          -1,021   ..............
International park affairs..............          1,718            1,719            1,719              +1   ..............
Environmental and compliance review.....            397              400              400              +3   ..............
Grant administration....................          1,582            1,585            1,585              +3   ..............
 
Heritage Partnership Programs                    13,092            7,616           13,265            +173          +5,649
 Commissions and grants.................
    Administrative support..............            117              119              119              +2   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Heritage Partnership             13,209            7,735           13,384            +175          +5,649
       Programs.........................
 
Statutory or Contractual Aid:
    Aleutian World War II Historic Area:  ..............  ................            400            +400            +400
    Anchorage Museum....................          2,500   ................  ..............         -2,500   ..............
    Barnanoff Museum / Erskin House.....            250   ................  ..............           -250   ..............
    Bishop Museum's Falls of Clyde......            300   ................  ..............           -300   ..............
    Brown Foundation....................            101              101              401            +300            +300
    Chesapeake Bay Gateway..............          1,200              798            3,000          +1,800          +2,202
    Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission.            299               47              500            +201            +453
    Denver Natural History and Science              750   ................  ..............           -750   ..............
     Museum.............................
    Ice Age National Scientific Reserve.            806              806              806   ..............  ..............
    Illinois and Michagan Canal Passage.  ..............  ................            500            +500            +500
    Independence Mine, AK...............          1,500   ................  ..............         -1,500   ..............
    Jamestown 2007......................            200   ................            400            +200            +400
    Johnstown Area Heritage Association.             49               49               49   ..............  ..............
    Lake Roosevelt Forum................             50   ................  ..............            -50   ..............
    Lamprey River.......................            500              200            1,000            +500            +800
    Louisiana Creole Heritage Center....  ..............  ................            250            +250            +250
    Louisiana Purchase Comm of Arkansas.  ..............  ................            350            +350            +350
    Mandan On-a-Slant Village...........            750   ................  ..............           -750   ..............
    Martin Luther King, Jr. Center......            528              528              528   ..............  ..............
    Morris Thompson Cultural and Visitor            750   ................  ..............           -750   ..............
     Center.............................
    National Constitution Center, PA....            500   ................            500   ..............           +500
    Native Hawaiian culture and arts                740              740              740   ..............  ..............
     program............................
    New Orleans Jazz Commission.........             66               66               66   ..............  ..............
    Office of Arctic Studies............  ..............  ................          1,500          +1,500          +1,500
    Penn Center National landmark, SC...          1,000   ................          1,000   ..............         +1,000
    Roosevelt Campobello International              766              802              802             +36   ..............
     Park Commission....................
    Sewall-Belmont House................            500   ................            500   ..............           +500
    Sleeping Rainbow Ranch, Capitol Reef  ..............  ................            700            +700            +700
     NP.................................
    St. Charles Interpretive Center.....            500   ................  ..............           -500   ..............
    Vancouver National Historic reserve.            400   ................            400   ..............           +400
    Vulcan State Park...................          2,000   ................  ..............         -2,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Statutory or Contractual         17,005            4,137           14,392          -2,613         +10,255
       Aid..............................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Recreation and             66,159           46,824           62,978          -3,181         +16,154
       Preservation.....................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
     Urban Park and Recreation Fund
 
Urban park grants.......................  ..............  ................         10,000         +10,000         +10,000
Conservation............................         30,000              300    ..............        -30,000            -300
 
       Historic Preservation Fund
 
State historic preservation offices.....  ..............  ................         34,000         +34,000         +34,000
    Conservation........................         39,000           34,000    ..............        -39,000         -34,000
Tribal grants...........................  ..............  ................          3,000          +3,000          +3,000
    Conservation........................          3,000            3,000    ..............         -3,000          -3,000
Grants for millennium initiative........  ..............  ................         30,000         +30,000         +30,000
    Conservation........................         30,000           30,000    ..............        -30,000         -30,000
National trust (endowment)..............          2,500   ................  ..............         -2,500   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Historic Preservation Fund.         74,500           67,000           67,000          -7,500   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
              Construction
 
Emergency and unscheduled...............          3,500            3,500            3,500   ..............  ..............
Housing.................................         12,500           12,500           12,500   ..............  ..............
Equipment replacement...................         17,960           31,960           32,460         +14,500            +500

[[Page 816]]

 
Planning, construction..................         25,400           25,400           25,400   ..............  ..............
General management plans................         11,240           13,896           14,396          +3,156            +500
Line item construction and maintenance..        208,488          122,934          207,078          -1,410         +84,144
    Conservation (infrastructure                 66,851           82,202    ..............        -66,851         -82,202
     improvement).......................
Construction program management.........         17,405           27,292           24,792          +7,387          -2,500
Dam safety..............................          2,700            2,700            2,700   ..............  ..............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-        21,624   ................  ..............        -21,624   ..............
 117)...................................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Construction...............        387,668          322,384          322,826         -64,842            +442
          Appropriations................       (299,193)        (240,182)        (322,826)       (+23,633)       (+82,644)
          Conservation..................        (66,851)         (82,202)   ..............       (-66,851)       (-82,202)
          Emergency appropriations......        (21,624)  ................  ..............       (-21,624)  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
    Land and Water Conservation Fund
 
(Rescission of contract authority)......        -30,000          -30,000          -30,000   ..............  ..............
 
  Land Acquisition and State Assistance
 
Assistance to States:
    State conservation grants...........  ..............  ................        111,000        +111,000        +111,000
        Conservation....................        140,000          194,600    ..............       -140,000        -194,600
    Administrative expenses.............  ..............  ................          4,000          +4,000          +4,000
        Conservation....................          4,000            5,400    ..............         -4,000          -5,400
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Assistance to States...        144,000          200,000          115,000         -29,000         -85,000
 
National Park Service:
    Acquisitions........................  ..............  ................         68,417         +68,417         +68,417
        Conservation....................        110,117           65,469    ..............       -110,117         -65,469
    Emergencies and hardships...........  ..............  ................          4,000          +4,000          +4,000
        Conservation....................          4,000            4,000    ..............         -4,000          -4,000
    Acquisition management..............  ..............  ................         12,588         +12,588         +12,588
        Conservation....................         12,000           12,588    ..............        -12,000         -12,588
    Inholdings..........................  ..............  ................          4,000          +4,000          +4,000
        Conservation....................          4,000            4,000    ..............         -4,000          -4,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, National Park Service..        130,117           86,057           89,005         -41,112          +2,948
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Land Acquisition and           274,117          286,057          204,005         -70,112         -82,052
           State Assistance.............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
          TOTAL, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE..      2,380,074        2,355,561        2,286,305         -93,769         -69,256
              Appropriations............     (1,905,589)      (1,926,002)      (2,316,305)      (+410,716)      (+390,303)
              Conservation..............       (447,468)        (459,559)   ..............      (-447,468)      (-459,559)
              Rescission................       (-30,000)        (-30,000)        (-30,000)  ..............  ..............
              Emergency appropriations..        (57,017)  ................  ..............       (-57,017)  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
     UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
 
  Surveys, Investigations, and Research
 
Mapping, Remote Sensing, and Geographic
 Investigations:
    Cooperative topographic mapping.....         81,067           80,940           81,651            +584            +711
    Land remote sensing.................         35,849           32,828           32,945          -2,904            +117
    Geographic analysis and monitoring..         16,361           15,526           16,481            +120            +955
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, National Mapping Program        133,277          129,294          131,077          -2,200          +1,783
 
Geologic Hazards, Resource and
 Processes:
    Geologic hazards assessments........         75,004           73,971           75,481            +477          +1,510
    Geologic landscape and coastal               77,973           73,217           79,699          +1,726          +6,482
     assessments........................
    Geologic resource assessments.......         79,833           77,468           79,723            -110          +2,255
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Geologic Hazards,               232,810          224,656          234,903          +2,093         +10,247
       Resource and Processes...........
 
Water Resources Investigations:
    Hydrologic monitoring, assessments
     and research:
        Ground water resources program..          5,421            6,422            5,945            +524            -477
        National water quality                   63,096           57,321           62,631            -465          +5,310
         assessment.....................
        Toxic substances hydrology......         13,919   ................         13,525            -394         +13,525
        Hydrologic research and                  13,876           13,680           13,987            +111            +307
         development....................
        National streamflow information          14,310           12,214           14,310   ..............         +2,096
         program........................
        Hydrologic networks and analysis         24,886           23,852           25,752            +866          +1,900
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Hydrologic                  135,508          113,489          136,150            +642         +22,661
           monitoring, assessments and
           research.....................
 
    Federal-State program...............         64,318           64,339           64,974            +656            +635
    Water resources research institutes.          6,000   ................          5,502            -498          +5,502
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Water Resources                 205,826          177,828          206,626            +800         +28,798
       Investigations...................
 
Biological Research:
     Biological research and monitoring.        133,502          127,619          132,816            -686          +5,197
    Biological information management            18,917           18,893           20,036          +1,119          +1,143
     and delivery.......................
    Cooperative research units..........         13,970           13,969           14,075            +105            +106
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Biological Research.....        166,389          160,481          166,927            +538          +6,446
 
Science support.........................         86,255           86,104           85,734            -521            -370
Facilities..............................         89,445           88,975           89,350             -95            +375
 
Adjustment for conservation spending....        -25,000          -13,578    ..............        +25,000         +13,578
Conservation............................         25,000           13,578    ..............        -25,000         -13,578
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL           914,002          867,338          914,617            +615         +47,279
       SURVEY...........................
          Appropriations................       (889,002)        (853,760)        (914,617)       (+25,615)       (+60,857)
          Conservation..................        (25,000)         (13,578)   ..............       (-25,000)       (-13,578)
                                         ===============================================================================================================
       MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE
 
Royalty and Offshore Minerals Management
 
OCS Lands:
    Leasing and environmental program...         38,573           37,633           37,633            -940   ..............

[[Page 817]]

 
    Resource evaluation.................         24,989           25,348           26,948          +1,959          +1,600
    Regulatory program..................         49,572           50,512           51,012          +1,440            +500
    Information management program......         14,894           24,050           22,050          +7,156          -2,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, OCS Lands...............        128,028          137,543          137,643          +9,615            +100
 
Royalty Management:
    Compliance and asset management.....         48,106           48,724           48,724            +618   ..............
    Revenue and operations..............         35,223           34,545           34,545            -678   ..............
    Indian allottee refunds.............             15               15               15   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Royalty Management......         83,344           83,284           83,284             -60   ..............
 
General Administration:
    Executive direction.................          2,003            2,030            2,030             +27   ..............
    Policy and management improvement...          4,036            4,095            4,095             +59   ..............
    Administrative operations...........         15,970           16,638           16,638            +668   ..............
    General support services............         20,016           20,862           20,862            +846   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, General Administration..         42,025           43,625           43,625          +1,600   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal (gross)..................        253,397          264,452          264,552         +11,155            +100
 
Use of receipts.........................       -102,730         -100,230         -100,230          +2,500   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Royalty and Offshore               150,667          164,222          164,322         +13,655            +100
       Minerals Management..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
           Oil Spill Research
 
Oil spill research......................          6,105            6,105            6,105   ..............  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE        156,772          170,327          170,427         +13,655            +100
                                         ===============================================================================================================
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND
               ENFORCEMENT
 
        Regulation and Technology
 
Environmental restoration...............            160              162              162              +2   ..............
Environmental protection................         77,741           79,159           79,159          +1,418   ..............
Technology development and transfer.....         12,151           12,593           12,593            +442   ..............
Financial management....................            477              485              485              +8   ..............
Executive direction.....................         12,271           12,693           12,693            +422   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Regulation and                  102,800          105,092          105,092          +2,292   ..............
       Technology.......................
 
Civil penalties.........................            275              275              275   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Regulation and Technology..        103,075          105,367          105,367          +2,292   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
     Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund
 
Environmental restoration...............        186,697          156,987          174,697         -12,000         +17,710
Technology development and transfer.....          4,136            4,164            4,164             +28   ..............
Financial management....................          6,070            6,179            6,179            +109   ..............
Executive direction.....................          6,552            6,705            6,705            +153   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Abandoned Mine Reclamation         203,455          174,035          191,745         -11,710         +17,710
       Fund.............................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING           306,530          279,402          297,112          -9,418         +17,710
       RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT......
                                         ===============================================================================================================
        BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
 
      Operation of Indian Programs
 
          Tribal Budget System
 
Tribal Priority Allocations:
    Tribal government...................        378,956          388,949          388,949          +9,993   ..............
    Human services......................        151,199          148,951          148,951          -2,248   ..............
    Education...........................         50,037           50,165           50,165            +128   ..............
    Public safety and justice...........          1,417            1,382            1,382             -35   ..............
    Community development...............         39,784           40,726           40,726            +942   ..............
    Resources management................         56,743           61,517           61,517          +4,774   ..............
    Trust services......................         49,205           58,383           58,383          +9,178   ..............
    General administration..............         24,815           25,461           25,461            +646   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Tribal Priority                 752,156          775,534          775,534         +23,378   ..............
       Allocations......................
 
Other Recurring Programs:
    Education:
        School operations:
            Forward-funded..............        436,427          452,984          442,985          +6,558          -9,999
            Other school operations.....         67,588           69,832           67,931            +343          -1,901
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, School                  504,015          522,816          510,916          +6,901         -11,900
               operations...............
 
        Continuing education............         41,118           39,118           43,118          +2,000          +4,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Education...........        545,133          561,934          554,034          +8,901          -7,900
 
    Resources management................         41,835           34,258           41,608            -227          +7,350
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Other Recurring Programs        586,968          596,192          595,642          +8,674            -550
 
Non-Recurring Programs:
    Community development...............          3,175   ................          3,000            -175          +3,000
    Resources management................         32,611           30,215           31,715            -896          +1,500
    Trust services......................         37,012           37,295           37,645            +633            +350
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Non-Recurring Programs..         72,798           67,510           72,360            -438          +4,850
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Tribal Budget System.......      1,411,922        1,439,236        1,443,536         +31,614          +4,300
                                         ===============================================================================================================

[[Page 818]]

 
             BIA Operations
 
Central Office Operations:
    Tribal government...................          2,649            2,654            2,654              +5   ..............
    Human services......................            909              907              907              -2   ..............
    Community development...............            886              875              875             -11   ..............
    Resources management................          3,476            3,488            3,488             +12   ..............
    Trust services......................          3,129            8,823            8,823          +5,694   ..............
 
    General administration:
        Education program management....          2,435            2,409            2,409             -26   ..............
        Other general administration....         44,622           53,334           53,334          +8,712   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, General                      47,057           55,743           55,743          +8,686   ..............
           administration...............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Central Office               58,106           72,490           72,490         +14,384   ..............
           Operations...................
 
Regional Office Operations:
    Tribal government...................          1,324            1,336            1,336             +12   ..............
    Human services......................          3,067            3,162            3,162             +95   ..............
    Community development...............            847              853              853              +6   ..............
    Resources management................          4,365            5,449            5,449          +1,084   ..............
    Trust services......................         23,669           24,383           24,383            +714   ..............
    General administration..............         29,407           29,040           29,040            -367   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Regional Office                  62,679           64,223           64,223          +1,544   ..............
       Operations.......................
 
Special Programs and Pooled Overhead:
    Education...........................         16,039           16,273           16,473            +434            +200
    Public safety and justice...........        160,652          161,368          166,543          +5,891          +5,175
    Community development...............          8,623            1,061            9,911          +1,288          +8,850
    Resources management................          1,311            1,307            1,307              -4   ..............
    General administration..............         80,477           81,152           81,152            +675   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Special Programs and            267,102          261,161          275,386          +8,284         +14,225
       Pooled Overhead..................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, BIA Operations.............        387,887          397,874          412,099         +24,212         +14,225
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Operation of Indian              1,799,809        1,837,110        1,855,635         +55,826         +18,525
       Programs.........................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
               BIA SPLITS
 
Natural resources.......................       (140,341)        (136,234)        (145,084)        (+4,743)        (+8,850)
Forward-funding.........................       (436,427)        (452,984)        (442,985)        (+6,558)        (-9,999)
Education...............................       (177,217)        (177,797)        (180,096)        (+2,879)        (+2,299)
Community development...................     (1,045,824)      (1,070,095)      (1,087,470)       (+41,646)       (+17,375)
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, BIA splits.................     (1,799,809)      (1,837,110)      (1,855,635)       (+55,826)       (+18,525)
 
              Construction
 
Education...............................        292,503          292,717          295,717          +3,214          +3,000
Public safety and justice...............          5,541            5,046            5,046            -495   ..............
Resources management....................         50,645           39,173           39,173         -11,472   ..............
General administration..................          2,179            2,182            2,182              +3   ..............
Construction management.................          6,264            6,134            6,134            -130   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Construction...............        357,132          345,252          348,252          -8,880          +3,000
 
 Indian Land and Water Claim Settlements
  and Miscellaneous Payments to Indians
 
White Earth Land Settlement Act (Admin).            625              625              625   ..............  ..............
Hoopa-Yurok settlement fund.............            250              250              250   ..............  ..............
Pyramid Lake water rights settlement....            142              142              142   ..............  ..............
Ute Indian water rights settlement......         24,728           24,728           24,728   ..............  ..............
Rocky Boy's.............................          7,950            5,068            5,068          -2,882   ..............
Great Lakes fishing settlement..........          6,254   ................  ..............         -6,254   ..............
Shivwits Band Settlement................          5,000           16,000           16,000         +11,000   ..............
Santo Domingo Pueblo Settlement.........          2,000            3,136            3,136          +1,136   ..............
Colorado Ute Settlement.................          8,000            8,000            8,000   ..............  ..............
Torres-Martinez Settlement..............          6,000   ................  ..............         -6,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Miscellaneous Payments to           60,949           57,949           57,949          -3,000   ..............
       Indians..........................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 Indian Guaranteed Loan Program Account
 
Indian guaranteed loan program account..          4,986            5,493            5,493            +507   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS...      2,222,876        2,245,804        2,267,329         +44,453         +21,525
                                         ===============================================================================================================
          DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES
 
             Insular Affairs
 
        Assistance to Territories
 
Territorial Assistance:
    Office of Insular Affairs...........          4,528            5,295            5,295            +767   ..............
    Technical assistance................         16,961            7,461           12,461          -4,500          +5,000
    Maintenance assistance fund.........          2,300            2,300            2,300   ..............  ..............
    Brown tree snake....................          2,350            2,350            2,350   ..............  ..............
    Insular management controls.........          1,491            1,491            1,491   ..............  ..............
    Coral reef initiative...............            500              500              500   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Territorial Assistance..         28,130           19,397           24,397          -3,733          +5,000
 
American Samoa: Operations grants.......         23,100           23,100           23,100   ..............  ..............
 
Northern Marianas: Covenant grants......         27,720           27,720           27,720   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Assistance to Territories..         78,950           70,217           75,217          -3,733          +5,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
       Compact of Free Association
 
Compact of Free Association--Federal              7,354            7,354            7,354   ..............  ..............
 services...............................

[[Page 819]]

 
    Mandatory payments--program grant            14,500           12,000           12,000          -2,500   ..............
     assistance.........................
Enewetak support........................          1,391            1,391            1,571            +180            +180
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Compact of Free Association         23,245           20,745           20,925          -2,320            +180
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      Total, Insular Affairs............        102,195           90,962           96,142          -6,053          +5,180
                                         ===============================================================================================================
         Departmental Management
 
Departmental direction..................         12,964           13,405           13,405            +441   ..............
Management and coordination.............         24,905           26,455           26,455          +1,550   ..............
Hearings and appeals....................          8,559            8,198            8,198            -361   ..............
Central services........................         20,425           26,429           23,528          +3,103          -2,901
Bureau of Mines workers compensation/               888            4,109              841             -47          -3,268
 unemployment...........................
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-         2,205   ................  ..............         -2,205   ..............
 117)...................................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental Management....         69,946           78,596           72,427          +2,481          -6,169
                                         ===============================================================================================================
         Office of the Solicitor
 
Legal services..........................         37,276           38,432           38,432          +1,156   ..............
General administration..................          7,724            9,341            9,341          +1,617   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Solicitor....         45,000           47,773           47,773          +2,773   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
       Office of Inspector General
 
Audit...................................         18,680           19,782           19,580            +900            -202
Investigations..........................          6,763            7,266            7,213            +450             -53
 
Program integrity.......................          1,457            1,496            1,488             +31              -8
Policy and management...................          7,402            8,115            7,958            +556            -157
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Inspector General         34,302           36,659           36,239          +1,937            -420
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 Office of Special Trustee for American
                 Indians
 
         Federal Trust Programs
 
Program operations, support, and                 96,728          148,246          148,246         +51,518   ..............
 improvements...........................
Executive direction.....................          2,496            2,781            2,781            +285   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Trust programs.....         99,224          151,027          151,027         +51,803   ..............
 
    Indian Land Consolidation Program
 
Indian land consolidation...............         10,980            7,980           10,980   ..............         +3,000
Indian land consolidation (conservation)  ..............  ................  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Special Trustee          110,204          159,007          162,007         +51,803          +3,000
       for American Indians.............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
    National Indian Gaming Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...................  ..............           2,000    ..............  ..............         -2,000
 
 Natural Resource Damage Assessment Fund
 
Damage assessments......................          4,165            3,927            3,927            -238   ..............
Program management......................          1,332            1,361            1,361             +29   ..............
Restoration support.....................  ..............             250              250            +250   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Natural Resource Damage              5,497            5,538            5,538             +41   ..............
       Assessment Fund..................
 
 Federal Priority Land Acquisitions and
                Exchanges
 
Federal priority land acquisitions and    ..............           3,000    ..............  ..............         -3,000
 exchanges..............................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES.......        367,144          423,535          420,126         +52,982          -3,409
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, TITLE I, DEPARTMENT OF THE       9,496,419        9,450,753        9,430,482         -65,937         -20,271
       INTERIOR.........................
          Appropriations................     (8,431,939)      (8,501,952)      (9,460,482)    (+1,028,543)      (+958,530)
          Conservation..................     (1,006,258)        (978,801)   ..............    (-1,006,258)      (-978,801)
          Emergency appropriations......        (59,222)  ................  ..............       (-59,222)  ..............
          Contingent emergency                  (54,000)  ................  ..............       (-54,000)  ..............
           appropriations...............
          Rescission....................       (-55,000)        (-30,000)        (-30,000)       (+25,000)  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES
 
        DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 
             FOREST SERVICE
 
      Forest and Rangeland Research
 
Forest and rangeland research...........        241,304          242,798          247,804          +6,500             006
 
       State and Private Forestry
 
Forest Health Management:
    Federal lands forest health                  43,304           44,374           44,374          +1,070   ..............
     management.........................
    Cooperative lands forest health              25,000           25,038           25,038             +38   ..............
     management.........................
    Emerging pest and pathogens fund....  ..............          11,968           14,000         +14,000          +2,032
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Forest Health Management         68,304           81,380           83,412         +15,108          +2,032
 
Cooperative Fire Assistance:
    State fire assistance...............         25,310           25,353           25,853            +543            +500
    Volunteer fire assistance...........          5,053            5,040            5,040             -13   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Cooperative Fire                 30,363           30,393           30,893            +530            +500
       Assistance.......................
 
Cooperative Forestry:
    Forest stewardship..................         33,171   ................         32,221            -950         +32,221
        Conservation....................  ..............          49,526    ..............  ..............        -49,526

[[Page 820]]

 
    Stewardship incentives..............          3,000   ................  ..............         -3,000   ..............
Forest Legacy...........................  ..............  ................         74,000         +74,000         +74,000
    Forest legacy program (conservation)         65,000           69,797    ..............        -65,000         -69,797
Urban and Community Forestry............  ..............  ................         37,750         +37,750         +37,750
    Urban and community forestry                 36,000           36,235    ..............        -36,000         -36,235
     (conservation).....................
    Economic action programs............         35,680   ................         28,700          -6,980         +28,700
    Pacific Northwest assistance                  9,425   ................  ..............         -9,425   ..............
     programs...........................
    Forest resource information and               5,015            4,996            4,996             -19   ..............
     analysis...........................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Cooperative Forestry....        187,291          160,554          177,667          -9,624         +17,113
 
International forestry..................          5,263            5,036            5,500            +237            +464
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, State and Private Forestry.        291,221          277,363          297,472          +6,251         +20,109
          Appropriations................       (190,221)        (121,805)        (297,472)      (+107,251)      (+175,667)
          Conservation..................       (101,000)        (155,558)   ..............      (-101,000)      (-155,558)
                                         ===============================================================================================================
         National Forest System
 
Land management planning................         70,358           72,195           72,195          +1,837   ..............
Inventory and monitoring................        173,316          176,306          176,306          +2,990   ..............
Recreation, heritage and wilderness.....        245,500          252,444          252,444          +6,944   ..............
Wildlife and fish habitat management....        131,847          133,506          133,506          +1,659   ..............
Grazing management......................         34,775           35,850           35,850          +1,075   ..............
Forest products.........................        266,340          264,753          263,753          -2,587          -1,000
Vegetation and watershed management.....        190,113          190,644          190,644            +531   ..............
Minerals and geology management.........         48,956           53,635           53,635          +4,679   ..............
Landownership management................         88,434           91,016           91,016          +2,582   ..............
Law enforcement operations..............         79,000           80,142           80,500          +1,500            +358
Valles Caldera National Preserve........          2,800              984            3,150            +350          +2,166
Expedited consultations.................  ..............          15,000    ..............  ..............        -15,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Forest System.....      1,331,439        1,366,475        1,352,999         +21,560         -13,476
                                         ===============================================================================================================
        Wildland Fire Management
 
Preparedness............................        622,618          600,703          600,703         -21,915   ..............
Fire suppression operations.............        255,321          420,699          420,699        +165,378   ..............
Other operations........................        336,410          347,736          327,889          -8,521         -19,847
Suppression (contingent emergency               266,000   ................  ..............       -266,000   ..............
 operations)............................
Other operations (contingent emergency           80,000   ................  ..............        -80,000   ..............
 appropriations)........................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Wildland Fire Management...      1,560,349        1,369,138        1,349,291        -211,058         -19,847
                                         ===============================================================================================================
   Capital Improvement and Maintenance
 
Facilities..............................        185,447          200,500          168,652         -16,795         -31,848
Roads...................................        229,666          231,893          235,566          +5,900          +3,673
Trails..................................         70,075           68,829           69,572            -503            +743
Infrastructure improvement..............  ..............  ................         69,866         +69,866         +69,866
Infrastructure improvement                       61,000           50,866    ..............        -61,000         -50,866
 (conservation).........................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Capital Improvement and            546,188          552,088          543,656          -2,532          -8,432
       Maintenance......................
          Appropriations................       (485,188)        (501,222)        (543,656)       (+58,468)       (+42,434)
          Conservation..................        (61,000)         (50,866)   ..............       (-61,000)       (-50,866)
                                         ===============================================================================================================
            Land Acquisition
 
Forest Service:
    Acquisitions........................  ..............  ................        130,499        +130,499        +130,499
        Conservation....................        132,242          112,746    ..............       -132,242        -112,746
    Acquisition management..............  ..............  ................         17,764         +17,764         +17,764
        Conservation....................         13,000           17,764    ..............        -13,000         -17,764
    Cash equalization...................          1,500   ................  ..............         -1,500   ..............
    Forest inholdings...................          2,000   ................  ..............         -2,000   ..............
    Wilderness inholdings...............          1,000   ................  ..............         -1,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Land Acquisition...........        149,742          130,510          148,263          -1,479         +17,753
                                         ===============================================================================================================
Acquisition of lands for national                 1,069            1,069            1,069   ..............  ..............
 forests, special acts..................
Acquisition of lands to complete land               234              234              234   ..............  ..............
 exchanges..............................
Range betterment fund...................          3,290            3,402            3,402            +112   ..............
Gifts, donations and bequests for forest             92               92               92   ..............  ..............
 and rangeland research.................
Management of national forest lands for           5,488            5,542            5,542             +54   ..............
 subsistence uses.......................
 
Reduction for conservation funding......         -2,000           -2,000    ..............         +2,000          +2,000
Conservation (Youth Conservation Corps).          2,000            2,000    ..............         -2,000          -2,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, FOREST SERVICE.............      4,130,416        3,948,711        3,949,824        -180,592          +1,113
          Appropriations................     (3,470,674)      (3,609,777)      (3,949,824)      (+479,150)      (+340,047)
          Contingent emergency                 (346,000)  ................  ..............      (-346,000)  ..............
           appropriations...............
          Conservation..................       (313,742)        (338,934)   ..............      (-313,742)      (-338,934)
                                         ===============================================================================================================
          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 
          Clean Coal Technology
 
Deferral................................        -40,000   ................        -70,000         -30,000         -70,000
    (Transfer to Fossil Energy).........       (-33,700)        (-40,000)   ..............       (+33,700)       (+40,000)
 
 Fossil Energy Research and Development
 
Clean coal power initiative.............        116,300          110,000          150,000         +33,700         +40,000
    (By transfer from Clean Coal                (33,700)         (40,000)   ..............       (-33,700)       (-40,000)
     Technology)........................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Program level..............       (150,000)        (150,000)        (150,000)  ..............  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
Fuels and Power Systems:
    Central Systems:
        Innovations for existing plants.         23,500           21,200           22,200          -1,300          +1,000
 
        Advanced Systems:
            Integrated gasification              43,000           40,650           44,650          +1,650          +4,000
             combined cycle.............

[[Page 821]]

 
            Pressurized fluidized bed            11,000            9,100           11,400            +400          +2,300
             systems....................
            Turbines....................         18,500           14,000           17,000          -1,500          +3,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Advanced Systems         72,500           63,750           73,050            +550          +9,300
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Central Systems.         96,000           84,950           95,250            -750         +10,300
 
Distributed Generation Systems--Fuel
 Cells:
    Advanced research...................          4,000            3,000            4,000   ..............         +1,000
    Systems development.................         13,500           10,000           10,000          -3,500   ..............
    Vision 21-hybrids...................         13,500           11,500           13,500   ..............         +2,000
    Innovative concepts.................         27,124           22,500           34,000          +6,876         +11,500
    Novel generation....................  ..............           2,500            3,025          +3,025            +525
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Distributed Generation           58,124           49,500           64,525          +6,401         +15,025
       Systems--Fuel Cells..............
 
Sequestration R&D: Greenhouse gas                32,177           54,000           41,965          +9,788         -12,035
 control................................
 
Fuels:
    Transportation fuels and chemicals..         24,000            5,000           20,000          -4,000         +15,000
    Solid fuels and feedstocks..........          5,000   ................          4,000          -1,000          +4,000
    Advanced fuels research.............          3,200   ................          3,300            +100          +3,300
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Fuels...................         32,200            5,000           27,300          -4,900         +22,300
 
Advanced Research:
    Coal utilization science............          6,250            8,000            9,000          +2,750          +1,000
    Materials...........................          7,000            9,000           10,000          +3,000          +1,000
    Technology crosscut.................         10,750            9,150           11,150            +400          +2,000
    University coal research............          3,000            4,000            3,000   ..............         -1,000
    HBCUs, education and training.......          1,000            1,500            1,000   ..............           -500
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Advanced Research.......         28,000           31,650           34,150          +6,150          +2,500
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Fuels and Power Systems.        246,501          225,100          263,190         +16,689         +38,090
 
Gas:
    Natural Gas Technologies:
        Exploration and production......         20,500           15,450           22,450          +1,950          +7,000
        Gas hydrates....................          9,800            4,500            9,500            -300          +5,000
        Infrastructure..................         10,050   ................          9,050          -1,000          +9,050
        Emerging processing technology            2,250   ................          2,680            +430          +2,680
         applications...................
        Effective environmental                   2,600            2,640            2,640             +40   ..............
         protection.....................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Gas.................         45,200           22,590           46,320          +1,120         +23,730
 
Petroleum--Oil Technology:
    Exploration and production                   32,350           16,400           25,400          -6,950          +9,000
     supporting research................
    Reservoir life extension/management.         12,949            9,500            9,000          -3,949            -500
    Effective environmental protection..         10,700            9,500            9,900            -800            +400
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Petroleum--Oil                   55,999           35,400           44,300         -11,699          +8,900
       Technology.......................
 
Cooperative R&D.........................          8,240            6,000            8,340            +100          +2,340
Fossil energy environmental restoration.          9,500            9,715            9,715            +215   ..............
Import/export authorization.............          2,400            2,500            3,000            +600            +500
Headquarters program direction..........         18,700           15,820           18,900            +200          +3,080
Energy Technology Center program                 67,300           54,880           69,900          +2,600         +15,020
 direction..............................
General plant projects..................         13,450            2,000            6,000          -7,450          +4,000
Advanced metallurgical processes........          5,200            5,300            6,000            +800            +700
Use of prior year balances..............         -6,000          -14,000    ..............         +6,000         +14,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Fossil Energy Research and         582,790          475,305          625,665         +42,875        +150,360
       Development......................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      Alternative Fuels Production
 
Transfer to Treasury....................         -2,000   ................  ..............         +2,000   ..............
 
 Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves
 
Oil Reserves:
    Naval petroleum reserves Nos. 1 and           5,144            5,626            5,626            +482   ..............
     2..................................
    Naval petroleum reserve No. 3.......          7,235            7,250            7,250             +15   ..............
    Program direction (headquarters)....          9,992            7,955            7,955          -2,037   ..............
    Use of prior year funds.............         -5,000   ................  ..............         +5,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Naval Petroleum and Oil             17,371           20,831           20,831          +3,460   ..............
       Shale Reserves...................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
       Elk Hills School Lands Fund
 
Elk Hills school lands fund.............  ..............          36,000    ..............  ..............        -36,000
    Advance appropriations, Fiscal Year          36,000   ................         36,000   ..............        +36,000
     2003...............................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Elk Hills School Lands Fund         36,000           36,000           36,000   ..............  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
           Energy Conservation
 
Building Technology, State and Community
 Sector:
    Building research and standards:
        Technology roadmaps and                   6,857            2,357            2,357          -4,500   ..............
         competitive R&D................
        Residential buildings                    12,478           13,478           13,478          +1,000   ..............
         integration....................
        Commercial buildings integration          4,510            5,010            5,010            +500   ..............
        Equipment, materials and tools..         38,547           31,718           37,018          -1,529          +5,300
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Building research            62,392           52,563           57,863          -4,529          +5,300
           and standards................
 
    Building Technology Assistance:
        Weatherization assistance.......        230,000          277,100          225,000          -5,000         -52,100
        State energy program............         45,000           38,798           45,000   ..............         +6,202
        Community partnerships..........         18,788           20,037           20,037          +1,249   ..............
        Energy star program.............          3,000            6,200            5,000          +2,000          -1,200
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Building technology         296,788          342,135          295,037          -1,751         -47,098
           assistance...................
 

[[Page 822]]

 
    Cooperative programs with States....          2,000   ................  ..............         -2,000   ..............
    Energy efficiency science initiative          4,000   ................  ..............         -4,000   ..............
    Management and planning.............         15,090           14,093           14,093            -997   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Building Technology,            380,270          408,791          366,993         -13,277         -41,798
       State and Community Sector.......
 
Federal Energy Management Program:
    Program activities..................         18,900           23,425           22,425          +3,525          -1,000
    Program direction...................          4,400            4,455            4,455             +55   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Federal Energy                   23,300           27,880           26,880          +3,580          -1,000
       Management Program...............
 
Industry Sector:
    Industries of the future (specific).         72,624           71,615           71,615          -1,009   ..............
    Industries of the future                     60,900           57,109           59,609          -1,291          +2,500
     (crosscutting).....................
    Cooperative programs with States....          2,000            2,000            2,000   ..............  ..............
    Energy efficiency science initiative          4,000   ................  ..............         -4,000   ..............
    Management and planning.............          9,400            7,635            7,635          -1,765   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Industry Sector.........        148,924          138,359          140,859          -8,065          +2,500
 
Power Technologies:
    Distributed generation technologies          61,896           62,284           63,534          +1,638          +1,250
     development........................
    Management and planning.............          1,950            1,620            1,620            -330   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Power Technologies......         63,846           63,904           65,154          +1,308          +1,250
 
Transportation:
    Vehicle technology R&D..............        155,122          149,280          157,280          +2,158          +8,000
    Fuels utilization R&D...............         25,908           18,483           23,173          -2,735          +4,690
    Materials technologies..............         40,293           29,800           37,800          -2,493          +8,000
    Technology deployment...............         15,160           15,000           16,000            +840          +1,000
    Cooperative programs with States....          2,000   ................  ..............         -2,000   ..............
    Energy efficiency science initiative          4,000   ................  ..............         -4,000   ..............
    Management and planning.............         10,232           10,101           10,101            -131   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Transportation..........        252,715          222,664          244,354          -8,361         +21,690
 
Policy and management...................         43,750           40,053           40,053          -3,697   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Energy Conservation........        912,805          901,651          884,293         -28,512         -17,358
                                         ===============================================================================================================
           Economic Regulation
 
Office of Hearings and Appeals..........          1,996            1,487            1,487            -509   ..............
 
       Strategic Petroleum Reserve
 
Storage facilities development and              154,009          154,856          158,856          +4,847          +4,000
 operations.............................
Home heating oil reserve................          8,000   ................  ..............         -8,000   ..............
Management..............................         17,000           14,000           14,000          -3,000   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Strategic Petroleum Reserve        179,009          168,856          172,856          -6,153          +4,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
          SPR Petroleum Account
 
Oil acquisition.........................  ..............          11,000            7,000          +7,000          -4,000
 
   Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve
 
Northeast home heating oil reserve......  ..............           8,000            6,000          +6,000          -2,000
 
    Energy Information Administration
 
National Energy Information System......         78,499           80,611           80,611          +2,112   ..............
Use of prior year balances..............  ..............            -500             -500            -500   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Energy Information                  78,499           80,111           80,111          +1,612   ..............
       Administration...................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY.......      1,766,470        1,703,241        1,764,243          -2,227         +61,002
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
 
          INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE
 
         Indian Health Services
 
Clinical Services:
    IHS and tribal health delivery:
        Hospital and health clinic            1,153,711        1,188,540        1,192,705         +38,994          +4,165
         programs.......................
        Dental health program...........         95,305          100,085          100,085          +4,780   ..............
        Mental health program...........         47,142           50,626           50,626          +3,484   ..............
        Alcohol and substance abuse             135,005          137,744          137,744          +2,739   ..............
         program........................
    Contract care.......................        460,776          468,130          468,130          +7,354   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Clinical Services.......      1,891,939        1,945,125        1,949,290         +57,351          +4,165
 
Preventive Health:
    Public health nursing...............         37,781           39,875           39,875          +2,094   ..............
    Health education....................         10,628           11,063           11,063            +435   ..............
    Community health representatives             49,789           50,774           50,774            +985   ..............
     program............................
    Immunization (Alaska)...............          1,526            1,556            1,556             +30   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Preventive Health.......         99,724          103,268          103,268          +3,544   ..............
 
Urban health projects...................         30,947           31,528           31,528            +581   ..............
Indian health professions...............         31,165           35,373           31,318            +153          -4,055
Tribal management.......................          2,406            2,406            2,406   ..............  ..............
Direct operations.......................         55,323           54,474           57,248          +1,925          +2,774
Self-governance.........................          9,876           10,089           10,089            +213   ..............
Contract support costs..................        268,234          270,734          270,734          +2,500   ..............
 
Medicare/Medicaid Reimbursements:              (499,985)        (449,985)        (449,985)       (-50,000)  ..............
 Hospital and clinic accreditation (Est.
 collecting)............................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Indian Health Services.....      2,389,614        2,452,997        2,455,881         +66,267          +2,884
                                         ===============================================================================================================

[[Page 823]]

 
        Indian Health Facilities
 
Maintenance and improvement.............         46,331           47,331           47,331          +1,000   ..............
Sanitation facilities...................         93,827           93,983           93,827   ..............           -156
Construction facilities.................         86,260           72,000           74,819         -11,441          +2,819
Facilities and environmental health             126,775          132,963          133,119          +6,344            +156
 support................................
Equipment...............................         16,294           16,294           16,294   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Indian Health Facilities...        369,487          362,571          365,390          -4,097          +2,819
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE......      2,759,101        2,815,568        2,821,271         +62,170          +5,703
                                         ===============================================================================================================
         OTHER RELATED AGENCIES
 
    OFFICE OF NAVAJO AND HOPI INDIAN
               RELOCATION
 
Salaries and expenses...................         15,148           14,491           14,491            -657   ..............
 
 INSTITUTE OF AMERICAN INDIAN AND ALASKA
   NATIVE CULTURE AND ARTS DEVELOPMENT
 
Payment to the Institute................          4,490            5,130            5,130            +640   ..............
 
         SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
 
          Salaries and Expenses
 
Museum and Research Institutes:
     Anacostia Museum and Center for              1,932            1,981            1,981             +49   ..............
     African American History and
     Culture............................
    Archives of American Art............          1,738            1,802            1,802             +64   ..............
    Arthur M. Sackler Gallery/Freer               6,098            6,168            6,168             +70   ..............
     Gallery of Art.....................
    Center for Folklife and Cultural              1,850            1,911            1,911             +61   ..............
     Heritage...........................
    Cooper-Hewitt, National Design                2,942            3,050            3,050            +108   ..............
     Museum.............................
    Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture                4,771            4,724            4,724             -47   ..............
     Garden.............................
    National Air and Space Museum.......         16,599           20,402           20,402          +3,803   ..............
    National Museum of African Art......          4,334            4,464            4,464            +130   ..............
    National Museum of American Art.....          8,265            8,327            8,327             +62   ..............
    National Museum of American History.         20,800           21,604           23,604          +2,804          +2,000
    National Museum of the American              27,899           33,616           33,616          +5,717   ..............
     Indian.............................
    National Museum of Natural History..         43,404           44,982           44,982          +1,578   ..............
    National Portrait Gallery...........          5,626            5,550            5,550             -76   ..............
    National Zoological Park............         22,027           24,275           24,275          +2,248   ..............
    Astrophysical Observatory...........         20,546           21,121           21,121            +575   ..............
    Center for Materials Research and             3,357            3,460            3,460            +103   ..............
     Education..........................
    Environmental Research Center.......          3,391            3,510            3,510            +119   ..............
    Tropical Research Institute.........         10,581           11,029           11,029            +448   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtoal, Museums and Research             206,160          221,976          223,976         +17,816          +2,000
       Institutes.......................
 
Program Support and Outreach:
    Outreach............................          8,193            8,383            8,383            +190   ..............
    Communications......................          1,617            1,356            1,356            -261   ..............
    Institution-wide programs...........          5,506            6,006            6,006            +500   ..............
    Office of Exhibits Central..........          2,494            2,588            2,588             +94   ..............
    Major scientific instrumentation....          6,229            5,000            5,000          -1,229   ..............
    Museum Support Center...............          3,074            2,469            2,469            -605   ..............
    Smithsonian Institution Archives....          1,611            1,674            1,674             +63   ..............
    Smithsonian Institution Libraries...          7,437            8,488            8,488          +1,051   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Program Support and              36,161           35,964           35,964            -197   ..............
       Outreach.........................
 
Administration..........................         43,376           53,976           53,976         +10,600   ..............
 
Facilities Services:
    Office of Protection Services.......         37,383           58,674           58,674         +21,291   ..............
    Office of Physical Plant............         76,173           90,965           90,965         +14,792   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Facilities Services.....        113,556          149,639          149,639         +36,083   ..............
 
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-        21,707   ................  ..............        -21,707   ..............
 117)...................................
Offsetting reduction....................  ..............         -12,795          -12,795         -12,795   ..............
Rescission of prior year unobligated      ..............         -14,100          -14,100         -14,100   ..............
 funds..................................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and Expenses......        420,960          434,660          436,660         +15,700          +2,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
  Repair, Restoration and Alteration of
               Facilities
 
Base program............................         67,900           81,300           78,300         +10,400          -3,000
 
              Construction
 
Museum support center...................  ..............           2,000    ..............  ..............         -2,000
National Museum of the American Indian..         30,000           10,000           16,000         -14,000          +6,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Construction...............         30,000           12,000           16,000         -14,000          +4,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION....        518,860          527,960          530,960         +12,100          +3,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
         NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART
 
          Salaries and Expenses
 
Care and utilization of art collections.         26,019           25,721           27,920          +1,901          +2,199
Operation and maintenance of buildings           14,908           19,907           16,708          +1,800          -3,199
 and grounds............................
Protection of buildings, grounds and             14,837           17,845           17,845          +3,008   ..............
 contents...............................
General administration..................         13,203           14,746           14,746          +1,543   ..............
Emergency appropriations (Public Law 107-         2,148   ................  ..............         -2,148   ..............
 117)...................................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and Expenses......         71,115           78,219           77,219          +6,104          -1,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
  Repair, Restoration and Renovation of
                Buildings
 
Base program............................         14,220           16,230           16,230          +2,010   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART....         85,335           94,449           93,449          +8,114          -1,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================

[[Page 824]]

 
     JOHN F. KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE
             PERFORMING ARTS
 
Operations and maintenance..............         15,000           16,310           16,310          +1,310   ..............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law          4,310   ................  ..............         -4,310   ..............
     107-117)...........................
Construction............................         19,000           17,600           17,600          -1,400   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, JOHN F. KENNEDY CENTER FOR          38,310           33,910           33,910          -4,400   ..............
       THE PERFORMING ARTS..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 WOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR
                SCHOLARS
 
          Salaries and Expenses
 
Fellowship program......................          1,218            1,259            1,259             +41   ..............
Scholar support.........................            615              659              659             +44   ..............
Public service..........................          2,164            2,261            2,261             +97   ..............
General administration..................          1,656            1,968            1,968            +312   ..............
Smithsonian fee.........................            208              208              208   ..............  ..............
Conference planning.....................          1,770            1,968            1,968            +198   ..............
Space...................................            165              165              165   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, WOODROW WILSON CENTER......          7,796            8,488            8,488            +692   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE
               HUMANITIES
 
     National Endowment for the Arts
 
        Grants and Administration
 
Grants:
    Direct grants.......................         47,827           47,271           46,862            -965            -409
    Challenge America grants............  ..............  ................         17,000         +17,000         +17,000
 
State partnerships:
    State and regional..................         25,118           24,802           25,118   ..............           +316
    Underserved set-aside...............          6,805            6,712            6,805   ..............            +93
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, State partnerships......         31,923           31,514           31,923   ..............           +409
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Grants..................         79,750           78,785           95,785         +16,035         +17,000
 
Program support.........................          1,154            1,304            1,304            +150   ..............
Administration..........................         17,330           19,400           19,400          +2,070   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Arts.......................         98,234           99,489          116,489         +18,255         +17,000
                                         ===============================================================================================================
  National Endowment for the Humanities
 
        Grants and Administration
 
Grants:
    Federal/State partnership...........         31,829           31,829           31,829   ..............  ..............
    Preservation and access.............         18,905           18,905           18,905   ..............  ..............
    Public programs.....................         13,114           13,114           13,114   ..............  ..............
    Research programs...................         13,063           13,063           13,063   ..............  ..............
    Education programs..................         12,624           12,624           12,624   ..............  ..............
    Program development.................            397              397              397   ..............  ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Grants..................         89,932           89,932           89,932   ..............  ..............
 
Administrative Areas: Administration....         18,450           19,700           19,700          +1,250   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Grants and Administration..        108,382          109,632          109,632          +1,250   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
             Matching Grants
 
Treasury funds..........................          4,000            5,686            5,686          +1,686   ..............
Challenge grants........................         10,436           10,436           10,436   ..............  ..............
Regional humanities centers.............          1,686   ................  ..............         -1,686   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Matching Grants............         16,122           16,122           16,122   ..............  ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      Total, Humanities.................        124,504          125,754          125,754          +1,250   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
Challenge America grants................         17,000           17,000    ..............        -17,000         -17,000
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      TOTAL, NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE         266,637          242,243          242,243         -24,394   ..............
       ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES..........
                                         ===============================================================================================================
         COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS
 
Salaries and expenses...................          1,224            1,224            1,224   ..............  ..............
 
   NATIONAL CAPITAL ARTS AND CULTURAL
                 AFFAIRS
 
Grants..................................          7,000            7,000            7,000   ..............  ..............
 
      ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC
              PRESERVATION
 
Salaries and expenses...................          3,400            3,667            3,667            +267   ..............
 
  NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION
 
Salaries and expenses...................          7,253            7,253            7,253   ..............  ..............
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law            758   ................  ..............           -758   ..............
     107-117)...........................
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National Capital Planning            8,011            7,253            7,253            -758   ..............
       Commission.......................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
 
 UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
 
Holocaust Memorial Museum...............         36,028           38,663           38,663          +2,635   ..............
 
             PRESIDIO TRUST
 
Operations..............................         23,125           21,327           21,327          -1,798   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 825]]

 
      Total, Presidio Trust.............         23,125           21,327           21,327          -1,798   ..............
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, TITLE II, RELATED AGENCIES.      9,671,351        9,473,325        9,543,143        -128,208         +69,818
          Appropriations................     (8,986,686)      (9,148,491)      (9,591,243)      (+604,557)      (+442,752)
          Conservation..................       (313,742)        (338,934)   ..............      (-313,742)      (-338,934)
          Advance appropriations........        (36,000)  ................        (36,000)  ..............       (+36,000)
          Emergency appropriations......        (28,923)  ................  ..............       (-28,923)  ..............
          Contingent emergency                 (346,000)  ................  ..............      (-346,000)  ..............
           appropriations...............
          Rescission....................  ..............        (-14,100)        (-14,100)       (-14,100)  ..............
          Deferrals.....................       (-40,000)  ................       (-70,000)       (-30,000)       (-70,000)
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      TOTAL, TITLE IV, WILDLAND FIRE      ..............  ................        825,000        +825,000        +825,000
       MANAGEMENT.......................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
   TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 
Bureau of Land Management...............      1,872,597        1,825,422        1,861,458         -11,139         +36,036
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service..........      1,276,424        1,283,364        1,213,108         -63,316         -70,256
National Park Service...................      2,380,074        2,355,561        2,286,305         -93,769         -69,256
United States Geological Survey.........        914,002          867,338          914,617            +615         +47,279
Minerals Management Service.............        156,772          170,327          170,427         +13,655            +100
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and        306,530          279,402          297,112          -9,418         +17,710
 Enforcement............................
Bureau of Indian Affairs................      2,222,876        2,245,804        2,267,329         +44,453         +21,525
Departmental Offices....................        367,144          423,535          420,126         +52,982          -3,409
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Title I--Department of the       9,496,419        9,450,753        9,430,482         -65,937         -20,271
       Interior.........................
                                         ===============================================================================================================
       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES
 
Forest Service..........................      4,130,416        3,948,711        3,949,824        -180,592          +1,113
Department of Energy:                        (1,766,470)      (1,703,241)      (1,764,243)        (-2,227)       (+61,002)
    Clean Coal Technology...............        -40,000   ................        -70,000         -30,000         -70,000
    Fossil Energy Research and                  582,790          475,305          625,665         +42,875        +150,360
     Development........................
    Alternative Fuels Production........         -2,000   ................  ..............         +2,000   ..............
    Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale                17,371           20,831           20,831          +3,460   ..............
     Reserves...........................
    Elk Hills School Lands Fund.........         36,000           36,000           36,000   ..............  ..............
    Energy Conservation.................        912,805          901,651          884,293         -28,512         -17,358
    Economic Regulation.................          1,996            1,487            1,487            -509   ..............
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve.........        179,009          168,856          172,856          -6,153          +4,000
    SPR Petroleum Account...............  ..............          11,000            7,000          +7,000          -4,000
    Northeast home heating oil reserve..  ..............           8,000            6,000          +6,000          -2,000
    Energy Information Administration...         78,499           80,111           80,111          +1,612   ..............
Indian Health Service...................      2,759,101        2,815,568        2,821,271         +62,170          +5,703
Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian                 15,148           14,491           14,491            -657   ..............
 Relocation.............................
Institute of American Indian and Alaska           4,490            5,130            5,130            +640   ..............
 Native Culture and Arts Development....
Smithsonian Institution.................        518,860          527,960          530,960         +12,100          +3,000
National Gallery of Art.................         85,335           94,449           93,449          +8,114          -1,000
John F. Kennedy Center for the                   38,310           33,910           33,910          -4,400   ..............
 Performing Arts........................
Woodrow Wilson International Center for           7,796            8,488            8,488            +692   ..............
 Scholars...............................
National Endowment for the Arts.........         98,234           99,489          116,489         +18,255         +17,000
National Endowment for the Humanities...        124,504          125,754          125,754          +1,250   ..............
Institute of Museum and Library Services         26,899   ................  ..............        -26,899   ..............
Challenge America Arts Fund.............         17,000           17,000    ..............        -17,000         -17,000
Commission of Fine Arts.................          1,224            1,224            1,224   ..............  ..............
National Capital Arts and Cultural                7,000            7,000            7,000   ..............  ..............
 Affairs................................
Advisory Council on Historic                      3,400            3,667            3,667            +267   ..............
 Preservation...........................
National Capital Planning Commission....          8,011            7,253            7,253            -758   ..............
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.         36,028           38,663           38,663          +2,635   ..............
Presidio Trust..........................         23,125           21,327           21,327          -1,798   ..............
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Title II--Related Agencies.      9,671,351        9,473,325        9,543,143        -128,208         +69,818
                                         ===============================================================================================================
      GRAND TOTAL.......................     19,167,770       18,924,078       18,973,625        -194,145         +49,547
          Appropriations................    (17,847,770)     (17,606,343)     (18,973,625)    (+1,125,855)    (+1,367,282)
          Conservation..................     (1,320,000)      (1,317,735)   ..............    (-1,320,000)    (-1,317,735)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

   Mr. Specter, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for Departments of Labor, Health and 
     Human Services, and Education and related agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other 
     purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the 
     bill do pass.


                       Amount of budget authority

Total bill as reported to Senate.......................$430,133,003,000
Amount of adjusted appropriations, 2002.................412,247,133,000
Budget estimates, 2003..................................425,777,165,000
The bill as reported to the Senate:
    Over the adjusted appropriations for 2002...........+17,885,870,000
    Over the budget estimates for 2003...................+4,355,838,000

       SUMMARY OF BUDGET ESTIMATES AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       For fiscal year 2003, the Committee recommends total budget 
     authority of $430,133,003,000 for the Departments of Labor, 
     Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related 
     Agencies. Of this amount, $131,399,000,000 is current year 
     discretionary funding.

                      OVERVIEW AND BILL HIGHLIGHTS

       The Labor, HHS, and Education and Related Agencies bill 
     constitutes the largest of the non-defense Federal 
     appropriations bills being considered by Congress this year. 
     It is the product of extensive deliberations, driven by the 
     realization that no task before Congress is more important 
     than safeguarding and improving the health and well-being of 
     all Americans. This bill is made up of over 300 programs, 
     spanning three Federal Departments and numerous related 
     agencies. But the bill is more than its component parts. 
     Virtually every element of this bill reflects the traditional 
     ideal of democracy: that every citizen deserves the right to 
     a basic education and job skills training; protection from 
     illness and want; and an equal opportunity to reach one's 
     highest potential.
       This bill at the same time provides a safety net of social 
     protections for the needy while stimulating advances in human 
     achievement and the life sciences. At its

[[Page 826]]

     core, this bill embodies those defining principles by which 
     any free society must be guided: compassion for the less 
     fortunate; respect for family and loved ones; acceptance of 
     personal responsibility for one's actions; character 
     development; and the avoidance of destructive behavior.

                         HIGHLIGHTS OF THE BILL

       Physical Activity and Nutrition.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes a total of $940,467,000 for programs 
     to increase physical activity, improve nutrition, and reduce 
     obesity and overweight.
       Job Training.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $5,120,084,000 for job training programs, an increase of 
     $144,321,000 over the budget request.
       Worker protection.--The Committee bill includes 
     $1,239,500,000 to ensure the health and safety of workers, 
     including $462,314,000 for the Occupational Safety and Health 
     Administration and $271,841,000 for the Mine Safety and 
     Health Administration. The recommendation is an increase of 
     $61,000,000 over the 2002 level.
       Child Labor.--The Committee bill includes $148,015,000 for 
     activities designed to end abusive child labor. This is 
     $93,441,000 above the budget request.
       Persons With Disabilities.--To promote independent living 
     in home and community based settings, the Committee has 
     included $6,960,162,000 for services to persons with 
     disabilities. This includes $27,000,000 for programs 
     authorized under the Assistive Technology Act. In addition, 
     the recommendation includes $47,015,000 for the Office of 
     Disability Policy at the Department of Labor, and $40,000,000 
     for Real Choice Systems Change Grants through the Center for 
     Medicaid and Medicare Services.-
       National Institutes of Health.--A total of $27,167,926,000 
     is recommended to fund biomedical research at the 27 
     Institutes and Centers that comprise the NIH. This represents 
     an increase of $3,712,083,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level 
     and is the same as the budget request. This appropriation 
     completes the historic 5-year effort to double the funding 
     for the NIH.
       Minority health, education and training initiative.--The 
     Committee bill includes $2,116,187,000, an increase of 
     $144,258,000 over the 2002 appropriation for an initiative to 
     provide greater support for minority health, education and 
     training programs.
       AIDS.--The Committee bill includes $5,677,026,000 for AIDS 
     research, prevention, and services. This includes 
     $2,051,295,000 for Ryan White programs, an increase of 
     $140,570,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level, and 
     $860,293,000 for AIDS prevention programs at the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention.
       Bioterrorism initiative.--The Committee bill includes 
     $3,741,080,000 to fund efforts to address bioterrorism 
     threats.
       Health Centers.--The recommendation includes $1,533,570,000 
     for health centers, an increase of $75,706,000 over the 
     budget request and $190,000,000 over the fiscal 2002 level.
       Centers for Disease Control.--The Committee bill provides 
     $745,600,000 within the Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention to combat chronic disease and promote health. The 
     amount recommended is $55,370,000 over the budget request.
       Substance abuse.--The Committee bill provides 
     $2,278,379,000 for substance abuse prevention and treatment 
     programs. This is an increase of $63,985,000 over the 2002 
     enacted level. The recommendation restores proposed 
     reductions to substance abuse prevention programs and 
     supports an increase of $60,000,000 for the substance abuse 
     prevention and treatment block grant.
       Head Start.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $6,667,533,000 for the Head Start Program. This represents an 
     increase of $129,893,000 over the 2002 level and is the same 
     as the request.
       Low-income home energy assistance state grants.--The 
     Committee recommends $1,700,000,000 for heating and cooling 
     assistance for low-income individuals and families, 
     $300,000,000 more than the request and the same as the 2002 
     level.
       Education for the Disadvantaged.--The Committee has 
     provided $13,178,400,000 in grants to enhance educational 
     opportunities for disadvantaged children. This includes an 
     increase of $1,000,000,000 over the fiscal year 2002 amount 
     for grants to local education agencies, bringing the total to 
     $11,350,000,000.
       Teacher Quality.--The Committee recommends $2,850,000,000 
     for State grants to improve teacher quality. This is the same 
     as both the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget 
     request.
       English Language Acquisition.--The Committee recommends 
     $690,000,000 for bilingual education, an increase of 
     $25,000,000 over the administration request and the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       Student financial aid.--The Committee recommends 
     $13,151,500,000 for student financial assistance, an increase 
     of $866,000,000 over last year and $384,000,000 more than the 
     President's budget. The amount provided for the Pell Grant 
     Program will allow the maximum grant to be raised to $4,100, 
     an increase of $100 over the 2002 amount and the budget 
     request.
       Higher education initiatives.--The Committee bill provides 
     $2,047,640,000 for initiatives to provide greater 
     opportunities for higher education, including $832,500,000 
     for Federal TRIO programs.
       Education for individuals with disabilities.--The Committee 
     bill provides $9,691,424,000 to help ensure that all children 
     have access to a free and appropriate education, and that all 
     infants and toddlers with disabilities have access to early 
     intervention services. This represents an increase of 
     $1,018,620,000 over the 2002 level. Included in this 
     appropriation is an increase of $1,000,000,000 over last 
     year's level for grants to States.
       Rehabilitation services.--The bill recommends 
     $2,959,838,000 for rehabilitation services, an increase of 
     $14,025,000 above the amount provided in 2002. These funds 
     are essential for families with disabilities seeking 
     employment. The Committee restored funding for several 
     important programs proposed for elimination, such as 
     Supported Employment State Grants, Projects with Industry, 
     Recreational programs and programs for migrant and seasonal 
     farmworkers.
       Services for older Americans.--For programs serving older 
     Americans, the Committee recommendation totals 
     $3,034,636,000, an increase of $128,080,000 over the fiscal 
     year 2002. This recommendation includes $212,547,000 for 
     senior volunteer programs, $440,200,000 for community service 
     employment for older Americans, $359,000,000 for supportive 
     services and centers, $150,000,000 for family caregiver 
     support programs and $721,670,000 for senior nutrition 
     programs. For the medical research activities of the National 
     Institute on Aging, the Committee recommends $1,000,099,000. 
     The Committee recommendation includes $12,500,000 for the 
     Medicare insurance counseling program.


               PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND NUTRITION INITIATIVE

       Obesity has become our Nation's fastest rising public 
     health threat. All available data show that the number of 
     Americans who are obese or overweight have reached epidemic 
     proportions. An estimated 120 million people--61 percent of 
     American adults--are either overweight or obese. This puts 
     them at increased risk for chronic and life-threatening 
     diseases such as heart disease, stroke, cancer and diabetes. 
     Chronic diseases account for 7 out of every 10 U.S. deaths, 
     and more than 60 percent of medical care expenditures.
       Between 1980 and 1999 the number of obese American adults 
     nearly doubled from approximately 15 percent to 27 percent. 
     An estimated 300,000 premature deaths a year are associated 
     with obesity and overweight, an amount second only to 
     tobacco-related deaths. The total direct and indirect costs 
     attributed to overweight and obesity amounted to 
     $117,000,000,000 in 2000. The problem is not limited to 
     adults. Alarmingly, an increasing number of overweight youth 
     in this country are at risk for chronic health problems or 
     disabilities later in life. About 13 percent of children and 
     14 percent of adolescents are obese. The increase in obesity 
     and overweight among American youth over the past two decades 
     has been dramatic, more than tripling in the past two 
     decades. According to a recent study, hospital costs for 
     diseases related to childhood obesity have increased 
     threefold in the past 20 years. A recent study confirms that 
     Americans are becoming obese at younger ages: approximately 
     27 percent of U.S. adults are obese by the time they reach 
     their mid-30s, about twice the rate in the early 1960s.
       This dramatic upsurge in obesity has been associated with a 
     nationwide increase in diabetes. The prevalence of type 2 
     diabetes, the most common form of the disease, has tripled in 
     the last 30 years. At least 80 percent of patients with type 
     2 diabetes are overweight or obese. Type 2 diabetes was 
     commonly known in the past as ``adult onset'' diabetes. 
     However, research is showing a dramatic escalation in the 
     number of children diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Whereas 
     fewer than 4 percent of childhood diabetes cases in 1990 were 
     type 2, that number has risen to approximately 20 percent.
       Problems with obesity and diabetes also disproportionately 
     affect minority communities. Thirty percent of African 
     Americans are obese, compared to 21 percent of whites. Black 
     women were nearly twice as likely as white women to be obese, 
     and one quarter of Hispanic women are obese. According to the 
     CDC, African American are considered to have the highest 
     rates of both obesity and diabetes among all races and ethnic 
     groups. Among all groups, however, Native Americans have some 
     of the highest prevalence rates of overweight. Among the 
     highest rates reported are for American Indians in Arizona at 
     80 percent for women and 67 percent for men.
       The good news is that many of the chronic diseases linked 
     to obesity are preventable. Recent studies provide strong 
     evidence that prevention efforts focusing on diet, exercise 
     and other lifestyle changes can result in substantially 
     reduced risk among high-risk groups. Last August a major 
     clinical trial reported that Americans at high risk for type 
     2 diabetes can dramatically reduce their risk of getting the 
     disease with improvements to their diet and exercise. In 
     addition, exercise and nutrition can have health benefits for 
     individuals of all ages and at all levels of fitness.
       The Committee strongly believes a commitment to improving 
     physical activity and nutrition is imperative if we are to 
     reduce

[[Page 827]]

     chronic disease, premature deaths and related health care 
     costs. For this reason, the Committee has included a total of 
     $940,467,000 for programs designed to increase physical 
     activity, healthy lifestyles and nutrition. This is an 
     increase of $60,219,000 over last year's level.
       Recognizing the myriad physical activity promotion programs 
     being undertaken by different Federal agencies, the Committee 
     urges agencies receiving funds for this purpose under this 
     bill to take special measures to coordinate their activities. 
     In particular, the CDC's Division of Nutrition and Physical 
     Activity (DNPA) should develop mechanisms such as interagency 
     committees to coordinate with the Department of Education in 
     administering such as programs as the Carol M. White Physical 
     Education for Progress in order to leverage resources at the 
     local level. The Committee notes the recent establishment of 
     a Memorandum of Understanding between the CDC, the Department 
     of Interior and the Department of Agriculture in the area of 
     promoting physical activity as a valuable model.
     Nutrition and Physical Activity
       The Committee commends the substantial efforts that CDC is 
     directing to stem the obesity epidemic across all life 
     stages. CDC is coordinating national, State, and school-based 
     programs to research and implement health promotion and 
     public health education strategies and interventions to 
     increase physical activity levels and good nutrition at all 
     ages, to provide important health information, and to monitor 
     health and healthy behaviors in the population. CDC currently 
     funds 12 States to promote physical activity and good 
     nutrition to prevent and control obesity. The Committee 
     recommends $40,000,000 for primary prevention activities 
     related to Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity at CDC, 
     an increase of $12,495,000 over fiscal year 2002.
       The Committee recognizes the potential to respond to this 
     national problem through broad, population-based primary 
     prevention strategies. The Committee encourages CDC to build 
     on the successful CDC Guide to Community Preventive Services 
     and the Guidelines for Comprehensive Programs to Promote 
     Healthy Eating and Physical Activity, and to collect and 
     disseminate information, evaluations, and planning guides 
     that document a range of specific State and local policy and 
     environmental interventions that provide practical, 
     replicable approaches to improving nutrition and physical 
     activity.-The Committee recognizes coordination at the local 
     level is critical, especially among community health and 
     school-based efforts to promote physical activity and 
     nutrition. The Committee recommends that the CDC urge its 
     grantees to establish a position of statewide physical 
     activity coordinator to oversee a comprehensive physical 
     activity and nutrition program, in order to ensure resources 
     are utilized to their optimum potential and to avoid 
     duplicative efforts. This position could be funded through 
     DNPA grants or elsewhere and could be located in the State 
     Health Department, Governor's Council on Physical Fitness and 
     Sports, or in the State Education Department.
     Healthy Communities
       The Committee provides $20,000,000 to HRSA for the Healthy 
     Communities Innovation Initiative, a new pilot program 
     designed to prevent three of the most rapidly increasing 
     chronic conditions in this country: diabetes, asthma, and 
     obesity. The Committee is pleased that the Secretary has 
     championed this program, which will develop coalitions 
     between private and public organizations working in the areas 
     of prevention, medical, social, educational, business, 
     religious, and civic services. This program will encourage 
     the development of innovative efforts in five communities to 
     enhance access to services, encourage positive behavioral 
     changes, and improve community health. The Committee further 
     encourages the Secretary to stress the importance of weight 
     reduction as a tool in preventing heart disease.
     School Health
       Obesity rates were significantly reduced among girls in 
     grades 6-8 who participated in a school-based intervention 
     program. The Committee applauds CDC for establishing 
     effective coordinated school health programs in 20 States and 
     2 local education agencies. The Committee urges CDC to expand 
     its coordinated school health program. The Committee has 
     provided $58,235,000 for coordinated school health to address 
     risk behaviors such as tobacco use, unhealthy diets, and 
     physical inactivity at CDC. The Committee urges CDC and the 
     Department of Education to coordinate activities relating to 
     nutrition and physical activity which will help to reduce 
     obesity and prevent heart disease.
     Head Start
       The Committee commends the Department for its focus on 
     prevention as a key to improving the overall health and well-
     being of our Nation. The Committee also recognizes the 
     importance of good nutrition and physical activity among 
     young children for developing a fertile atmosphere for 
     cognitive development and school readiness. According to the 
     Nutrition Cognition National Advisory Committee at Tufts 
     University in Massachusetts, children without an adequate 
     diet may have trouble concentrating in school, participating 
     in play, bonding with peers, and performing at their 
     potential. Therefore, the Committee urges the Head Start 
     Bureau to review the scope of good nutrition and physical 
     activities which are presently being undertaken in response 
     to the Head Start Performance Standards, as well as the 
     current knowledge base on good nutrition and physical 
     activities for young children. Further, the Committee urges 
     the Head Start Bureau to review the activities presently 
     being undertaken by local programs to promote healthy bodies 
     as a prerequisite for strong minds and to identify best 
     practices currently employed by local programs. As a follow 
     up, the Committee encourages the Head Start Bureau, in 
     collaboration with the National Head Start Association, to 
     devise a plan for implementing a locally-determined but 
     coordinated effort to achieve the goals of a stronger, more 
     vibrant and effective nutritional and physical activity 
     component within Head Start programs. The Committee expects 
     that the Head Start Bureau will enter into a cooperative 
     agreement with the National Head Start Association to carry 
     out these activities.
     Physical Education
       Despite the well-publicized benefits of exercise, more than 
     60 percent of American adults do not get enough physical 
     activity to provide health benefits. This trend is not 
     limited to adults: more than a third of young people in 
     grades 9-12 do not regularly engage in physical activity. 
     Nearly one-half of American youths aged 12-21 years are not 
     vigorously active on a regular basis. Physical education (PE) 
     classes are important for ensuring that young people have a 
     minimal, regular amount of physical activity and for 
     establishing physical activity patterns that may be carried 
     into adulthood. Yet the Committee notes that daily enrollment 
     in physical education classes dropped from 42 percent to 25 
     percent among high school students between 1991 and 1995. In 
     order to help reverse this trend, the Committee 
     recommendation includes $70,000,000 for the Carol M. White 
     Physical Education for Progress program. This is an increase 
     of $20,000,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $70,000,000 over the request. This program provides grants to 
     local educational agencies and community-based organization 
     to initiate, expand and improve physical education program 
     for students in kindergarten through 12th grade. The PEP 
     program will help curb this Nation's increasing obesity 
     problem, which will in turn reduce the risk of developing 
     heart disease later in life.
     National Youth Fitness Survey
       The Committee believes a national instrument to assess 
     fitness levels of young people is needed to plan, execute and 
     evaluate a comprehensive effort to address obesity and 
     overweight. CDC conducted the National Children and Youth 
     Fitness Survey (NCYFS) twice during the mid-1980's, funded 
     under Departmental authority, but this survey was 
     discontinued. The Committee believes NCYFS should be re-
     established. The NCYFS should include the same measures of 
     fitness used previously, in order to allow for comparisons 
     with past data, and should incorporate new measures, in order 
     to reflect new understandings of appropriate fitness 
     assessment. In addition, in developing a new NC fiscal years, 
     consideration should be given to establishing measures 
     relating the provision of physical activity programs 
     (physical education, recess, and after-school) and academic 
     performance. The Committee envisions NCYFS to be done on 
     regular 5-year intervals in the future.


           PREVENTING AND REVERSING HEART DISEASE INITIATIVE

       Nearly 62 million Americans, young and old, live with the 
     effects of cardiovascular disease. The Nation's number one 
     killer, cardiovascular disease costs society an estimated 
     $330,000,000,000 annually in medical costs and lost 
     productivity. Challenges to combating this disease include 
     persistent geographic, racial, and ethnic disparities, the 
     increased prevalence of sedentary lifestyles, obesity rates, 
     and deficiencies in the use of proven and effective 
     treatments for those already afflicted with cardiovascular 
     disease.
       On May 16, 2002, the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and 
     Human Services and Education convened a hearing to more 
     closely examine the factors contributing to cardiovascular 
     disease, and to explore possible approaches to prevent, 
     control, and reverse its effects. Testimony heard from a 
     variety of top medical experts reflected a common theme: All 
     agreed that stress management, in conjunction with diet 
     modification, exercise, and pharmacological and/or surgical 
     intervention, can significantly improve the quality of life 
     for those confronted with cardiovascular disease. Witnesses 
     confirmed that cardiovascular disease usually begins several 
     years before symptoms appear. Due to the body's compensation 
     mechanisms many individuals function normally for years in an 
     asymptomatic state, unaware that the disease is taking hold. 
     Once symptoms become apparent, a disproportionate amount of 
     medical resources are devoted to dealing with those 
     symptomatic events, rather than taking preventive measures at 
     a much earlier stage. Integrating technology, behavioral and 
     metabolic medicine, and lifestyle modifications at an early 
     age would

[[Page 828]]

     shift that focus from reactive medicine to preventive 
     medicine. For example, relatively simple lifestyle 
     modifications, including exercise, nutrition plans and 
     learning a relaxation response to stress, such as yoga 
     techniques, have led to successful outcomes for individuals 
     who are otherwise at risk. Individuals who have adopted these 
     changes have experienced positive results, including weight 
     loss, lower blood pressure and cholesterol levels, improved 
     clinical symptoms and reduction in psychological distress. 
     For many years the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute 
     has supported a vigorous program of research on the 
     behavioral and psychological impact of cardiovascular 
     disease. Data obtained by NHLBI confirmed that mental stress 
     could cause myocardial ischemia or reduced blood flow.
       Current evidence suggests that all individuals at risk for 
     cardiovascular disease can benefit from stress reduction, but 
     that general health and well-being are greatly improved if 
     the first steps are taken during childhood. Among children, 
     in fact, stress management programs have been shown to 
     improve self-esteem, grade-point average and work habits 
     while reducing violent behavior. To that end, the educational 
     system in this country should be encouraged to incorporate 
     stress management programs into school curriculum.
       To address the prevention and reversing heart disease 
     initiative, the Committee has included $419,300,000 in 
     addition to the amounts provided as part of the physical 
     activity and nutrition initiative.
       Obesity and nutrition programs work hand in hand in 
     preventing and reducing heart disease. The Committee 
     encourages the Departments of Health and Human Services and 
     Education to coordinate the above programs and activities to 
     address both initiatives.
     Fund for Innovative Education
       As part of the preventing and reversing heart disease 
     initiative, the Committee has included $1,000,000 to design 
     programs to teach school children and teachers coping skills 
     to help ease both the short- and long-term effects of stress. 
     The Committee directs the Department to implement this 
     initiative as soon as possible. Programs such as these have 
     been scientifically proven to improve students' self-esteem, 
     self-efficacy, control, grade point average, work habits, 
     memory and cooperation.
     National Institute of Heart, Lung and Blood
       The Committee encourages the NHLBI, in conjunction with 
     Walter Reed Medical Center, to conduct a controlled, 
     prospective, randomized trial to compare the outcomes of 
     utilizing a demanding vegetarian diet versus a more liberal 
     diet that would also utilize lipid-lowering drugs, as well as 
     the impact of relaxation response-based stress management 
     programs. Such a trial could take place over a long period of 
     time to allow a long-term assessment of outcomes.
     Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service
       The Committee commends the Centers for Medicare and 
     Medicaid Service (CMS) for their work on a lifestyle 
     modification study comparing the efficacy and costs of two 
     cardiac approaches to reversing heart disease.
     Centers for Disease Control
       The Committee has provided $10,000,000 to increase CDC's 
     cardiovascular programs as part of the Committee's initiative 
     to prevent and reverse heart disease. The Committee urges the 
     CDC to initiate research to examine strategies to prevent and 
     reverse heart disease, including mind/body approaches to 
     stress management, yoga, diet modifications, and exercise 
     programs.
       Minorities continue to be underrepresented in the health 
     professions. To address disparities in the health care 
     workforce, as well as the shortages in underserved 
     communities, the Committee has included $305,564,000 for 
     health professions programs, including $125,330,000 for 
     centers of excellence, health careers opportunity programs, 
     faculty loan repayment and scholarships for disadvantaged 
     students. Also included is $25,051,000 for nursing workforce 
     diversity.
       To improve the health of racial and ethnic populations 
     through the development of effective health policies and 
     programs to eliminate disparities in health, the Committee 
     has provided $283,258,000 including $186,929,000 for the 
     National Center on Minority Health and Health disparities and 
     $46,329,000 for minority health improvements. Also included, 
     to address areas hardest hit by the HIV-AIDS epidemic, is 
     $50,000,000 specifically targeted for minority AIDS programs.
       For Indian education programs to help increase student 
     achievement through early childhood, preschool, elementary 
     and secondary education and vocational programs, the 
     Committee has included $129,368,000. Programs for migrant and 
     Native American education and training are funded at 
     $579,101,000.
       To aid institutions with a significant percentage of 
     financially needy students, the Committee has provided an 
     increase of $36,788,000 over the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation for a total of $475,413,000. Included in this 
     amount is $82,000,000 for strengthening institutions, 
     $93,000,000 for Hispanic-serving institutions, $215,415,000 
     for historically black colleges and universities, $53,764,000 
     for strengthening historically black graduate institutions, 
     and Native Alaskan and Native Hawaiian institutions are 
     funded at $8,234,000.
       To assist States, colleges, middle and high schools serving 
     high percentages of low income students and improve 
     postsecondary education opportunities for low-income 
     individuals and first-generation college students, the 
     Committee has included $1,127,500,000 for the GEAR UP and 
     TRIO programs. To assist Howard University with academic 
     programs and the administration of the University hospital, 
     the Committee recommends $239,474,000. And to provide 
     minority and low-income college students with information, 
     preparation and financial assistance needed to gain access to 
     complete law school, $5,000,000 has been provided for the 
     Thurgood Marshall legal educational opportunity program.
       The increases provided for the above mentioned programs, 
     along with funding for the National Institutes of Health, the 
     Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the No child 
     Left Behind Act, will go a long way towards eliminating 
     health and education disparities.


                       SAFE MOTHERHOOD INITIATIVE

       Over the last decade, the Committee has expressed its 
     strong support for closing the gap in research on diseases 
     and conditions specific to women and of including women and 
     minorities in clinical research where they had previously 
     been ignored. The Committee recognizes that much progress has 
     been made to improve research and the quality of care for 
     women. Yet over the past year, the Committee has grown 
     increasingly concerned about the lack of progress that has 
     been made in reducing the rates of maternal mortality and 
     morbidity in the United States. The Committee notes that 
     there has been no decline in pregnancy-related deaths or 
     morbidity in 20 years. Although the Department of Health and 
     Human Services set goals to reduce pregnancy-related deaths 
     and illness set forth in Healthy People 2000 and again in 
     Healthy People 2010, it has failed to do so.
       Today, the United States ranks 20th out of 49 developed 
     countries in maternal mortality related deaths. About 1,000 
     women a year--two to three every day--die from pregnancy-
     related causes. African American women are four times more 
     likely to die from pregnancy-related illness or conditions; 
     and women over the age of 35 are two to three times more 
     likely to experience a pregnancy-related death compared to 
     women aged 20-25. The rate of pre-term labor and delivery 
     remains virtually unchanged as well.
       Pregnancy-related illness affect an even wider number of 
     women: in the United States one out of three pregnant women 
     experience a major medical complication at some point during 
     their pregnancy. And women who are high-risk, who have a 
     chronic condition face even more difficult pregnancies, 
     deliveries, and risk to their long-term health.
       Despite the need for accurate information on prescription 
     drug use by pregnant women, only 1 percent of FDA approved 
     drugs have been shown in controlled studies to show no risk 
     to pregnant women and their babies. And 80 percent of FDA 
     approved drugs lack adequate scientific evidence about use in 
     pregnancy. That means that pregnant women are left with 
     little or no knowledge about the safety of medications, 
     prescribed or over-the-counter, and their impact on the 
     fetus.
       The Committee believes it is time to live up to the 
     commitments articulated in Healthy People 2000 and 2010 to 
     reduce maternal mortality and morbidity and ensure a safe and 
     healthy pregnancy for all women. In fact, a recent National 
     Summit on Safe Motherhood held by the CDC, and cosponsored by 
     a range of agencies and organizations, laid the cornerstones 
     of a strategy to improve our Nation's commitments to healthy 
     pregnancies, healthy mothers, and healthy infants. The 
     Committee calls on the Secretary to put key elements of such 
     a safe motherhood initiative in place and has developed this 
     Safe Motherhood initiative to help achieve these goals, 
     including:
     Improving the Safety of Medications for Pregnant Women
       The Committee is very concerned about the lack of 
     scientific data and studies on the safety and dosing of drugs 
     for women who are pregnant. While drug testing in women 
     raises important ethical considerations, the Committee 
     believes that the NIH and FDA can develop appropriate 
     protocols and mechanisms to improve the quality of 
     information available to women and their health care 
     providers about the safety and proper dosing of drugs and 
     biologics taken during pregnancy. The Committee urges NIH to 
     work with the FDA to improve the quality of information on 
     drugs and biological products for women who are pregnant and 
     lactating through grants, contract or other appropriate 
     mechanisms to aid in promptly completing studies to determine 
     the safety and dosing for marketed drugs and biologics that 
     were not approved or licensed based on studies in pregnant 
     women. The Director shall be prepared to report to the 
     Committee at its annual review before the Committee on the 
     progress and activities.

[[Page 829]]


     Improving National Data and Information related to Maternal 
         Morbidity and Mortality
       The Committee provides the CDC $5,000,000 to establish a 
     demonstration program to improve data collection about 
     pregnancy-related complications and maternal mortality. CDC 
     shall award grants to at least four States for the 
     development of surveillance systems that use standard 
     definitions of maternal morbidity and mortality that have 
     been developed by the CDC in collaboration with the grant 
     recipients. The quality of data and information about 
     maternal morbidity and mortality is poor and unreliable. 
     States do not use standard definitions of maternal morbidity 
     or mortality. When States do collect data, it is impossible 
     to compare their data, know precisely what is happening 
     within the State, or to identify emerging trends across 
     States.
     CDC Safe Motherhood Activities
       The committee commends CDC for its groundbreaking National 
     Summit of Safe Motherhood and commends the agency for its 
     work on its Safe Motherhood Initiative. The Summit succeeded 
     in expanding our understanding of Safe Motherhood as a 
     critical woman's health issue and identified the troubling 
     lack of research and data on pregnancy-related issues. The 
     Committee has provided an increase of $2,000,000 to CDC to 
     further its work identified at the Summit and to continue to 
     carry out their existing Safe Motherhood activities.
     Research to Reduce Poor Pregnancy Outcomes--and Racial and 
         Ethnic Disparities
       The Committee provides CDC $2,000,000 to provide individual 
     grants to community-based organizations, public and private 
     research institutions and universities to conduct prevention 
     and health promotion research to focus specifically on 
     improving maternal outcomes in maternal morbidity and 
     mortality, eliminating racial disparities in maternal 
     morbidity and mortality, such as developing better health 
     care models, population-based studies, prevention strategies, 
     culturally sensitive and appropriate health care practice 
     models, improved outreach and efforts and funding for 
     minority organizations to provide technical assistance and 
     outreach in minority communities. The research should take 
     into consideration the role of stress, violence, 
     discrimination, nutrition, obesity, and access to quality 
     health care and health literacy.
     Substance abuse treatment
       According to the National Institute of Drug Abuse, more 
     than 5 percent of the 4,000,000 women who gave birth in the 
     United States in 1992 used illegal drugs while pregnant, 
     according to the first and only nationally representative 
     survey of drug use among pregnant women. That is an estimated 
     221,000 women gave birth that year while using illicit drugs 
     during their pregnancy. The Committee notes that when a 
     pregnant woman abuses drugs or alcohol, both she and her 
     unborn child may suffer harm. In addition, substance abuse 
     often creates or is accompanied by an array of social 
     problems for the abuser and those around her, including 
     violence, child abuse and neglect, and family dysfunction. 
     Therefore, the Committee has provided SAMHSA with $3,000,000 
     for residential treatment programs for pregnant women which 
     provide comprehensive treatment service strategies, including 
     outreach, intake and assessment, provision of comprehensive 
     services, and follow-up for women and their children in order 
     to reduce the harm caused to mothers and their children.


                          EDUCATION INITIATIVE

       The No Child Left Behind Act, approved overwhelmingly by 
     Congress in December 2001 and signed into law in January 
     2002, mandates the Nation's most sweeping education reforms 
     in decades. It signals a new relationship between the Federal 
     Government and public schools, one that is based on high 
     expectations for every student--and strict accountability for 
     success or failure. More than ever before, Federal dollars 
     will be tied to academic achievement; States, districts, and 
     schools must improve student performance, or face the 
     consequences.
       Most importantly, the law presumes that all children--
     regardless of race, ethnicity, disability, or proficiency in 
     English--can succeed academically. That is a powerful notion, 
     and it holds great potential to raise student performance 
     across the Nation.
       But that potential may not be maded if these high 
     expectations aren't backed up with enough resources to make 
     them attainable. While States and local communities provide 
     more than 90 percent of funding for elementary and secondary 
     education and our education system primarily is a State and 
     local responsibility, the Federal Government does have a 
     supporting role. That's why this education funding bill makes 
     targeted investments in programs that support State and local 
     education reform efforts. Hiring qualified teachers takes 
     more than lofty goals and good intentions; it also takes 
     money. So does replacing old textbooks, buying computers, 
     implementing successful curricula, and numerous other 
     measures that are critical to creating an environment where 
     children can learn. Educators and parents need to believe 
     their schools have enough money to give them a fighting 
     chance to meet the new mandates. Without that trust, public 
     opinion will quickly turn against the No Child Left Behind 
     Act's reforms, and the high expectations that are the 
     cornerstone of the law will be relaxed or ignored. That would 
     be a tragic result for the millions of today's students who 
     are receiving an inadequate education. For those reasons, the 
     Committee has responded by adding more than $1,700,000,000 
     for education over last year's historic increase in Federal 
     funding. Almost $800,000,000 of that amount is designated for 
     programs authorized by the No Child Left Behind Act.
     Title I grants to LEAs
       One of the Committee's top educational priorities was to 
     increase funding for Title I Grants to LEAs. Schools 
     receiving Title I aid are at the greatest risk of failing to 
     meet the academic standards mandated in the new law; they're 
     also the schools upon which the most accountability measures 
     have been placed. Therefore, the Committee has provided for 
     this account a record-high $11,350,000,000, an increase of 
     $1,000,000,000 over last year. The Committee allocated all of 
     this increase through the two funding formulas that are the 
     most targeted to the poorest schools.
     Teacher quality programs
       Another priority for the Committee in addressing the 
     mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act was to increase 
     funding for teacher quality programs, which can be used for a 
     variety of measures, including teacher recruitment and 
     retention, professional development, the reform of teacher 
     certification requirements, and class-size reduction. The No 
     Child Left Behind Act mandates that all teachers must be 
     ``highly qualified'' by the end of the 2005-06 school year; 
     in the near term, all Title I teachers hired after September 
     2002 must also meet that definition. Therefore, the Committee 
     has provided more than $3,350,000,000 for programs where 
     funds may be used for specific activities in support of 
     teacher quality.
     English language acquisition
       The No Child Left Behind Act establishes several new 
     accountability measures that specifically address limited-
     English-proficient (LEP) students. States will be required to 
     set annual yearly progress goals for the achievement of all 
     children as well as specific groups of children, including 
     LEP students. In addition, each State will be required to 
     develop annual measurable objectives for LEP students; these 
     objectives must track student progress in learning English 
     and district progress in making adequate yearly progress for 
     LEP students. The Committee recognizes that LEP students will 
     face many unique challenges in trying to meet these goals; 
     therefore, it has provided $690,000,000 for English language 
     acquisition State grants. While the increase in the overall 
     program is $25,000,000, States will receive an increase of 
     $75,000,000 over last year because less money is needed to 
     support categorical programs that were consolidated under the 
     No Child Left Behind Act.
     Other key education programs
       The Committee also directed additional funding to several 
     other programs that will help States, districts, and schools 
     meet the new education mandates. Among them:
       --The Committee has provided a $100,000,000 increase, as 
         requested by the administration, for the Reading First 
         program, for a total of $1,000,000,000. This program 
         provides State grants to improve reading instruction in 
         grades K-3.
       --The Committee has provided $175,000,000, an increase of 
         $12,500,000 over last year, for rural education programs.
       --The Committee has provided $13,000,000, an increase of 
         $3,000,000 over last year, for dropout prevention grants.
       --The Committee has provided $15,000,000, an increase of 
         $5,000,000, for school leadership programs to help 
         districts recruit and train principals.
       --The Committee has provided $37,584,000, an increase of 
         $2,584,000 over last year, for voluntary public school 
         choice programs; such programs help enable parents of 
         students in failing public schools to send their children 
         to better public schools.


              REPROGRAMMING AND INITIATION OF NEW PROGRAMS

       Reprogramming is the utilization of funds for purposes 
     other than those contemplated at the time of appropriation 
     enactment. Reprogramming actions do not represent requests 
     for additional funds from the Congress, rather, the 
     reapplication of resources already available.
       The Committee has a particular interest in approving 
     reprogrammings which, although they may not change either the 
     total amount available in an account or any of the purposes 
     for which the appropriation is legally available, represent a 
     significant departure from budget plans presented to the 
     Committee in an agency's budget justification.
       Consequently, the Committee directs that the Departments 
     and agencies funded through this bill make a written request 
     to the chairman of the Committee prior to reprogramming of 
     funds in excess of 10 percent, or $500,000, whichever is 
     less, between programs, activities, or elements unless an 
     alternate amount for the agency in question is

[[Page 830]]

     specified elsewhere in this report. The Committee desires to 
     have the requests for reprogramming actions which involve 
     less than the above-mentioned amounts if such actions would 
     have the effect of changing an agency's funding requirements 
     in future years, if programs or projects specifically cited 
     in the Committee's reports are affected or if the action can 
     be considered to be the initiation of a new program.
       The Committee directs that it be notified regarding 
     reorganization of offices, programs, or activities prior to 
     the planned implementation of such reorganizations.
       The Committee further directs that each agency under its 
     jurisdiction submit to the Committee statements on the effect 
     of this appropriation act within 60 days of final enactment 
     of this Act.


                           TRANSFER AUTHORITY

       The Committee has included bill language permitting 
     transfers up to 1 percent between discretionary 
     appropriations accounts, as long as no such appropriation is 
     increased by more than 3 percent by such transfer; however, 
     the Appropriations Committees of both Houses of Congress must 
     be notified at least 15 days in advance of any transfer. 
     Similar bill language was carried in last year's bill for all 
     three Departments.
       Prior Committee notification is also required for actions 
     requiring the use of general transfer authority unless 
     otherwise provided for in this Act. Such transfers 
     specifically include taps, or other assessments made between 
     agencies, or between offices within agencies. Funds have been 
     appropriated for each office funded by this Committee; it is 
     not the intention of this Committee to augment those funding 
     levels through the use of special assessments. This directive 
     does not apply to working capital funds or other fee-for-
     service activities.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

                      TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

                 Employment and Training Administration


                    training and employment services

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$5,484,834,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,975,763,000
Committee recommendation..................................5,120,084,000

       The Committee recommends $5,120,084,000 for this account in 
     2003 which provides funding authorized primarily by the 
     Workforce Investment Act [WIA]. This is $364,750,000 less 
     than the 2002 level, and $144,321,000 above the 
     administration request.
       Training and employment services is comprised of programs 
     designed to enhance the employment and earnings of 
     economically disadvantaged and dislocated workers, operated 
     through a decentralized system of skill training and related 
     services. This appropriation is generally forward-funded on a 
     July-to-June cycle. Funds provided for fiscal year 2003 will 
     support the program from July 1, 2003, through June 30, 2004.
       Beginning with the fiscal year 2000 appropriation, budget 
     constraints required that a portion of this account's funding 
     be advance appropriated, with obligations for a portion of 
     Adult and Dislocated Worker Employment and Training 
     Activities and Job Corps delayed until the following fiscal 
     year. This practice will continue in this year's 
     appropriation.
       Fiscal year 2000 was the first full year of operations 
     under the new Workforce Investment Act, beginning July 1, 
     2000 through June 30, 2001. The new legislation is 
     significantly enhancing employment and training services, 
     consolidating, coordinating, and improving programs utilizing 
     a local level one-stop delivery system. In concurring with 
     the President's budget request for the youth, adult, and 
     dislocated worker block grants, the administration expects 
     that current participant levels will be maintained, due to 
     the reported availability of large amounts of unspent funds 
     carried over from prior years. However, the committee is 
     aware that there is controversy over the accuracy of 
     financial reporting under the Workforce Investment Act, and 
     notes that the General Accounting Office has made several 
     recommendations to the Labor Department for improvements. 
     Therefore, the Committee intends to carefully monitor this 
     situation, recognizing the vital role of the workforce system 
     at a time of economic slowdown.
       Adult employment and training activities.--For Adult 
     Employment and Training Activities, the Committee recommends 
     $900,000,000. This is $50,000,000 less than the 2002 
     comparable level and the same as the budget request. This 
     program is authorized by the Workforce Investment Act and is 
     formula-funded to States and further distributed to local 
     workforce investment boards. Services for adults will be 
     provided through the One-Stop system and most customers 
     receiving training will use their individual training 
     accounts to determine which programs and providers fit their 
     needs. The Act authorizes core services, which will be 
     available to all adults with no eligibility requirements, and 
     intensive services, for unemployed individuals who are not 
     able to find jobs through core services alone.
       Dislocated worker employment and training activities.--For 
     Dislocated Worker Employment and Training Activities, the 
     Committee recommends $1,383,040,000, the same as the budget 
     request. This is an increase of $11,540,000 over the 2002 
     comparable level. Of this amount, $1,106,432,000 is 
     designated for State formula grants. This program, authorized 
     by WIA, is a State-operated effort which provides core 
     services, intensive services, training, and supportive 
     services to help permanently separated workers return to 
     productive, unsubsidized employment. In addition, States use 
     these funds for rapid response assistance to help workers 
     affected by mass layoffs and plant closures. The 
     recommendation includes $276,608,000 available to the 
     Secretary for activities specified in WIA, primarily to 
     respond to mass layoffs, plant and/or military base closings, 
     and natural disasters across the country, which cannot be 
     otherwise anticipated, as well as technical assistance and 
     training and demonstration projects.
       The Committee bill continues language authorizing the use 
     of funds under the dislocated workers program for projects 
     that provide assistance to new entrants in the workforce and 
     incumbent workers.
       The Committee recommendation includes, as it has in past 
     years, funding for dislocated worker projects aimed at 
     assisting the long-term unemployed.
       The Committee encourages efforts to make certain that 
     dislocated workers in low pay, entry-level jobs can qualify 
     for help under the Dislocated Worker Program and get a fair 
     share of the funding.
       The Committee is aware of the substantial worker 
     dislocation brought on by the closure of sugarcane 
     plantations and the rapidly increasing demand for food safety 
     training at all levels of food production. To meet these 
     needs, the Committee reiterates its recommendation in last 
     year's report to provide on-farm and off-farm food safety 
     training for dislocated sugarcane workers employed in the 
     agricultural and food sector. Due to economic reasons and 
     family dysfunction, elderly caregivers care for thousands of 
     preschool Hawaiian and part-Hawaiian children with little or 
     no preparation. The Committee urges the Department to expand 
     funding to programs which work to train and assist these 
     caregivers and the children they serve. The Committee was 
     pleased to learn from the Secretary that the administration 
     has established an interagency effort to address our Nation's 
     nursing shortage. The shortage is especially critical in 
     rural America and within various ethnic minority populations, 
     such as native Hawaiians. The Department is accordingly 
     strongly urged to work with nursing programs serving such 
     populations, and in particular, to ensure that summer 
     employment opportunities exist for nursing students.
       Youth activities.--For Youth Activities, the Committee 
     recommends $1,000,965,000, the same as the budget request. 
     Youth Activities, authorized by WIA, consolidates the Summer 
     Youth Employment and Training Program under JTPA Title IIB, 
     and Youth Training Grants under JTPA Title IIC. In addition 
     to consolidating programs, WIA also requires Youth Activities 
     to be connected to the One-Stop system as one way to link 
     youth to all available community resources. The purpose of 
     Youth Activities is to provide

[[Page 831]]

     eligible youth with assistance in achieving academic and 
     employment success through improving educational and skill 
     competencies and providing connections to employers. Other 
     activities include providing mentoring opportunities, 
     opportunities for training, supportive services, summer 
     employment opportunities that are directly linked to academic 
     and occupational learning, incentives for recognition and 
     achievement, and activities related to leadership 
     development, citizenship, and community service.
       Youth opportunity grants.--For Youth Opportunity Grants, 
     the Committee recommends $44,500,000, the same as the budget 
     request. Combined with funds from prior years, it is expected 
     that this amount will be sufficient to continue funding the 
     36 existing Youth Opportunity Grants that meet performance 
     goals. These grants are aimed at increasing the long-term 
     employment of youth who live in empowerment zones, enterprise 
     communities, and other high-poverty areas. Surveys conducted 
     by the Department of Labor have found employment rates for 
     out-of-school youth as low as 24 percent in selected high-
     poverty neighborhoods. Youth Opportunity Grants will attempt 
     to dramatically increase these employment rates, and thus 
     improve all aspects of life for persons living in these 
     communities.
       Job Corps.--For Job Corps, the Committee recommends 
     $1,518,550,000. This is $13,610,000 less than the budget 
     request, but $59,798,000 more than the 2002 comparable level. 
     The Committee applauds Job Corps for establishing 
     partnerships with national employers, and encourages Job 
     Corps to continue to work with both large employers and small 
     businesses to ensure that student training meets current 
     labor market needs. Job Corps should continue its efforts to 
     upgrade its vocational offerings and curricula to reflect 
     industry standards and skill shortages. Job Corps, authorized 
     by WIA, is a nationwide network of residential facilities 
     chartered by Federal law to provide a comprehensive and 
     intensive array of training, job placement and support 
     services to at-risk young adults. The mission of Job Corps is 
     to attract eligible young adults, teach them the skills they 
     need to become employable and independent, and place them in 
     meaningful jobs or further education. Participation in the 
     program is voluntary and is open to economically 
     disadvantaged young people in the 16-24 age range who are 
     unemployed and out of school. Most Job Corps students come 
     from disruptive or debilitating environments, and it is 
     important that they be relocated to residential facilities 
     where they can benefit from the highly structured and 
     carefully integrated services provided by the Job Corps 
     program. A limited number of opportunities are also available 
     for non-residential participation.
       The Committee encourages Job Corps to strengthen working 
     relationships with work force development entities, including 
     employers, that will enhance services to students and 
     increase students' career opportunities. The Department is 
     encouraged to continue its efforts to meet industry standards 
     in its occupational offerings through a multi-year process to 
     review, upgrade, and modernize its vocational curricula, 
     equipment, and programs in order to create career 
     opportunities for students in appropriate growth industries. 
     The Committee also continues to encourage the Department of 
     Labor's Employment and Training Administration to encourage 
     Job Corps centers to coordinate with community-based 
     organizations, such as substance abuse treatment centers, in 
     innovative ways.
       The Committee supports the goal of the Workforce Investment 
     Act of 1998 to integrate our Nation's many diverse job 
     training programs, and its approach of retraining the 
     national character of the Job Corps program within the new 
     framework. The Committee encourages the Department to 
     continue its work to develop national partnerships with major 
     regional and national employers to increase employment 
     opportunities for Job Corps graduates. The Department should 
     also continue to establish connections between Job Corps and 
     State workforce development programs, and between Job Corps 
     and other national and community partners, to provide the 
     most efficient, cost-effective services possible.
       Responsible Reintegration for Young Offenders.--The 
     Committee recommends $55,000,000 for Responsible 
     Reintegration for Young Offenders, the same as the fiscal 
     year 2002 level, to address youth offender issues. This large 
     scale WIA Pilot and Demonstration initiative will link 
     offenders under age 35 with essential services that can help 
     make the difference in their choices in the future, such as 
     education, training, job placement, drug counseling, drug 
     demand reduction activities, and mentoring, in order to 
     reintegrate them into the mainstream economy. Through local 
     competitive grants, this program would establish partnerships 
     between the criminal justice system and local workforce 
     investment systems, complementing a similar program in the 
     Department of Justice (DOJ). To maximize the impact of these 
     initiatives, the DOL and DOJ funds will be targeted to the 
     same communities and populations. An estimated 10,400 youth 
     will be served, and it is expected that 65 percent of program 
     graduates will get jobs, re-enroll in high school, or be 
     enrolled in post-secondary education or training.
       Native Americans.--For Native Americans, the Committee 
     recommends $57,000,000. This is the same as the 2002 
     comparable level. This program, authorized by WIA, is 
     designed to improve the economic well-being of Native 
     Americans (Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts, and Native Hawaiians) 
     through the provision of training, work experience, and other 
     employment-related services and opportunities that are 
     intended to aid the participants to secure permanent, 
     unsubsidized jobs.
       Migrant and seasonal farmworkers.--For Migrant and Seasonal 
     Farmworkers, the Committee recommends $80,770,000. This is 
     the same as the 2002 comparable level. This program, 
     authorized by WIA, is designed to serve members of 
     economically disadvantaged families whose principal 
     livelihood is derived from migratory and other forms of 
     seasonal farmwork, or fishing, or logging activities. 
     Enrollees and their families are provided with employment 
     training and related services intended to prepare them for 
     stable, year-round employment within and outside of the 
     agriculture industry.
       There are at least 3 million hard-working migrant and 
     seasonal farmworkers in America whose annual incomes are 
     below $10,000. At a time when most State budgets are 
     shrinking and many of the basic services provided by State 
     and local governments are being cut back, the Committee 
     recognizes the importance of sustaining a national 
     commitment, dating from 1964, to help alleviate the chronic 
     seasonal unemployment and under-employment that traps many 
     farmworker families in a cycle of poverty across generations 
     and that deprives many farmworker children of educational 
     opportunities and real prospects for better jobs at higher 
     wages. The Committee also recognizes that many State and 
     local government officials will be reluctant to fund this 
     training and related assistance for this vulnerable portion 
     of our Nation's workforce who migrate through many States 
     every year, even though the work they perform is essential to 
     the economic well-being of our Nation's farmers, growers, and 
     small businesses.
       The Committee recommendation of $80,770,000 for activities 
     authorized under Section 167 of the Workforce Investment Act 
     is reflected in two separate line items on the table 
     accompanying the Committee Report: ``Migrant and Seasonal 
     Farmworkers'' and ``National Activities/Other.'' Under the 
     Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers line item, the Committee 
     recommends $79,751,000. The Committee recommendation includes 
     bill language directing that $4,786,000 of this amount be 
     used for migrant and seasonal farmworker housing grants. The 
     recommendation also provides that the remaining amount be 
     used for State service area grants, including funding 
     grantees in those States impacted by formula reductions at no 
     less than 85 percent of the comparable 1998 levels for such 
     States. Within the National Activities/Other line item, the 
     Committee recommendation includes $1,019,000 to be used for 
     Section 167 training, technical assistance and related 
     activities, including funds for migrant rest center 
     activities. The Committee urges the Department to continue 
     valuable technical assistance services provided by the 
     Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs. Finally, the 
     Committee wishes to again advise the Department regarding the 
     requirements of the Workforce Investment Act in selecting an 
     eligible entity to receive a State service area grant under 
     Section 167. Such an entity must have already demonstrated a 
     capacity to administer effectively a diversified program of 
     workforce training and related assistance for eligible 
     migrant and seasonal farmworkers.
       The Committee believes that the Association of Farmworkers 
     Opportunity Programs provide valuable technical assistance 
     and training to grantees and has distinguished itself as a 
     tremendous resource. Its Children in the Fields Campaign 
     provides information, education, and technical assistance 
     related to child labor in agriculture. The Association also 
     provides other assistance related to employment and training 
     (including pesticide and other worker safety training for 
     children and adults). The Department is encouraged to 
     continue the services that the Association provides these 
     areas.
       The Committee requests the Department undertake a study and 
     submit a report to the Congress by July 1, 2003 with 
     recommendations for eliminating the double standard embodied 
     currently in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and 
     corresponding regulations whereby child farmworkers as young 
     as 10 years of age can work in large-scale, corporate 
     agriculture in the United States at younger ages, for longer 
     hours, and under more hazardous conditions than minors age 16 
     and over working in non-agricultural jobs.
       National programs.--This activity includes WIA-authorized 
     programs in support of the workforce system including 
     technical assistance and incentive grants, evaluations, 
     pilots, demonstrations and research, and the Women in 
     Apprenticeship Program.
       Technical Assistance/Incentive Grants.--The Committee 
     recommends $15,000,000 for the provision of technical 
     assistance, staff development, and replication of programs of 
     demonstrated effectiveness; as well as incentive

[[Page 832]]

     grants to each State that exceeds State adjusted levels of 
     performance for WIA State programs.
       Pilots, Demonstrations, and Research.--The Committee 
     recommends $55,161,000, which is $74,988,000 less than the 
     fiscal year 2002 level, for grants or contracts to conduct 
     research, pilots or demonstrations that improve techniques or 
     demonstrate the effectiveness of programs. Within this 
     amount, the Committee expects the Department of Labor to 
     conduct a comprehensive study on the composition (including 
     past and present numbers, as well as future projections) of 
     the U.S. textile and apparel industry labor force, including 
     the availability of training and textile-related engineering 
     and manufacturing programs. The study should include a 
     significant review of the impact of lay-offs on the industry, 
     the workers, the local communities, and the States and 
     regions involved. The Committee expects the Department of 
     Labor to coordinate with the Department of Commerce in 
     designing the preparation of this report. The Committee 
     requests that the study be completed no later than September 
     1, 2003.
       The Committee is deeply concerned about the ability of the 
     28 million Americans who are deaf or hard-of-hearing to be 
     informed of critical news and information in the post-9/11/01 
     environment. The Committee is aware that court reporting 
     schools may not be able to meet the ``unfunded mandate'' set 
     by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to provide closed 
     captioning of 100 percent of broadcast programming by January 
     2006. These compelling concerns justify continued Federal 
     support to those schools to increase their capacity to 
     attract and train more real time writers and to work closely 
     with the broadcasting industry to significantly increase the 
     amount of programming that is closed captioned.
       The Committee is concerned with the lack of information 
     provided to the Committee regarding the performance and 
     operation of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA). Further, the 
     Committee is concerned that States and local workforce 
     investment areas lack the technology to comply with the basic 
     performance reporting and operational requirements of the 
     WIA. This includes client case management, program 
     performance and fiscal reporting and basic job match. The 
     Committee recognizes that the private sector has developed 
     and successfully implemented such technology on a limited 
     basis on behalf of State and local workforce areas. However, 
     the infrastructure cost restraints of the WIA have impeded 
     widespread implementation. Therefore, the Committee 
     recommends the Secretary provide States and local workforce 
     investment areas funding to partner with the private sector 
     to pilot such technology and determine its benefit to the WIA 
     system.
       Evaluation.--The Committee recommends $9,098,000 to provide 
     for the continuing evaluation of programs conducted under 
     WIA, as well as of federally-funded employment-related 
     activities under other provisions of law.
       Women in Apprenticeship.--The Committee recommends 
     $1,000,000 to continue the current level of the Women in 
     Apprenticeship and Nontraditional Occupations program. This 
     activity provides technical assistance to employers and 
     unions to assist them in training, placing, and retraining 
     women in nontraditional jobs and occupations.
       National Skills Standards Advisory Board.--The Committee 
     concurs with the administration's request not to provide 
     additional funding for the Board, the authorization for which 
     has expired. Fiscal year 2002 funding for the Board was 
     $3,500,000, to remain available until expended.
       The Committee acknowledges the ongoing dialogue between the 
     National Skill Standards Board (NSSB) and the Department of 
     Labor concerning the future mission funding, and governance 
     of the NSSB. If a plan satisfactory to the Labor Department 
     can be developed, the Committee would entertain a request to 
     provide funds through reprogramming.


            community service employment for older americans

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$445,100,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................440,200,000
Committee recommendation....................................440,200,000

       The Committee recommends $440,200,000, the same as the 
     budget request for community service employment for older 
     Americans. This program, authorized by title V of the Older 
     Americans Act, provides part-time employment in community 
     service activities for unemployed, low-income persons aged 55 
     and over. It is forward-funded from July to June, and the 
     2003 appropriation will support the program from July 1, 
     2003, through June 30, 2004. The Committee believes that 
     within the title V community service employment for older 
     Americans, special attention should be paid to providing 
     community service jobs for older Americans with poor 
     employment prospects, including individuals with a long-term 
     detachment from the labor force, older displaced homemakers, 
     aged minorities, limited English-speaking persons, and legal 
     immigrants.
       The program provides a direct, efficient, and quick means 
     to assist economically disadvantaged older workers because it 
     has a proven effective network--currently operated jointly by 
     10 national sponsors and the States--in every State and in 
     practically every county. Administrative costs for the 
     program are low, and the vast majority of the money goes 
     directly to low-income seniors as wages and fringe benefits.
       The program provides a wide range of vital community 
     services that would not otherwise be available, particularly 
     in low-income areas and in minority neighborhoods. Senior 
     enrollees provide necessary and valuable services at Head 
     Start centers, schools, hospitals, libraries, elderly 
     nutrition sites, senior center, and elsewhere in the 
     community. These services would not be available without the 
     program.
       A large proportion of senior enrollees use their work 
     experience and training to obtain employment in the private 
     sector. This not only increases our Nation's tax base, but it 
     also enables more low-income seniors to participate in the 
     program.
       The Committee is aware that the administration portion of 
     the cost per authorized position in the Title V program has 
     not been adjusted since 1981. The Committee therefore directs 
     the Department to conduct, in consultation with national and 
     State Title V grantees, an analysis to determine the 
     appropriate cost per authorized position and to report back 
     its finding and recommendations no later than July 1, 2003.
       Finally, the Committee reiterates the concern expressed in 
     last year's report regarding balancing the community service 
     and employment and training goals of this important program. 
     The Committee again expresses its concern that any 
     significant increase in job placement goals must be 
     accompanied by assurances from the Department to the 
     Committee that sufficient skills training resources under the 
     Workforce Investment Act will be available to national and 
     State Title V grantees to help meet such increased placement 
     goals. The Committee has not yet received such assurances.
       The Committee is aware that, prior to enactment of the 
     Workforce Investment Act (WIA), the Federal job-training 
     program targeted funds specifically to older workers. 
     Currently, WIA funds are not targeted for training older 
     workers, at a time when the number of older workers is 
     increasing significantly. To remain competitive in the labor 
     market, older workers must acquire or update their job 
     skills. While WIA is designed to meet the needs of all 
     workers, the Committee is concerned that the One-Stop Career 
     Centers, funded under WIA, may not be adequately meeting the 
     training and education needs of older workers. The Committee 
     therefore requests that the Department report within 180 days 
     the measures it can undertake to ensure training and related 
     services, appropriated under WIA, are available to older 
     workers.


              Federal unemployment benefits and allowances

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$415,650,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................13,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................972,200,000

       The Committee recommends $972,200,000, an increase of 
     $556,550,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level. This is the 
     amount estimated to pay for increased training and income 
     support expenses under the expanded trade adjustment 
     assistance program included in the Trade Act of 2002, enacted 
     last August. These are entitlement funds. The Committee 
     encourages the Labor Department to utilize the reprogramming 
     process, if it is necessary to utilize discretionary funds 
     for administrative or other expenses for newly authorized 
     programs under the Trade Act that cannot be paid from this 
     account.


     state unemployment insurance and employment service operations

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,779,501,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,686,543,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,618,903,000

       The Committee recommends $3,618,903,000 for this account. 
     This is $67,640,000 below the budget request and $160,598,000 
     below the 2002 comparable level. Included in the total 
     availability is $3,475,451,000 authorized to be drawn from 
     the ``Employment Security Administration'' account of the 
     unemployment trust fund, and $143,452,000 to be provided from 
     the general fund of the Treasury.
       The funds in this account are used to provide 
     administrative grants and assistance to State agencies which 
     administer Federal and State unemployment compensation laws 
     and operate the public employment service.
       For unemployment insurance (UI) services, the bill provides 
     $2,651,488,000. This includes $2,641,488,000 for State 
     Operations, which is $76,200,000 less than the President's 
     request and $136,498,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 
     level. The Committee has deleted the request for $76,200,000 
     related to proposed legislation for temporary extended 
     benefits, since this cost was previously enacted as part of 
     Public Law 107-147. The Committee expects the Department to 
     manage these resources to ensure equitable funding to States 
     to handle total workload. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $10,000,000 for UI national activities, the same as 
     the fiscal year 2002 level and the President's request, which

[[Page 833]]

     is directed to activities that benefit the State/Federal 
     unemployment insurance program. The bill provides for a 
     contingency reserve amount should the unemployment workload 
     exceed an average weekly insured claims volume of 4,526,000. 
     This contingency amount would fund the administrative costs 
     of unemployment insurance workload over the level of 
     4,526,000 insured unemployed per week at a rate of 
     $28,600,000 per 100,000 insured unemployed, with a pro rata 
     amount granted for amounts of less than 100,000 insured 
     unemployed.
       For the Employment Service grants to States, the Committee 
     recommends $796,735,000 which includes $23,452,000 in general 
     funds together with an authorization to spend $773,283,000 
     from the ``Employment Security Administration'' account of 
     the unemployment trust fund. These funds are available for 
     the program year of July 1, 2003, through June 30, 2004.
       The recommendation includes $50,680,000 for national 
     activities, an increase of $21,560,000 over the budget 
     request. This recommendation restores the $20,560,000 
     reduction proposed in direct funding of the foreign labor 
     certification program, rejecting the proposal to finance a 
     portion of this program by a direct transfer from H-1B fees. 
     The recommendation also adds $1,000,000 over the request to 
     restore the proposed cut in the work opportunity tax credit 
     program.
       The recommendation also includes $100,000,000 for One-Stop 
     Career Centers, a reduction of $13,000,000 below the request. 
     This Committee recommendation includes funding for America's 
     Labor Market Information System, including core employment 
     statistics, universal access for customers, improving 
     efficiency in labor market transactions, and measuring and 
     displaying WIA performance information.
       The recommendation includes $20,000,000 for the Work 
     Incentives Grants program, the same as last year's level and 
     the President's request, to help persons with disabilities 
     find and retain jobs through the One-Stop Career Center 
     system mandated by the Workforce Investment Act. Funding will 
     support systems building grants intended to ensure that One-
     Stop systems integrate and coordinate mainstream employment 
     and training programs with essential employment-related 
     services for persons with disabilities.
       The Committee agrees that the work opportunity tax credit 
     [WOTC], and the welfare-to-work tax credit provide important 
     resources to create new jobs, particularly for those 
     Americans who would otherwise be dependent on welfare. 
     Therefore, the Committee recommendation includes $21,000,000 
     for the administration of these initiatives, an increase of 
     $1,000,000 over the budget request, restoring the increased 
     amount previously enacted.


        advances to the unemployment trust fund and other funds

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$464,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................463,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................463,000,000

       The Committee recommends $463,000,000, a decrease of 
     $1,000,000 below the 2002 comparable level, for this account. 
     The appropriation is available to provide advances to several 
     accounts for purposes authorized under various Federal and 
     State unemployment compensation laws and the black lung 
     disability trust fund, whenever balances in such accounts 
     prove insufficient. The bill anticipates that fiscal year 
     2003 advances will be made to the black lung disability trust 
     fund. The requested amount is required to provide for loan 
     interest payments on Black Lung Trust Fund borrowed amounts.
       The separate appropriations provided by the Committee for 
     all other accounts eligible to borrow from this account in 
     fiscal year 2003 are expected to be sufficient. Should the 
     need arise, due to unanticipated changes in the economic 
     situation, laws, or for other legitimate reasons, advances 
     will be made to the needy accounts to the extent funds are 
     available. Funds advanced to the black lung disability trust 
     fund are now repayable with interest to the general fund of 
     the Treasury.


                         program administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$161,276,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................172,061,000
Committee recommendation....................................177,642,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $121,032,000 in 
     general funds for this account, as well as authority to 
     expend $56,610,000 from the ``Employment Security 
     Administration'' account of the unemployment trust fund, for 
     a total of $177,642,000. This is $16,366,000 greater than the 
     2002 comparable level.
       The Committee recommendation concurs with the $5,500,000 
     requested increase to provide staff and contract resources 
     for performance management and accountability functions. The 
     recommendation restores proposed reductions in 
     apprenticeship, Job Corps, and other youth services 
     administrative activities. The recommendation also adds 
     $6,000,000 to restore funding which the budget had assumed 
     would come from enactment of authorizing legislation 
     redirection H-1B fees for Federal administration expenses.
       General funds in this account provide the Federal staff to 
     administer employment and training programs under the 
     Workforce Investment Act, the Older Americans Act, the Trade 
     Act of 1974, and the National Apprenticeship Act. Trust funds 
     provide for the Federal administration of employment security 
     functions under title III of the Social Security Act and the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended. Federal staff 
     costs related to the Wagner-Peyser Act in this account are 
     split 97 percent to 3 percent between unemployment trust 
     funds and general revenue, respectively.

              Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$110,932,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................117,044,000
Committee recommendation....................................117,044,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $117,044,000 for this 
     account, which is $6,112,000 above the 2002 comparable level, 
     and the same as the budget request. This includes program 
     increases to enhance the Voluntary Fiduciary Compliance 
     Program and the ERISA filing and acceptance system.
       The Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration [PWBA] is 
     responsible for the enforcement of title I of the Employee 
     Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 [ERISA] in both civil 
     and criminal areas. PWBA is also responsible for enforcement 
     of sections 8477 and 8478 of the Federal Employees' 
     Retirement Security Act of 1986 [FERSA]. PWBA provides 
     funding for the enforcement and compliance; policy, 
     regulation, and public services; and program oversight 
     activities.

                  Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

       The Corporation's estimate for fiscal year 2003 includes 
     benefit payments of $1,325,000,000, multiemployer financial 
     assistance of $10,000,000, administrative expenses limitation 
     of $13,050,000, and services related to terminations expenses 
     of $179,844,000.
       The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is a wholly owned 
     Government corporation established by the Employee Retirement 
     Income Security Act of 1974. The law places it within the 
     Department of Labor and makes the Secretary of Labor the 
     Chair of its Board of Directors. The Corporation receives its 
     income primarily from insurance premiums collected from 
     covered pension plans, collections of employer liabilities 
     imposed by the act, and investment earnings. It is also 
     authorized to borrow up to $100,000,000 from the Treasury. 
     The primary purpose of the Corporation is to guarantee the 
     payment of pension plan benefits to participants if covered 
     plans fail or go out of existence.

                  Employment Standards Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$370,236,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................294,315,000
Committee recommendation....................................385,457,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $385,457,000 for this 
     account. This is $15,221,000 above the 2002 comparable level 
     and $91,142,000 above the budget request. The bill contains 
     authority to expend $2,029,000 from the special fund 
     established by the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation 
     Act; the remainder are general funds. In addition, an amount 
     of $31,987,000 is available by transfer from the black lung 
     disability trust fund. This is the same as the request and 
     $610,000 above the 2002 comparable level.
       This recommendation provides sufficient funding to offset 
     the impact of inflation, preventing the reduction in full-
     time equivalent staffing assumed in the budget request. It 
     rejects the administration's proposed legislation that would 
     have established a surcharge on the amount billed to Federal 
     agencies for workers' compensation benefits to finance Labor 
     Department administrative expenses of $86,442,000. It 
     restores proposed program reductions, including the equal pay 
     initiative and includes recommended program increases.
       The President's budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on Health, 
     Education, Labor, and Pensions to charge individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the administrative cost of the 
     Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA) program. Currently 
     Federal agencies are budgeted for and billed each year for 
     monetary and medical benefits that have been paid to their 
     employees under FECA, while the program's discretionary 
     administrative costs are financed in the Department of Labor 
     (DOL). The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     will continue to fund this administrative cost through this 
     account.
       The Employment Standards Administration is involved in the 
     administration of numerous laws, including the Fair Labor 
     Standards Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, the 
     Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Workers' Protection Act, 
     the Davis-Bacon Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the 
     Federal Employees' Compensation Act [FECA], the Longshore and 
     Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, and the Federal Mine Safety 
     and Health Act (black lung).
       The Committee supports expansion of the equal pay 
     initiative, which helps business improve the way they pay 
     their employees, and assists in education about the 
     importance of equal pay.

[[Page 834]]




                            SPECIAL BENEFITS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$121,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................163,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................163,000,000

       The Committee recommends continuation of appropriation 
     language to provide authority to require disclosure of Social 
     Security account numbers by individuals filing claims under 
     the Federal Employees' Compensation Act or the Longshore and 
     Harbor Workers' Compensation Act and its extensions.
       The recommendation includes $163,000,000, the same as the 
     budget request and an increase of $42,000,000 above the 2002 
     comparable level. This appropriation primarily provides 
     benefits under the Federal Employees' Compensation Act 
     [FECA]. The payments are prescribed by law.
       The total amount to be available in fiscal year 2003 is 
     $3,326,393,000, an increase of $108,000,000 above the 2002 
     comparable level.
       The Committee recommends continuation of appropriation 
     language that provides authority to use the FECA fund to 
     reimburse a new employer for a portion of the salary of a 
     newly reemployed injured Federal worker. The FECA funds will 
     be used to reimburse new employers during the first 3 years 
     of employment not to exceed 75 percent of salary in the 
     worker's first year, declining thereafter. Costs will be 
     charged to the FECA fund.
       The Committee again includes appropriation language that 
     retains the drawdown date of August 15. The drawdown 
     authority enables the agency to meet any immediate shortage 
     of funds without requesting supplemental appropriations. The 
     August 15 drawdown date allows maximum flexibility for 
     continuation of benefit payments without interruption.
       The Committee recommends continuation of appropriation 
     language to provide authority to deposit into the special 
     benefits account of the employees' compensation fund those 
     funds that the Postal Service, the Tennessee Valley 
     Authority, and other entities are required to pay to cover 
     their fair share of the costs of administering the claims 
     filed by their employees under FECA. The Committee concurs 
     with requested bill language to allow use fair share 
     collections to fund capital investment projects and specific 
     initiatives to strengthen compensation fund control and 
     oversight.


       Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$135,665,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................104,867,000
Committee recommendation....................................104,867,000

       The Committee recommends $104,867,000 for this account in 
     2003. This is the same as the President's request and 
     $30,798,000 below 2002.
       The mission of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
     Compensation Program is to deliver benefits to eligible 
     employees and former employees of the Department of Energy, 
     its contractors and subcontractors or to certain survivors of 
     such individuals, as provided in the Energy Employees 
     Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. The mission 
     also includes delivering benefits to certain beneficiaries of 
     the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. Benefit costs of 
     $758,000,000 are anticipated in fiscal year 2003.
       The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
     Program provides benefits authorized by the Energy Employees 
     Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. The program 
     went into effect on July 31, 2001. The Department of Labor's 
     Office of Workers' Compensation Programs within the 
     Employment Standards Administration is responsible for 
     adjudicating and administering claims filed by employees or 
     former employees (or their survivors) under the Act.


                    black lung disability trust fund

Appropriations, 2002 (Definite)..........................$1,036,115,000
Budget estimate, 2003:
  (Definite).................................................55,629,000
  (Indefinite)..............................................979,371,000
Committee recommendation:
  (Definite).................................................55,629,000
  (Indefinite)..............................................979,371,000

       The Committee recommends $1,035,000,000 for this account in 
     2003, of which $55,629,000 is definite budget authority and 
     $979,371,000 is indefinite budget authority. In total, this 
     is a decrease of $934,000 below the 2002 comparable level and 
     the same as the administration request. This represents a 
     change in the appropriation language beginning in fiscal year 
     2002 for the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. This change 
     will eliminate the need for drawdowns from the subsequent 
     year appropriation in order to meet current year 
     compensation, interest, and other benefit payments. The 
     appropriation language will continue to provide definite 
     budget authority for the payment of administrative expenses 
     for the operation and administration of the Trust Fund.
       The total amount available for fiscal year 2003 will 
     provide $360,371,000 for benefit payments, and $55,629,000 
     for administrative expenses for the Department of Labor. Also 
     included is $619,000,000 for interest payments on advances. 
     In fiscal year 2002, comparable obligations for benefit 
     payments are estimated to be $388,283,000 while 
     administrative expenses are $54,651,000. In fiscal year 2002, 
     the interest payments on advances is estimated to be 
     $593,000,000.
       The trust fund pays all black lung compensation/medical and 
     survivor benefit expenses when no responsible mine operation 
     can be assigned liability for such benefits, or when coal 
     mine employment ceased prior to 1970, as well as all 
     administrative costs which are incurred in administering the 
     benefits program and operating the trust fund.
       It is estimated that 49,000 people will be receiving black 
     lung benefits financed from the trust fund by the end of the 
     fiscal year 2003. This compares with an estimated 53,250 
     receiving benefits in fiscal year 2002.
       The basic financing for the trust fund comes from a coal 
     excise tax for underground and surface-mined coal. Additional 
     funds come from reimbursement payments from mine operators 
     for benefit payments made by the trust fund before the mine 
     operator is found liable, and advances. The advances to the 
     fund assure availability of necessary funds when liabilities 
     may exceed other income. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation 
     Act of 1987 continues the current tax structure until 2014.

             Occupational Safety and Health Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$443,498,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................437,019,000
Committee recommendation....................................462,314,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $462,314,000 for this 
     account. This is an increase of $25,295,000 over the budget 
     request and an increase of $18,816,000 above the 2002 
     comparable level. This agency is responsible for enforcing 
     the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 in the 
     Nation's workplaces.
       This recommendation provides sufficient funding to offset 
     the impact of inflation, preventing the reduction in full-
     time equivalent staffing assumed in the budget request.
       In addition, the Committee has included language to allow 
     OSHA to retain up to $750,000 per fiscal year of training 
     institute course tuition fees to be utilized for occupational 
     safety and health training and education grants in the 
     private sector.
       Within the amount for Safety and Health Standards, bill 
     language specifies that $2,000,000 of the increased funding 
     is only available to provide for the reissuance of a rule 
     relating to ergonomics. It is the Committee's expectation 
     that these funds expedite activities leading to reissuance of 
     such a rule within the timeframe and according to the 
     parameters specified in S. 2184.
       The Committee is concerned that OSHA has halted action on 
     or delayed many important regulatory initiatives on major 
     workplace hazards, including chemical safety regulations to 
     prevent reactive chemical explosions which have killed 108 
     workers over the past two decades, the extension of confined 
     space entry requirements to the construction industry where 
     87 workers were killed in confined space incidents during the 
     1990s, and regulations to limit exposure to cancer causing 
     chemicals perchoroetlylene, hexavalent chromium and 
     metalworking fluids. At the same time, the administration has 
     proposed to reduce funding for its standards activities. The 
     Committee believes that the development and issuance of 
     safety and health standards is one of the core 
     responsibilities of OSHA, and has provided funding in the 
     bill to maintain OSHA's current level of activity for safety 
     and health standards, not including funds for the development 
     of a new ergonomics standard.
       The Committee retains language carried in last year's bill 
     effectively exempting farms employing 10 or fewer people from 
     the provisions of the act except those farms having a 
     temporary labor camp. The Committee also retains language 
     exempting small firms in industry classifications having a 
     lost workday injury rate less than the national average from 
     general schedule safety inspections. These provisions have 
     been in the bill for many years.
       The Committee believes that OSHA's worker safety and health 
     training and education programs, including the grant program 
     that supports such training, are a critical part of a 
     comprehensive approach to worker protection. The Committee is 
     concerned that OSHA cut funding to help establish ongoing 
     worker safety and health training programs and has provided 
     $7,175,000 in additional funds to restore the Susan Harwood 
     training grant program to $11,175,000. Bill language 
     specifies that no less than $3,200,000 shall be used to 
     maintain the existing institutional competency building 
     training grants, provided that grantees demonstrate 
     satisfactory performance.
       The Committee has provided funding to maintain the State 
     consultation grant program and expects that this program will 
     continue to be targeted to provide compliance assistance to 
     small businesses.
       The Committee is very pleased with OSHA's efforts in 
     placing high priority on the voluntary protection programs 
     (VPP) and other voluntary cooperative programs. The agency's 
     work in expanding participation in the programs, and 
     promoting prompt review and processing of applications is 
     particularly noteworthy. The Committee expects OSHA to 
     continue to place high priority on the VPP. Cooperative 
     voluntary

[[Page 835]]

     programs, especially the VPP, are an important part of OSHA's 
     ability to assure worker safety and health and should be 
     administered in conjunction with an effective strong 
     enforcement program.
       The Committee also intends that the Office of Regulatory 
     Analysis continue to be funded as close as possible to its 
     present level.

                 Mine Safety and Health Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$253,932,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................254,323,000
Committee recommendation....................................271,841,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $271,841,000 for this 
     account. This is $17,909,000 more than the 2002 comparable 
     level, and $17,518,000 more than the budget request.
       This recommendation provides sufficient funding to offset 
     the impact of inflation, preventing the reduction in full-
     time equivalent staffing assumed in the budget request. It 
     further includes funding to continue the Miner's Choice X-ray 
     Program.
       The Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 for 
     digitizing mine maps and to develop technologies to detect 
     mine voids, in an effort to improve the ability of mining 
     officials to verify the location of abandoned mines. This 
     recommendation is in response to initiatives for improving 
     mine safety arising from a special hearing held October 21, 
     2002, in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, on the mine disaster at 
     Quecreek. This initiative, to supplement State funding, is 
     intended to make sure that all existing mine maps are 
     available to the relevant agencies and the maps are centrally 
     warehoused and digitized in order to ensure their 
     preservation.
       The Committee recommendation also increases the bill 
     language amount for mine rescue and recovery activities from 
     ``up to $1,000,000'' to ``up to $2,000,000'', while retaining 
     the provision allowing the Secretary of Labor to use any 
     funds available to the Department to provide for the costs of 
     mine rescue and survival operations in the event of a major 
     disaster.
       This agency insures the safety and health of the Nation's 
     miners by conducting inspections and special investigations 
     of mine operations, promulgating mandatory safety and health 
     standards, cooperating with the States in developing 
     effective State programs, and improving training in 
     conjunction with States and the mining industry.
       In addition, bill language is included to allow the 
     National Mine Health and Safety Academy to collect not to 
     exceed $750,000 for room, board, tuition, and the sale of 
     training materials to be available for mine safety and health 
     education and training activities. Bill language also allows 
     MSHA to retain up to $1,000,000 from fees collected for the 
     approval and certification of equipment, materials, and 
     explosives for use in mines, and may utilize such sums for 
     such activities.
       The Committee is aware that in October 2001 the National 
     Academy of Sciences (NAS) released a report on 
     recommendations to improve the safety of coal waste 
     impoundments. The Committee notes that the NAS report 
     includes recommendations on actions that could be taken, 
     primarily by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) 
     and the Office of Surface Mining (OSM) to improve the design 
     process for coal slurry impoundments; to improve mapping of 
     mines and the characterization of sites of existing and 
     future impoundments; to improve the assessment of mitigation 
     of risks associated with impoundments; and to assess 
     alternative options for these impoundments. In recognizing 
     the public safety and environmental threats that these 
     impoundment failures pose, the Committee directs MSHA and OSM 
     to provide the Committee with a study, no later than March 
     15, 2003, on specific actions the respective agencies are 
     taking to implement the recommendations contained in the 
     October 2001 NAS report, and on specific actions taken to 
     address failures and potential failures which have occurred 
     since October 11, 2000.

                       Bureau of Labor Statistics


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$475,431,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................498,164,000
Committee recommendation....................................490,454,000

       The Committee includes $494,454,000 for this account, 
     $7,710,000 less than the budget request and $15,023,000 more 
     than the 2002 comparable level. This includes $72,029,000 
     from the ``Employment Security Administration'' account of 
     the unemployment trust fund, and $418,425,000 in Federal 
     funds. This funding level will cover the agency's built-in 
     increases.
       The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the principal fact 
     finding agency in the Federal Government in the broad field 
     of labor economics.
       In addition, the Committee has included bill language 
     making $2,570,000 of the BLS allowance for Occupational 
     Employment Statistics available for the period July 1, 2003 
     through September 30, 2003; this converts this activity to 
     current year funding, at its annual level of $10,280,000, 
     instead of funding on a program year basis.

                      Office of Disability Policy

Appropriations, 2002........................................$38,056,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................47,015,000
Committee recommendation.....................................47,015,000

       The Committee recommends $47,015,000 for this account in 
     2003. This is the same as the President's request and 
     $8,959,000 above 2002.
       Congress created the Office of Disability Employment Policy 
     (ODEP) in the Department of Labor's fiscal year 2001 
     appropriation. Programs and staff of the former President's 
     Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities (PCEPD) 
     have been integrated into this new office.
       The ODEP mission, under the leadership of an Assistant 
     Secretary, is to bring a heightened and permanent long-term 
     focus to the goal of increasing employment of persons with 
     disabilities. This will be achieved through policy analysis, 
     technical assistance, and development of best practices, as 
     well as outreach, education, constituent services, and 
     promoting ODEP's mission among employers.
       The increase includes: an expansion of One-Stop 
     accessability grants, to support the process of implementing 
     the ``ticket to work'' through One-Stop Career Centers; 
     expanding the provision of grants aimed at developing and 
     implementing innovative programs for moving youth with 
     disabilities from school to work; and funding an Olmstead 
     grant program to assist persons with significant disabilities 
     in making the transition from institutional settings to the 
     community and employment.
       The Committee urges the Department to establish a special, 
     structured, fall and spring semester internship program to 
     augment existing programs supporting undergraduate students 
     with disabilities in their efforts to pursue careers in 
     public service. The program would be carried out under a 
     partnership between the Secretary, the Congress and the 
     Judiciary, groups representing citizens with disabilities and 
     colleges and universities that would provide opportunities 
     for their students to participate in this innovative program 
     for undergraduate students with disabilities.

                        Departmental Management


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$385,601,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................317,934,000
Committee recommendation....................................396,623,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $396,623,000 for this 
     account, which is $78,689,000 more than the budget request 
     and $11,022,000 more than the 2002 comparable level. In 
     addition, an amount of $22,952,000 is available by transfer 
     from the black lung disability trust fund, which is the same 
     as the budget request.
       The primary goal of the Department of Labor is to protect 
     and promote the interests of American workers. The 
     departmental management appropriation finances staff 
     responsible for formulating and overseeing the implementation 
     of departmental policy and management activities in support 
     of that goal. In addition, this appropriation includes a 
     variety of operating programs and activities that are not 
     involved in departmental management functions, but for which 
     other salaries and expenses appropriations are not suitable.
       The Committee recommendation reflects major Committee 
     priorities, including international labor affairs, and 
     pension participant advocacy.
       The Committee recommendation includes $26,468,000 for 
     Executive Direction, the same as the budget request.
       The Committee recommends $10,973,000 for the Women's 
     Bureau, an increase of $2,604,000 over the budget request and 
     $808,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. The Committee 
     urges the Women's Bureau to provide increased support for 
     effective programs such as ``Women Work!'', to provide 
     technical assistance and training on programming for women in 
     transition, as well as Pay Equity initiatives.
       Bill language specifies that not less than $3,000,000 is 
     provided to establish an Office of Pension Participant 
     Advocacy within the Office of the Secretary at the Department 
     of Labor. The Committee believes that protecting and 
     promoting the rights of workers in retirement plans is 
     central to the mission of the Department of Labor. The 
     Committee is concerned by the lack of protection for 
     participants in private retirement plans that have been 
     highlighted by recent financial failures. The Committee 
     believes that it is necessary for there to be an office 
     within the Federal Government to advise both Congress and the 
     Administration on necessary changes in policies to correct 
     problems that affect participants. In addition, there is a 
     need to coordinate public and private efforts to assist 
     participants and provide them with meaningful information. 
     Although several Federal agencies have oversight of pension 
     plans--the PBGC insures terminated defined benefit plans and 
     the PWBA has traditionally focused on protecting the 
     integrity of pension funds--none have traditionally sought to 
     protect the retirement security interests of American 
     workers. For this reason, the Committee has chosen to include 
     funds for the express purpose of creating an office within 
     this agency to identify needed changes in pension policies, 
     and gaps in data on pension plans and their participants.

[[Page 836]]

       The Committee recommends $148,015,000 for the Bureau of 
     International Labor Affairs, the same level of funding as 
     provided in fiscal year 2002.
       Of this amount, the Committee's recommendation includes 
     $82,000,000 to sustain important U.S. commitments to restore 
     hope and to improve the lives of more than 250 million 
     defenseless child laborers at work in today's global economy. 
     The United States was the third nation, to ratify ILO 
     Convention #182 for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of 
     Child Labor, just months after its unprecedented unanimous 
     adoption in 1999. Having done so, the Committee recognizes an 
     on-going obligation to provide supplementary resources to 
     assist developing countries especially to remove children 
     from the worst forms of child labor. $45,000,000 of that sub-
     total shall constitute the U.S. contribution to sustain and 
     to extend to more countries in waiting the successful efforts 
     of the ILO's International Program for the Elimination of 
     Child Labor (IPEC). The remaining $37,000,000 is for 
     bilateral assistance to expand upon the program initiated by 
     the Department in fiscal year 2001 to help ensure access to 
     basic education for the growing number of children removed 
     from the worst forms of child labor in impoverished nations 
     where abusive and exploitative child labor is most acute; 
     however, the Secretary may transfer $14,000,000 of this sub-
     total to USAID's ``Basic Education and Policy Support 
     Initiative'' for complementary projects. The Committee notes 
     that the United States was a strong and active supporter of 
     the Dakar Declaration of 2000, including the commitment 
     therein to help achieve universal access to basic education 
     for all of the world's children by 2015. Accordingly, the 
     Committee views this program to be a vital component for 
     fulfilling this on-going commitment and firmly believes that 
     affording access to basic education is also the single most 
     effective means to curb the worst forms of child labor, 
     wherever they exist. In programming these funds, the 
     Committee directs the Department to consult with our 
     country's labor attaches and labor reporting officers abroad, 
     to coordinate and work more closely with USAID and IPEC 
     officials, and to also make use of non-governmental 
     organizations and trade unions, when appropriate, to promptly 
     and economically steer these funds to where they benefit the 
     most child laborers who are at the greatest risk.
       The Committee recognizes that combating abusive child labor 
     and promoting greater respect for other internationally-
     recognized worker rights and core labor standards are crucial 
     to spreading the benefits of trade and investment more 
     broadly within as well as among all trading nations. 
     Accordingly, the Committee further recommends $20,000,000 for 
     multilateral technical assistance, and $17,000,000 for 
     bilateral assistance to enable developing countries in 
     particular to strengthen governmental capacity to enforce 
     national labor laws and protect internationally-recognized 
     worker rights, to implement core labor standards, and to 
     develop policies to assist workers who are adversely affected 
     by shifts in trade and investment flows, structural 
     adjustments, and macroeconomic changes within national 
     economies and the global economy respectively.
       The Committee also deems it very important that ILAB deepen 
     and improve its permanent capacity to compile and report to 
     the Congress annually on the extent to which each foreign 
     country that has trade and investment agreements with the 
     United States enforces internationally-recognized worker 
     rights as required under multiple U.S. laws and promotes core 
     labor standards as embodied in the ILO Declaration on 
     Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work as adopted and 
     reaffirmed in 1998. The Committee expects $5,000,000 to be 
     spent for this purpose. The Committee recognizes that it may 
     be necessary to build ILAB capacity over a period of 2 years 
     and, for the Department to tap private sector expertise from 
     knowledgeable employer, trade union, and non-governmental 
     organizations with their own presence or in-country partners 
     on the ground in foreign countries.
       Finally, the Committee requests that ILAB undertake and 
     complete a study and report to the Congress by September 30, 
     2003 on government-wide implementation of Executive Order No. 
     13126 prohibiting the acquisition and procurement of any 
     products mined, produced, or manufactured with any forced or 
     indentured child labor and compliance with this order by all 
     civilian and military agencies. In prior studies and reports 
     to the Congress, the Department has identified and presented 
     evidence of the use of forced or indentured child labor in 
     the production of at least 45 products in at least 25 foreign 
     countries and those findings have been further corroborated 
     by the U.S. State Department in its annual human rights 
     reports to the Congress. Nevertheless, the Department, in 
     coordination with the General Services Administration, only 
     included 11 products in two foreign countries when the final 
     list of tainted products was published in the Federal 
     Register for the first time on January 18, 2001. This study 
     should explain in detail why so few products and countries 
     have been included on the current list of procurement 
     prohibitions, given that the Labor Department, State 
     Department, and Customs Service within the Treasury 
     Department have identified collectively a much larger list of 
     goods produced in many more foreign countries they have 
     reason to believe were mined, produced, or manufactured using 
     forced or indentured child labor. It should also include 
     recommendations to improve government-wide compliance with 
     Executive Order No. 13126, to include services within its 
     scope where there is reason to believe there is forced or 
     indentured child labor involved, and to award Federal 
     procurement preferences to reward companies and industries 
     that do not do business with any foreign or domestic 
     producers who use forced, indentured, or abusive child labor.
       The Committee concurs with the request to provide 
     $10,000,000 for HIV/AIDS workplace education. The Committee 
     expects the Department to work through the ILO to most 
     effectively program the appropriated funds. The Committee 
     previously directed that ILAB work through the ILO to 
     effectively program funds provided in fiscal year 2002 to 
     global workplace-based education and prevention programs. In 
     fiscal year 2003, the Committee recommendation includes 
     $10,000,000 solely for the purpose of providing the ILO with 
     assistance to conduct global workplace-based HIV-AIDS 
     education and prevention programs. For other ILAB programs, 
     including 125 FTE for Federal Administration, the Committee 
     recommends $14,282,000.
       Acknowledging the need to upgrade the information 
     technology capability in the Department of Labor, the 
     Committee provides $55,000,000 for the information technology 
     fund, and $5,884,000 for management cross cut activities. The 
     total provided includes support for cross-cutting investments 
     such as common office automation suite implementation, 
     architecture requirements, and web services as well as human 
     resource management.
       The Committee retains bill language intended to ensure that 
     decisions on appeals of Longshore and Harborworker 
     Compensation Act claims are reached in a timely manner.

                    Veterans Employment and Training

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$212,624,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................210,337,000
Committee recommendation....................................218,087,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $218,087,000 for this 
     account, including $26,550,000 in general revenue funding and 
     $191,537,000 to be expended from the ``Employment Security 
     Administration'' account of the unemployment trust fund. This 
     is $7,750,000 more than the budget request and $5,463,000 
     above the 2002 comparable level.
       For State grants the bill provides $83,615,000 for the 
     Disabled Veterans Outreach Program and $79,253,000 for the 
     Local Veterans Employment Representative Program. These 
     amounts are each $2,000,000 above the budget request and the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       For Federal administration, the Committee recommends 
     $28,669,000, an increase of $2,000,000 over the budget 
     request and $713,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level. 
     The Committee supports the concept of the Transition 
     Assistance Program administered jointly with the Department 
     of Defense which assists soon-to-be-discharged service 
     members in transitioning into the civilian work force and 
     includes funding to maintain an effective program. The 
     Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000, the same as the 
     fiscal 2002 level, for the National Veterans Training 
     Institute [NVTI]. This Institute provides training to the 
     Federal and State staff involved in the direct delivery of 
     employment and training related services to veterans.
       The Committee recommendation includes $19,000,000 for the 
     Homeless Veterans Program, an increase of $1,500,000 over the 
     budget request. Also included is $7,550,000 for the Veterans 
     Workforce Investment Program, an increase of $250,000 above 
     the budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     level.
       The recommendation also authorizes the Department of Labor 
     to permit the Veterans' Employment and Training Service 
     [VETS] to also fund activities in support of the VETS' 
     Federal Contractor Program [FTP] from funds currently made 
     available to States for veterans' employment activities. It 
     does not authorize transfer of any activities to the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs, as proposed in the budget 
     request.

                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$56,860,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................62,256,000
Committee recommendation.....................................62,256,000

       The bill includes $62,256,000 for this account, the same as 
     the budget request and $5,396,000 above the 2002 comparable 
     level. This funding will cover the agency's built-in 
     increases, as well as program increases. The bill includes 
     $56,659,000 in general funds and authority to transfer 
     $5,597,000 from the ``Employment Security Administration'' 
     account of the unemployment trust fund. In addition, an 
     amount of $334,000 is available by transfer from the black 
     lung disability trust fund.
       The Office of the Inspector General [OIG] was created by 
     law to protect the integrity of departmental programs as well 
     as the welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. 
     Through a comprehensive program of

[[Page 837]]

     audits, investigations, inspections, and program evaluations, 
     the OIG attempts to reduce the incidence of fraud, waste, 
     abuse, and mismanagement, and to promote economy, efficiency, 
     and effectiveness.

                           General Provisions

       General provision bill language is included to:
       Prohibit the use of Job Corps funding for compensation of 
     an individual at a rate in excess of Executive Level II (sec. 
     101).
       Permit transfers of up to 1 percent between appropriations 
     (sec. 102).
       Prohibit funding for the procurement of goods and services 
     utilizing forced or indentured child labor in industries and 
     host countries already identified by the Labor Department 
     (sec. 103 in accordance with Executive Order 13126).
       Authorize funds to be appropriated for job training for 
     workers involved in construction projects funded through the 
     Denali Commission (sec. 104).

           TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

              Health Resources and Services Administration


                     health resources and services

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$6,080,551,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................5,365,404,000
Committee recommendation..................................6,115,654,000

       The Committee provides an appropriation of $6,115,654,000 
     for health resources and services. This is $750,250,000 more 
     than the administration request and $35,103,000 more than 
     fiscal year 2002.
       Health Resources and Services Administration [HRSA] 
     activities support programs to provide health care services 
     for mothers and infants; the underserved, elderly, homeless; 
     migrant farm workers; and disadvantaged minorities. This 
     appropriation supports cooperative programs in community 
     health, AIDS care, health provider training, and health care 
     delivery systems and facilities.


                             HEALTH CENTERS

       The Committee provides $1,533,570,000 for the health 
     centers, which is $190,000,000 more than fiscal year 2002 
     level and $75,706,000 above the administration request for 
     this group of programs, which include community health 
     centers, migrant health centers, health care for the 
     homeless, and public housing health service grants.
       In fiscal year 2003, community, migrant, public housing and 
     homeless Health Centers will provide primary health care 
     services to more than 12,000,000 people. Health Centers serve 
     indigent urban and underserved rural clients, including many 
     uninsured patients. From 1999 to 2001, the number of 
     uninsured seeking care at Health Centers increased by 500,000 
     for a total of 4.2 million or about 40 percent of the patient 
     population in 2001. In addition, millions of poor, minority, 
     or isolated people, who have some health insurance coverage, 
     continue to encounter serious difficulties in getting access 
     to health care due to income or distance barriers. For many 
     of these Americans, Health Centers are the only source of 
     primary and preventive health care. Located in more than 
     3,500 rural and urban medically-underserved communities 
     around the Nation, Health Centers have proven to be a cost-
     effective and efficient source of care for the underserved. 
     By providing access to basic health services, Health Centers 
     annually save the health care system billions of dollars in 
     reduced use of costly emergency room, specialty, and hospital 
     inpatient care.
       The Committee does not set aside any additional 
     appropriations for loan guarantee authority under Section 
     330(d) or Part A of Title XVI of the Public Health Service 
     Act. The Committee intends that the $14,000,000 of subsidy 
     authority appropriated in fiscal year 1997 and fiscal year 
     1998, making $160,000,000 available for loan guarantees, 
     continue to be available for guarantees of both loan 
     principal and interest in accordance with the original 
     allocations.
       The Committee limits the amount available for payment of 
     claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act to $50,000,000, 
     which is $25,000,000 more than the administration request and 
     $35,000,000 more than the amount provided for last year. The 
     Committee recognizes the tremendous value of this program for 
     health centers and as new health centers become covered, and 
     past claims are settled, payments have risen accordingly.
     Community health centers
       Community health centers provide comprehensive, case-
     managed primary health care services to medically indigent 
     and underserved populations in rural and urban areas. Of the 
     clients served by community health centers, about 44 percent 
     are children and 67 percent have incomes below the poverty 
     line.
       The Committee is pleased with the process HRSA has used to 
     fund new start applications and also the expeditious manner 
     in which the first round of funding was allocated. Adequate 
     funding is provided to ensure that at least 30 new starts, 60 
     new sites, and 80 project expansions occur in 2003. However, 
     the Committee expects HRSA to give priority to areas of the 
     country that currently have few health centers and 
     significant numbers of underserved populations not currently 
     served by health centers, especially minority communities and 
     rural and frontier areas.
       Although the Committee continues to support the expansion 
     of the health centers program to double the number of 
     patients served, the Committee is concerned that current 
     funding methodologies may not recognize the increased cost of 
     providing services for current patients at existing health 
     centers. The Committee expects HRSA to use a portion of the 
     increased funding provided to increase support for existing 
     health centers based on performance-related criteria separate 
     from the funding of new service site and service expansion 
     applications.
       The Committee is concerned that Federal community health 
     center funds are often not available to small, remote 
     communities in Alaska, Hawaii and other similar States 
     because the population base is too small. Many of these 
     communities have no health service providers and are forced 
     to travel long distances by boat or plane even in emergency 
     situations. The Committee is aware that efforts are now 
     underway to double community health center funding to address 
     the growing number of uninsured persons in this country, but, 
     without new approaches to providing health services, many 
     will not benefit from the proposed increases in funding. The 
     Committee applauds the agency for its initiatives such as the 
     ``Alaska Frontier Health Plan,'' and encourages the agency to 
     continue and expand its efforts with this program.
       The Committee is concerned by the small percentage of 
     Illinois' medically-under-served population that presently 
     have access to community or migrant health center services. 
     The Committee expects HRSA to take steps to address this 
     services deficit in fiscal year 2003.
     School-based health centers
       This program provides grants for comprehensive primary and 
     preventive health care services and health education to at-
     risk and medically underserved children and youth. Grants are 
     awarded to public or private, nonprofit, community-based 
     health care providers. Through agreements with a local school 
     or school system, the health care entity provides the 
     services in the school building or on school grounds.
     Migrant health program
       The program helps provide culturally sensitive 
     comprehensive primary care services to migrant and seasonal 
     farm workers and their families. Over 80 percent of the 
     centers also receive funds from the community health centers 
     program.
     Health care for the homeless
       The program provides project grants for the delivery of 
     primary health care services, substance abuse services, and 
     mental health services to homeless adults and children. About 
     one-half of the projects are administered by community health 
     centers. The other one-half are administered by nonprofit 
     coalitions, inner-city hospitals, and local public health 
     departments.
     Public housing health service grants
       The program awards grants to community-based organizations 
     to provide case-managed ambulatory primary health and social 
     services in clinics at or in proximity to public housing. 
     More than 60 percent of the programs are operated by 
     community health centers.
     Native Hawaiian health care
       The Committee again includes the legal citation in the bill 
     for the Native Hawaiian Health Care Program. The Committee 
     has included sufficient funding so that health care 
     activities funded under the Native Hawaiian Health Care 
     Program can be supported under the broader community health 
     centers line. The Committee expects that not less than 
     $9,000,000 be provided for these activities in fiscal year 
     2003.
       The purpose of this activity is to improve the health 
     status of native Hawaiians by making primary care, health 
     promotion, and disease prevention services available through 
     the support of Native Hawaiian health systems. Services 
     provided include health screening, nutrition programs, and 
     contracting for basic primary care services. This activity 
     also supports a health professions scholarship program for 
     native Hawaiians.
     Other Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander health issues
       The Committee remains committed to the concept of a 
     demonstration project for American Samoans in Hawaii at the 
     Waimanalo Health Center that will integrate social services, 
     include traditional health, prevention and disease 
     management, and address the disparities in health status 
     among native Hawaiians and other minority populations.
       In addition, as emphasized last year, the Committee 
     strongly supports the establishment of a Center of Excellence 
     for Indigenous Health and Healing at the University of Hawaii 
     and other schools that serve native peoples including 
     American Indians, Alaska Natives and Pacific Islanders. The 
     incorporation of traditional medicine and healing practices 
     into the training of medical, nursing, social work, 
     psychology, pharmacy and public health students will not only 
     advance these disciplines but also enhance the health care 
     services delivered to these populations.

[[Page 838]]

       The Committee believes that community health centers are a 
     critical source of care for the underserved, particularly in 
     remote rural areas in States such as Alaska and Hawaii. To 
     facilitate the development of such centers in these and other 
     States with low-income persons living in extremely remote 
     areas, the Committee recommends that HRSA examine its 
     regulations and applications procedures to ensure they are 
     not unduly burdensome but are appropriately flexible to meet 
     the needs of these communities. New health centers in remote 
     communities are needed.
       Again, the Committee observes that the State of Hawaii and 
     Pacific Basin Region are experiencing an acute shortage of 
     doctorally prepared pharmacists, and there is no school of 
     pharmacy in the State. Unique to Hawaii is the fact that much 
     of its population comes from the Pacific basin region and use 
     health interventions that are unique to that part of the 
     world. Therefore, the Committee again urges HRSA to develop a 
     pharmacy program at the University of Hawaii/Hilo that 
     includes in its curriculum a strong clinical focus on Pacific 
     basin region culture and traditional interventions.
       The Committee recognizes the important service done by the 
     Molokai Health System on that remote island. This is an 
     exemplary facility. Its environment provides opportunities to 
     research outcomes of new interventions, evaluate culturally 
     relevant health education, train providers on caring for 
     ethnic populations and integrate non-Western health 
     treatments. The leadership of Molokai has also encouraged the 
     collaboration among diverse health professionals and the use 
     of technological advances such as telehealth and telemedicine 
     and video consultations. Given this history of success in 
     meeting the needs of its unique community, the Committee 
     strongly recommends that Molokai General Hospital be 
     designated as a Center of Excellence on the provision of 
     health care in rural areas.
     National Health Service Corps: Field placements
       The Committee provides $46,498,000 for field placement 
     activities, which is $8,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 
     level and the same as the administration request. The funds 
     provided for this program are used to support the activities 
     of National Health Service Corps obligors and volunteers in 
     the field, including travel and transportation costs of 
     assignees, training and education, recruitment of volunteers, 
     and retention activities. Salary costs of most new assignees 
     are paid by the employing entity.
     National Health Service Corps: Recruitment
       The Committee provides $142,918,000 for recruitment 
     activities, which is $43,929,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 level and the same as the administration request. This 
     program provides major benefits to students (full-cost 
     scholarships or sizable loan repayment) in exchange for an 
     agreement to serve as a primary care provider in a high 
     priority federally designated health professional shortage 
     area. The Committee reiterates its intention that funds 
     support multi-year, rather than single-year, commitments.
       The Committee applauds the President for building on the 
     Committee's Rural Health Initiative from the previous fiscal 
     year by proposing a needed increase for this program. The 
     Committee is again increasing funding for field placements 
     and recruitment to address growing concerns about primary 
     care provider shortages in rural and underserved areas. The 
     Committee strongly supports these programs because of their 
     success in recruiting, training, and retaining well-trained 
     providers in these areas. The Committee is aware that 
     providers who train in rural and underserved areas are more 
     likely to elect to practice in those areas.


                           HEALTH PROFESSIONS

       The Committee provides $305,564,000 for health professions 
     programs under Title VII of the Public Health Services Act, 
     which is $10,343,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $294,564,000 more than the administration request for these 
     programs.
       The Committee urges the administration to create a 
     partnership between the HRSA and the Arthritis Foundation for 
     the purpose of conducting a national study on the status of 
     pediatric rheumatology in the United States. As provided in 
     the Children's Health Act of 2000, this study will asses this 
     crisis and identify strategies for addressing the significant 
     shortage of pediatric services for children with arthritis. 
     The Secretary shall report the findings of the study to the 
     Committee no later than August 1, 2003.
       The Committee remains concerned about the widening gap 
     between the size of the Nation's aging baby boom population 
     and the number of pulmonary/critical care physicians. Given 
     the current funding trends for graduate medical education, we 
     can expect a severe shortage of these specialists by 2007. 
     The Committee therefore urges the Administrator to consult 
     with the American College of Chest Physicians and the members 
     of the Critical Care Workforce Partnership to develop a 
     comprehensive action plan to address this pending crisis.
       The following clusters and their associated programs are 
     included in this consolidated account:
     A. Training for diversity
       Centers of excellence
       This program was established to fund institutions that 
     train a significant portion of the Nation's minority health 
     professionals. Funds are used for the recruitment and 
     retention of students, faculty training, and the development 
     of plans to achieve institutional improvements. The 
     institutions that are designated as centers of excellence are 
     private institutions whose mission is to train disadvantaged 
     minority students for service in underserved areas. Located 
     in poor communities and usually with little State funding, 
     they serve the health care needs of their patients often 
     without remuneration. The Committee is pleased that the 
     agency has refocused the minority centers of excellence 
     program on providing support to historically minority health 
     professions institutions.
       The Committee is pleased that HRSA has re-focused the 
     Minority Centers of Excellence program on providing support 
     to historically minority health professions institutions.
       Health careers opportunity program
       This program provides funds to medical and other health 
     professions schools for recruitment of disadvantaged students 
     and pre-professional school preparations. The Committee is 
     pleased that HRSA has given priority consideration for grants 
     to minority health professions institutions, and recommends 
     that grant review committees have proportionate 
     representation from these institutions.
       The Committee is pleased that HRSA has given priority 
     consideration for H-COP grants to minority health professions 
     institutions, and recommends that grant review committees 
     have proportionate representation from these institutions. 
     The Committee continues to encourage the H-COP program to 
     consider applications that are responsive to allied health 
     professions which are experiencing shortages and high vacancy 
     rates.
       Faculty loan repayment
       This program provides for the repayment of education loans 
     for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds who are health 
     professions students or graduates, and who have agreed to 
     serve for not less than 2 years as a faculty member of a 
     health professions school.
       Scholarships for disadvantaged students
       This program provides grants to health professions schools 
     for student scholarships to individuals who are from 
     disadvantaged backgrounds and are enrolled as full-time 
     students in such schools. The Committee continues to intend 
     that all health professions disciplines made eligible by 
     statute be able to participate in the scholarships program.
     B. Training in primary care medicine and dentistry
       Family medicine training
       Family medicine activities support grants for graduate 
     training in family medicine, grants for pre-doctoral training 
     in family medicine, grants for faculty development in family 
     medicine, and grants for the establishment of departments of 
     family medicine. The Committee reiterates its support for 
     this program and recognizes its importance in increasing the 
     number of primary care physicians in underserved areas.
       General internal medicine and pediatrics training
       This program provides funds to public and private nonprofit 
     hospitals and schools of medicine and osteopathic medicine to 
     support residencies in internal medicine and pediatrics. 
     Grants may also include support for faculty.
       Physician assistants
       This program supports planning, development, and operation 
     of physician assistant training programs.
       General dentistry and pediatric dental residencies
       This program assists dental schools and postgraduate dental 
     training institutions to meet the costs of planning, 
     developing, and operating residency training and advanced 
     education programs in general practice of dentistry and funds 
     innovative models for postdoctoral general dentistry and 
     pediatric dentistry.
       The Committee recognizes the need to increase the number of 
     dentists in rural and underserved areas, and particularly 
     increase the number of pediatric dentists in those areas. 
     Rural States are disproportionately underserved by pediatric 
     dentists.
       The Committee recognizes that these programs play a 
     critical role in meeting the oral health care needs of 
     Americans; especially those who require specialized or 
     complex care and represent vulnerable populations in 
     underserved areas. Additionally, the Committee realizes that 
     several States have fewer than 10 pediatric dentists. This 
     clearly is not enough to address American children's needs.
     C. Interdisciplinary, community-based linkages
       Area health education centers
       This program links university health science centers with 
     community health service delivery systems to provide training 
     sites for students, faculty, and practitioners. The program 
     supports three types of projects:

[[Page 839]]

     Core grants to plan and implement programs; special 
     initiative funding for schools that have previously received 
     Area Health Education Centers (AHEC) grants; and model 
     programs to extend AHEC programs with 50 percent Federal 
     funding.
       Health education and training centers
       These centers provide training to improve the supply, 
     distribution, and quality of personnel providing health 
     services in the State of Florida or along the border between 
     the United States and Mexico and in other urban and rural 
     areas with populations with serious unmet health care needs.
       Allied health and other disciplines
       These programs seek to improve access, diversity, and 
     distribution of allied health practitioners to areas of need. 
     The program improves access to comprehensive and culturally 
     competent health care services for underserved populations.
       The Committee recognizes the need to continue the Graduate 
     Psychology Education Program within the Bureau of Health 
     Professions. The Committee understands that this is the only 
     federally funded psychology-training program, and for this 
     reason, considers its continuation a high priority. The 
     Committee urges the administration to establish of a graduate 
     training program in Geropsychology (GTG) to train health 
     service psychologists to work with older Americans, 
     especially in rural communities and other underserved people.
       The Committee continues to encourage HRSA to give priority 
     consideration to those projects for schools training allied 
     health professionals experiencing shortages, such as medical 
     technologists and cytotechnologists.
       Geriatric education centers and training
       The Committee expects this program to continue to support 
     grants to health professions schools to establish geriatric 
     education centers and to support geriatric training projects. 
     These centers and geriatric training programs play a vital 
     role in enhancing the skill-base of health care professionals 
     to care for our Nation's growing elderly population. The 
     Committee is concerned about the shortage of trained 
     geriatricians and urges the agency to give priority to 
     building the work force necessary to care for the Nation's 
     elderly.
       Quentin N. Burdick program for rural health 
           interdisciplinary training
       This program addresses shortages of health professionals in 
     rural areas through interdisciplinary training projects that 
     prepare students from various disciplines to practice 
     together, and offers clinical training experiences in rural 
     health and mental health care settings to expose students to 
     rural practice. The Committee continues to be concerned about 
     the lack of providers in rural areas and expects funding to 
     continue at least at the fiscal year 2003 level.
       The Committee supports addressing the issue of how the 
     delivery of chiropractic health care can be enhanced in rural 
     areas, and how more women and minorities can be recruited as 
     chiropractic health care practitioners in rural areas. The 
     Committee also expects the Bureau to expand its support for 
     telecommunications and telehealth initiatives for providing 
     distance education and training for nurses and allied health 
     professionals serving rural areas.
       Podiatric primary care training
       This program provides grants to hospitals and schools of 
     podiatric medicine for residency training in primary care. In 
     addition to providing grants to hospitals and schools of 
     podiatric medicine for residency training in primary care, 
     the program also permits HRSA to study and explore ways to 
     more effectively administer postdoctoral training in an ever 
     changing health care environment.
       Chiropractic demonstration grants
       The program provides grants to colleges and universities of 
     chiropractic to carry out demonstration projects in which 
     chiropractors and physicians collaborate to identify and 
     provide effective treatment of spinal and lower back 
     conditions. The Committee continues to strongly support the 
     chiropractic research and demonstration grant program, 
     originally authorized under Section 782 of Public Law 102-
     408, and funded by the Committee in previous years. The 
     Committee recommends that the chiropractic-medical school 
     demonstration grant program be continued.
       The Committee believes that demonstration projects that 
     address treatment for spinal and lower-back conditions, as 
     authorized under Section 755(b)(3) of Public Law 105-392, may 
     include training initiatives as well as research 
     collaborations between physicians, chiropractors and 
     chiropractic colleges. Therefore, the Committee directs HRSA 
     to provide funding for such training components of 
     chiropractic demonstration grant proposals in fiscal year 
     2003 and beyond.
     D. Workforce information and analysis
       Health professions data and analysis
       This program supports the collection and analysis of data 
     on the labor supply in various health professions and on 
     future work force configurations.
       Research on certain health professions issues
       This program supports research on the extent to which debt 
     has a detrimental effect on students entering primary care 
     specialties; the effects of federally funded education 
     programs for minorities attending and completing health 
     professions schools; and the effectiveness of State 
     investigations in protecting the health of the public.
     E. Public health workforce development
       With the continued need for public health training 
     throughout the country, the Committee believes these programs 
     serve an important role in maintaining the country's public 
     health infrastructure.
       Public health, preventive medicine and dental public health 
           programs
       This program supports awards to schools of medicine, 
     osteopathic medicine, public health, and dentistry for 
     support of residency training programs in preventive medicine 
     and dental public health; and for financial assistance to 
     trainees enrolled in such programs.
       Health administration programs
       This program provides grants to public or nonprofit private 
     educational entities, including schools of social work, but 
     not schools of public health, to expand and improve graduate 
     programs in health administration, hospital administration, 
     and health policy analysis and planning; and assists 
     educational institutions to prepare students for employment 
     with public or nonprofit private agencies.
     F. Children's hospital graduate medical education program
       The Committee provides $285,000,000 for the Children's 
     Hospital Graduate Medical Education (GME) program. This is 
     $33,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and $85,000,000 
     more than the administration request.
       The program provides support for health professions 
     training in children's teaching hospitals that have a 
     separate Medicare provider number (``free-standing'' 
     children's hospitals). Children's hospitals are statutorily 
     defined under Medicare as those whose inpatients are 
     predominantly under the age of 18. The funds in this program 
     are intended to make the level of Federal Graduate Medical 
     Education support more consistent with other teaching 
     hospitals, including children's hospitals, which share 
     provider numbers with other teaching hospitals. Payments are 
     determined by formula, based on a national per-resident 
     amount. Payments support training of resident physicians as 
     defined by Medicare in both ambulatory and inpatient 
     settings.
       The Committee believes Federal support for GME for 
     children's hospitals is a sound investment in children's 
     health. Congress has enacted expansions in children's health 
     coverage and increased support for health programs devoted to 
     children and biomedical research. Equitable funding for 
     children's hospitals GME is needed to sustain the pediatric 
     workforce, including an adequate supply of future pediatric 
     researchers, and our pediatric research enterprise.
       The Committee further recognizes that an inequity exists 
     for GME funding for children's teaching hospitals because 
     Medicare is the largest single payer of GME, and free-
     standing children's hospitals treat few Medicare patients. 
     These funds provide essential, equitable support for the 
     teaching contributions of these institutions.
     G. Nursing education programs
       The Committee provides $83,502,000 for Nursing Education 
     Programs under Title VIII of the Public Health Services Act 
     which is $1,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     the same as the administration request.
       The Committee recognizes the current nursing shortage is 
     creating a health care crisis in hospitals and skilled 
     nursing facilities. The lack of young people in nursing has 
     resulted in a steady and dramatic increase in the average age 
     of U.S. nurses. Today, the average age of a working RN is 43 
     years old. According to recent surveys, one in five nurses 
     plans to retire by 2006, exacerbating the shortage.
       Another factor contributing to the nursing shortage is the 
     availability of nursing faculty. They, like nurses in 
     healthcare delivery, are aging. Thus, for some schools, even 
     if they could recruit more students, they may not have 
     faculty to teach them. The Committee believes that this is an 
     area that requires critical attention.
       One reason for this shortage is the inability of nursing 
     schools to educate more nursing students, which is in turn 
     largely the result of a lack of qualified nursing faculty. 
     Since the average age of nurse educators today is 55, this 
     shortage of educators will continue to accelerate. The 
     Committee is further aware of the success of the Troops-to-
     Teachers program at the Departments of Defense and Education 
     in placing qualified military veterans into teaching 
     positions in America's public schools through an expedited 
     certification process. The Committee therefore encourages 
     HRSA to establish a pilot program similar to the Troops-to-
     Teachers program to encourage qualified, active duty military 
     nurses to become nurse educators in certified nursing school 
     programs. The program should include career and placement 
     assistance, transitional stipends for those who commit to 
     teach in nursing schools, and cooperation with nursing 
     schools to expedite the transition from the military to 
     civilian teaching.

[[Page 840]]


       Advanced education nursing
       The Committee provides $47,596,000 for Advanced Education 
     Nursing programs, which is $12,445,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and $13,445,000 more than the administration 
     request. This program funds nursing schools to prepare nurses 
     at the master's degree or higher level for teaching, 
     administration, or service in other professional nursing 
     specialties.
       Basic nurse education and practice
       The Committee provides $10,855,000 for Basic Nurse 
     Education and Practice programs, which is $5,434,000 less 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level and the administration 
     request. Authorized by Public Law 105-392, the goal of this 
     program is to improve the quality of nursing practice. 
     Activities under this program will initiate new projects that 
     will change the educational mix of the basic nursing 
     workforce and empower the workforce to meet the demands of 
     the current health care system.
       Nursing workforce diversity
       The Committee provides $25,051,000 for Nursing Workforce 
     Diversity programs, which is $18,879,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and the administration request. The goal of 
     this program is to improve the diversity of the nursing 
     workforce through increased educational opportunities for 
     individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds. The Committee 
     urges the Division of Nursing to develop and increase 
     cultural competence in nursing and to increase the number of 
     underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities in all areas of 
     nursing education and practice to enhance nursing's ability 
     to provide quality health care services to the increasingly 
     diverse community it serves.


                          other HRSA programs

     Hansen's disease services
       The Committee has included $18,142,000 for the Hansen's 
     Disease Program which is $303,000 more than fiscal year 2002 
     and the same as the administration request. This program 
     offers Hansen's Disease treatment in Baton Rouge at the 
     Center, at other contract supported locations in Baton Rouge, 
     and in grant supported outpatient regional clinics. These 
     programs provide treatment to about 3,000 of the 6,000 
     Hansen's disease sufferers in the United States.
       With the exception of about 40 long-term residents who 
     continue to reside at Carville, the program has completed the 
     move to leased space in Baton Rouge. Other former long term 
     residents have been offered and elected to receive a living 
     allowance from the program and now live independently. The 
     former Federal property at Carville has been transferred to 
     the State of Louisiana.
       Over the next few years a long term facility will be 
     developed in the Baton Rouge area and offered to the current 
     long term residents remaining at the Carville location as an 
     alternative to remaining at the historic facility.
       The program also conducts research focusing on the global 
     elimination of Hansen's Disease in laboratory facilities at 
     Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. Research 
     activities are directed toward the development of new anti-
     leprosy drugs and short-term more effective regimens; 
     manufacture and distribution of lepromin skin tests reagents 
     through the World Health Organization; identification of host 
     resistant mechanisms for potential use in vaccines 
     development; and application of state-of-the-art 
     biotechnology to develop simple lab techniques for case 
     detection and diagnosis of preclinical disease.
       The Committee was surprised to learn of the extent to which 
     there has been an increase in the number of individuals 
     afflicted with Hansen's Disease in Hawaii due to its 
     geographical location and the influx of immigrants from the 
     Pacific Basin region. Funds have been provided to assist the 
     State in its screening efforts, which of necessity, must be 
     targeted towards the unique immigration cultures.
     Healthy communities innovation initiative
       The Committee has included $20,000,000 for the Healthy 
     Communities Innovation Initiative. This new program is funded 
     at the administration's request.
       The Healthy Communities Innovation Initiative is a new 
     interdisciplinary services demonstration program which will 
     concentrate on the prevention of three of the most rapidly 
     increasing diseases in the United States; diabetes, asthma, 
     and obesity. The purpose of this initiative is to encourage 
     the development of innovative efforts within 5 communities in 
     defined geographical areas, to enhance access to services, 
     and change health outcomes.
     Maternal and child health block grant
       The Committee provides $741,531,000 for the maternal and 
     child health [MCH] block grant. This is $10,000,000 more than 
     fiscal year 2002 and the administration request.
       The Maternal and Child Health Block Grant program provides 
     a flexible source of funding that allows States to target 
     their most urgent maternal and child health needs through 
     development of community-based networks of preventive and 
     primary care that coordinate and integrate public and private 
     sector resources and programs for pregnant women, mothers, 
     infants, children, and adolescents. The program supports a 
     broad range of activities including prenatal care, well child 
     services and immunizations, reducing infant mortality, 
     preventing injury and violence, expanding access to oral 
     health care, addressing racial and ethnic disparities and 
     providing comprehensive care for children, adolescents, and 
     families through clinics, home visits and school-based health 
     programs.
       The MCH block grant funds are provided to States to support 
     health care for mothers and children. According to statute, 
     12.75 percent of funds over $600,000,000 are used for 
     community-integrated service systems [CISS] programs. Of the 
     remaining funds, 15 percent is used for special projects of 
     regional or national significance [SPRANS] while 85 percent 
     is distributed on the same percentage split as the basic 
     block grant formula.
       The Committee provides $5,000,000 more for SPRANS 
     activities than would otherwise be the case under the 
     statutory formula for oral health demonstration programs and 
     activities in the States. The Committee expects that the 
     programs will include grants to reduce the incidence of early 
     childhood caries and baby bottle tooth decay, community water 
     fluoridation, school-linked dental sealant programs, and to 
     implement State identified objectives for improving oral 
     health.
       The Committee is aware of the joint activities between CMS 
     and HRSA to improve access to medical and dental care for 
     mothers and children in underserved populations. CMS and the 
     Maternal and Child Health program at HRSA have worked 
     together to assist States to reduce barriers to care for 
     Medicaid and SCHIP populations for maternal and child health 
     care including oral health care. The Committee urges these 
     agencies to continue their partnership and expand support for 
     State oral health systems grants and innovative demonstration 
     projects for the prevention and early intervention of dental 
     diseases in young children, State dental access summit 
     meetings, and the National Maternal and Child Oral Health 
     Resource Center. The Committee recognizes that such agency 
     collaborations are instrumental for providing coordinated 
     services that do not duplicate limited resources.
       It is the Committee's understanding that MCH has committed 
     to retaining SPRANS funding for three thalassemia centers 
     that provide comprehensive services to patients and families 
     through fiscal year 2003. The Committee believes that these 
     are critical programs and commends MCH for its support for 
     them. The Committee further urges MCH to work closely with 
     these three centers and with the Cooley's Anemia Foundation 
     to assure that these centers continue to have a stable source 
     of support that will allow them to function at or above 
     current levels of service.
       The Committee commends HRSA's Maternal and Child Health 
     Bureau for its support of the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome 
     Program Support Center, and encourages the Bureau to continue 
     its efforts in this important area of service. The Committee 
     is pleased that the SIDS and Other Infant Death Support 
     Center is collaborating with the NIH to address the 
     disproportionately high incidence of SIDS among African 
     Americans.
       The Committee recognizes that numerous and challenging 
     problems confront our adolescent populations and that every 
     effort should be made to encourage initiatives that promote 
     the health and well being of whose who represent our future. 
     In particular, we commend the Waimanalo Health Center in 
     Hawaii and encourage all efforts to expand its programs for 
     adolescents.
       The Committee recognizes that every year over 4 million 
     infants are born and screened to detect conditions that 
     threaten their life and long-term health. Newborn screening 
     is a public health activity used for early identification of 
     infants affected by certain genetic, metabolic, hormonal, 
     and/or functional conditions for which there may be an 
     effective treatment or intervention. If left untreated, these 
     disorders can cause death, disability, mental retardation, 
     and other serious illnesses. Parents are often unaware that 
     while nearly all babies born in the United States undergo 
     newborn screening, the number and quality of these tests vary 
     from State to State. The Committee supports efforts, 
     including those authorized by the Children's Health Act of 
     2000, to eliminate the disparities that exist between the 
     types of screening provided in the States. Ultimately, 
     eliminating these disparities can be the difference between 
     children suffering irreversible injury or death versus 
     children receiving successful diagnosis and treatment.
     Healthy start initiative
       The Committee provides $98,989,000 for the healthy start 
     infant mortality initiative. This is the same as the fiscal 
     year 2002 and the administration request.
       The healthy start initiative was developed to respond to 
     persistently high rates of infant mortality in this Nation. 
     The initiative was expanded in fiscal year 1994 by a special 
     projects program, which supported an additional seven urban 
     and rural communities to implement infant mortality reduction 
     strategies and interventions. The Children's Health Act of 
     2000 fully authorized this initiative as an independent 
     program.

[[Page 841]]


     Universal newborn hearing screening and early intervention
       The Committee provides $10,000,000 for universal newborn 
     hearing screening and early intervention activities, which is 
     $1,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level and $10,000,000 more 
     than the administration request. The Committee rejects the 
     administration proposal to consolidate this program into the 
     Maternal and Child Health Block Grant program.
       The Committee continues to strongly support the initiative 
     it began 2 years ago to provide grants to States to establish 
     universal newborn hearing screening and early intervention 
     programs. This initiative has been quite successful and the 
     response from States has been substantial. The Committee is 
     aware that HRSA received many more high quality applications 
     for this program than it was able to fund. Numerous studies 
     have demonstrated that newborn hearing screening followed by 
     early intervention services can greatly improve health and 
     educational outcomes for children.
       Currently, 44 States and 3 territories have received 
     competitive grants for the purpose of implementing statewide 
     early hearing detection intervention (EHDI) programs. Since 
     these grants have only been operational for between 6 months 
     to 2 years, the Committee believes that a dedicated source of 
     funding is critical at this time to ensure that State EHDI 
     programs become fully operational and that screening programs 
     are properly linked with diagnosis, early intervention, and 
     the child's routine medical care (medical home).
       The Committee is concerned that only 67 percent of babies 
     are now screened for hearing loss before 1 month of age. Of 
     the babies screened, only 56 percent who needed diagnostic 
     evaluations actually receive them by 3 months of age. 
     Moreover, only 53 percent of those diagnosed with hearing 
     loss are enrolled in early intervention programs by 6 months 
     of age.
       The Committee has provided an increase to expand funding to 
     States, increase the availability of qualified pediatric 
     audiologists, educate health care providers and families 
     about the importance of and procedures for EHDI, continue and 
     expand the National Technical Assistance System which works 
     with States to develop their programs, evaluate the impact of 
     statewide EHDI programs, increase the capacity of States to 
     screen children for progressive and late-onset hearing 
     losses, as well as chronic middle ear infections, and to link 
     identified children with medical, audiological, 
     otolaryngological and early intervention services. To 
     minimize the loss to follow-up, the Committee urges HRSA to 
     ensure that all infants identified through the screening 
     process are linked to a medical home.
       The Committee expects HRSA to coordinate projects funded 
     with this appropriation with projects related to early 
     hearing detection and intervention by the National Center on 
     Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, the National 
     Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, the 
     National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, 
     and the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative 
     Services.
     Organ procurement and transplantation
       The Committee provides $24,990,000 for organ transplant 
     activities. This is $5,000,000 more than fiscal year 2002 and 
     the same as the administration request.
       These funds support a scientific registry of organ 
     transplant recipients and the National Organ Procurement and 
     Transplantation Network to match donors and potential 
     recipients of organs. A portion of the appropriated funds may 
     be used for education of the public and health professionals 
     about organ donations and transplants, and to support agency 
     staff providing clearinghouse and technical assistance 
     functions. The Committee encourages the agency to establish 
     linkages with State and Federal transportation officials to 
     improve coordination of donation following vehicular 
     accidents, through the establishment of donor registries.
       The Committee urges HRSA to implement policies to encourage 
     the retrieval of pancreata so that additional transplants can 
     be conducted.
       The Committee considers increasing the supply of organs, 
     available from voluntary donations to be a top public health 
     priority and expects that funds be committed to those 
     activities having the greatest demonstrable impact on 
     donation rate.
     National bone marrow donor program
       The Committee provides $22,034,000 for the national bone 
     marrow donor program. This is $37,000 more than fiscal year 
     2002 and the same as the administration request. The National 
     Bone Marrow Donor Registry is a network, operated under 
     contract, that helps patients suffering from leukemia or 
     other blood diseases find matching volunteer unrelated bone 
     marrow donors for transplants. The program also conducts 
     research on the effectiveness of unrelated marrow transplants 
     and related treatments.
     Rural health outreach grants
       The Committee provides $51,472,000 for health outreach 
     grants. This amount is $645,000 less than the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $13,620,000 more than the administration 
     request. This program supports projects that demonstrate new 
     and innovative models of outreach in rural areas such as 
     integration and coordination of health services.
       The Committee is aware that the population of the 
     Mississippi Delta suffers from the worst health status in the 
     United States. This predominately African-American population 
     suffers from disproportionately high rates of heart disease, 
     cancer, diabetes, sexually transmitted diseases, and other 
     infectious and chronic diseases. The Committee recognizes the 
     variety of factors including socioeconomic, heredity, 
     educational and environmental conditions that result in this 
     abnormally high incidence of disease and poor health status. 
     As a result of this combination of factors, the Committee 
     also understands the need for a sustained multi-faceted 
     approach that includes research, education, and 
     infrastructure, as well as surveillance, prevention and 
     treatment strategies to combat this health crisis. Therefore, 
     the Committee recommends the continued funding of these 
     activities as already initiated and undertaken by the 
     coordinated efforts of the Mississippi Delta Health 
     Initiative. The Delta Health Initiative is a partnership 
     between The University of Mississippi Medical Center, Delta 
     State University, Mississippi Valley State University and the 
     Mississippi Department of Health as well as Delta region 
     health officials, agencies and providers.
       The Committee is deeply concerned about the increased 
     incidence of prescription drug abuse in pockets of the 
     country, particularly rural and frontier communities. Using 
     existing authority under the Public Health Act, HRSA is urged 
     to establish a program to raise awareness and promote 
     comprehensive, community-focused, research-based approaches 
     to reversing this trend, principally among our youth. 
     Education and awareness on this critical issue will hopefully 
     reduce the incidence of non-medical use of prescribed drugs 
     and allow those patients who truly need these medicines to 
     continue to have access to them.
       The Committee understands that many primary care clinics in 
     isolated, remote locations are providing extended stay 
     services and are not staffed or receiving appropriate 
     compensation to provide this service. The Committee 
     encourages the agency to undertake a demonstration project to 
     evaluate the effectiveness of a new type of provider, the 
     ``Extended Stay Primary Care Center,'' to provide expanded 
     services in remote and isolated primary care clinics to meet 
     the needs of seriously ill or injured patients who cannot be 
     transferred quickly to acute care referral centers, and 
     patients who require monitoring and observation for a limited 
     time.
     Rural health research
       The Committee provides $16,808,000 for the Rural Health 
     Policy Development Program. This is $2,000,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and $10,808,000 more than the 
     administration request. The funds provide support for the 
     Office as the focal point for the Department's efforts to 
     improve the delivery of health services to rural communities 
     and populations. Funds are used for rural health research 
     centers, the National Advisory Committee on Rural Health, and 
     a reference and information service.
     State offices of rural health
       The Committee provides $10,000,000 for the State Offices of 
     Rural Health. This is $2,001,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     level and $6,000,000 more than the administration request. 
     The State Office of Rural Health program helps the States 
     strengthen rural heath care delivery systems. For the second 
     consecutive year, Committee is significantly increasing 
     funding for the offices of rural health to allow States to 
     better coordinate care and improve support and outreach in 
     rural areas. The Committee believes that increased funds for 
     this purpose are critical to improving access and quality 
     health care services throughout rural communities.
     Telehealth
       The Committee provides $39,192,000 for telehealth 
     activities. This is $2,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     level and $33,583,000 more the administration request.
       The telehealth program promotes the use of technologies to 
     improve access to health services and distance education for 
     health professionals. The Committee recognizes the tremendous 
     potential that telehealth has for improving the delivery of 
     quality health care to rural underserved areas and for 
     providing distance education to health care professionals. 
     The Committee supports HRSA's numerous rural telehealth 
     initiatives and encourages the agency to work in partnership 
     with medical librarians and other health information 
     specialists in the development and implementation of its 
     telehealth projects.
     Native and rural Alaskan health care
       The Committee provides $30,000,000 for the Denali 
     Commission, which is $10,000,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $30,000,000 more than the administration 
     request. These funds support construction and renovation of 
     health clinics, hospitals and social service facilities in 
     rural Alaska as authorized by Public Law 106-113. Provision 
     of this funding will help remote communities in Alaska 
     develop critically needed health and social service 
     infrastructure for which no other funding sources are 
     available so that health and social services may be provided 
     to Alaskans in remote rural communities as they

[[Page 842]]

     are in other communities throughout the country.
       The Committee expects the Denali Commission to allocate 
     funds to a mix of rural hospital, clinic, long-term care and 
     social service facilities, rather than focusing exclusively 
     on clinic funding.
     Critical care programs
       The Committee has grouped the following ongoing and 
     proposed activities: emergency medical services for children, 
     the traumatic brain injury program, trauma care/emergency 
     medical services, and poison control centers.
     Emergency medical services for children
       The Committee provides $20,000,000 for emergency medical 
     services for children. This is $1,009,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and $1,007,000 more than the 
     administration request. The program supports demonstration 
     grants for the delivery of emergency medical services to 
     acutely ill and seriously injured children.
       The Committee urges HRSA to consider EMSC a high priority, 
     and supports the efforts and purpose of the EMSC program to 
     continue to work with States to improve the training and 
     availability of emergency medical services personnel who 
     effectively treat children. The Committee also urges the 
     Department to focus on the development of prevention and 
     treatment programs and education of emergency personnel in 
     remote and rural areas throughout the country.
     Poison control centers
       The Committee provides $24,000,000 for poison control 
     center activities, which is $2,792,000 more than fiscal year 
     2002. The funds provided support activities authorized in the 
     Poison Control Center Enforcement and Enhancement Act as well 
     as the development and assessment of uniform patient 
     management guidelines.
     Traumatic brain injury program
       The Committee provides $9,000,000 for the traumatic brain 
     injury program, which is $1,501,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 level and the administration request. The program 
     supports implementation and planning grants to States for 
     coordination and improvement of services to individuals and 
     families with traumatic brain injuries as well as protection 
     and advocacy. Such services can include: pre-hospital care, 
     emergency department care, hospital care, rehabilitation, 
     transitional services, education, employment, and long-term 
     support. The Committee includes $3,000,000 for protection and 
     advocacy services, as authorized under section 1305 of Public 
     Law 106-310.
     Black lung clinics
       The Committee provides $6,000,000 for black lung clinics. 
     This is the same level as the fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     administration request. This program funds clinics which 
     treat respiratory and pulmonary diseases of active and 
     retired coal miners. These clinics reduce the incidence of 
     high-cost inpatient treatment for these conditions.
     Trauma care
       The Committee provides $5,000,000 for trauma/emergency 
     medical services. This is $1,500,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and $5,000,000 more than the administration 
     request. The Committee rejects the administration proposal to 
     consolidate this program into the Maternal and Child Health 
     Block Grant program. This program is intended to improve the 
     Nation's overall emergency medical systems, which are 
     constantly activated to respond to a wide range of natural 
     and man-made disasters, such as: earthquakes; mass violence; 
     riots; school shootings; motor vehicle crashes; and terrorist 
     attacks.
     Nurse loan repayment for shortage area service
       The Committee provides $15,000,000 for nurse loan payment 
     for shortage area services. This is $4,761,000 more than 
     fiscal year 2002 and the same as the administration request.
       This program offers student loan repayment to nurses in 
     exchange for an agreement to serve not less than 2 years in 
     an Indian health service health center, native Hawaiian 
     health center, public hospital, community or migrant health 
     center, or rural health clinic. The Committee commends the 
     administration for supporting and building on the commitment 
     made in the Rural Health Initiative last year for this 
     critical program. The Committee again intends that the 
     majority of the increased funding be provided to increase the 
     supply of qualified health care professionals in rural areas.
     Payment to Hawaii, Hansen's disease treatment
       The Committee provides $2,045,000 for Hansen's disease 
     services. This is the same as fiscal year 2002 and the 
     administration request.
       Within the amount provided for Hansen's disease services, 
     the Committee urges funding for the fiscal year 2003 payment 
     to the State of Hawaii for the medical care and treatment in 
     its hospital and clinic facilities of persons with Hansen's 
     disease at a per diem rate not greater than the comparable 
     per diem operating cost per patient at Gillis W. Long 
     National Hansen's Disease Center. This amount is the same as 
     the administration request and the 2002 level.


                  acquired immune deficiency syndrome

     Ryan White AIDS programs
       The Committee provides $2,051,295,000 for Ryan White AIDS 
     programs. The recommendation includes $25,000,000 in 
     transfers available under section 241 of the Public Health 
     Service Act. The recommendation is $140,708,000 more than 
     fiscal year 2002 and $140,570,000 more than the 
     administration request.
       Recent advances in diagnosis, treatment, and medical 
     management of HIV disease has resulted in dramatic 
     improvements in individual health, lower death rates and 
     transmission of HIV from mother to infant. The Committee 
     recognizes, however, that not all HIV infected persons have 
     benefited from these medical advances and expects that the 
     Ryan White CARE Act programs provide social and other support 
     services with the specific intent of obtaining and 
     maintaining HIV-infected individuals in comprehensive 
     clinical care.
       The Department is encouraged to identify obstacles 
     confronting people with HIV/AIDS in receiving medical care 
     funded through the Ryan White programs and to develop 
     strategies to address these problems in light of the changing 
     medical needs of a patient population that is living longer 
     with current therapies.
       The Committee recognizes the recent advances in the 
     treatment and medical care of persons with HIV disease and 
     the need for early access to these interventions and 
     services. Furthermore, the Committee understands that 
     disparities exist in accessing and maintaining the benefits 
     of these recent advances among communities highly impacted by 
     HIV and AIDS.
     Emergency assistance--title I
       The Committee provides $630,000,000 for emergency 
     assistance grants to eligible metropolitan areas 
     disproportionately affected by the HIV/AIDS epidemic. This 
     amount is $10,486,000 above the fiscal year 2002 and the 
     administration request. These funds are provided to 
     metropolitan areas meeting certain criteria. One-half of the 
     funds are awarded by formula and one-half are awarded through 
     supplemental competitive grants.
       The Committee encourages the Secretary, when awarding 
     supplemental title I funds, to give priority as appropriate 
     to EMA's whose applications increase services to women, 
     adolescents, and children with AIDS/HIV infection.
     Comprehensive care programs--title II
       The Committee provides $1,095,000,000 for HIV health care 
     and support services. This amount is $117,627,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the administration request. These 
     funds are awarded to States to support HIV service delivery 
     consortia, the provision of home and community-based care 
     services for individuals with HIV disease, continuation of 
     health insurance coverage for low-income persons with HIV 
     disease and support for State AIDS drug assistance programs 
     [ADAP].
       The Committee continues to be encouraged by the progress of 
     anti-retroviral therapy in reducing the mortality rates 
     associated with HIV infection and in enhancing the quality of 
     life of patients on medication. The Committee has approved 
     bill language for $739,000,000 for AIDS medications, which is 
     $100,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     administration request.
       The Committee further urges HRSA to encourage States to 
     utilize Federal ADAP funding in the most cost-effective 
     manner to maximize access to HIV drug therapies and to 
     eliminate cost-shifting from Medicaid to the State ADAP 
     programs. States with ADAP funding should be allowed the 
     flexibility to purchase and maintain insurance policies for 
     eligible clients including covering any costs associated with 
     these policies, or continue to pay premiums on existing 
     insurance policies that provide a full range of HIV 
     treatments and access to comprehensive primary care services, 
     as determined by a State. Funds should not be committed to 
     purchase insurance deemed inadequate by a State in its 
     provision of primary care or in its ability to secure 
     adequate access to HIV treatments.
     Early intervention program--title III-B
       The Committee provides $200,000,000 for early intervention 
     grants. This is $6,083,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     level and $5,945,000 more than the administration request. 
     These funds are awarded competitively to primary health care 
     providers to enhance health care services available to people 
     at risk of HIV and AIDS. Funds are used for comprehensive 
     primary care, including counseling, testing, diagnostic, and 
     therapeutic services.
       The Committee encourages HRSA to fairly allocate the 
     increase for title III-B between existing grantees and new 
     providers. By providing additional funds to current grantees, 
     the Committee intends to strengthen the HIV care 
     infrastructure already established in title III-B clinics. 
     The Committee also supports expansion of the number of 
     communities receiving assistance from this title.
       Priority should be placed on funding existing and new 
     projects in rural, medically underserved areas, and secondary 
     cities outside of major metropolitan areas in order to build 
     clinical capacity for the delivery of HIV care among 
     clinicians serving high-risk populations, minorities, and 
     those who are unable

[[Page 843]]

     to access clinical HIV care for economic reasons. In building 
     capacity, the goal is to develop knowledgeable clinicians to 
     improve access to quality HIV treatment based upon the 
     evolving HIV treatment guidelines of DHHS.
     Women, infants, children, and youth--title IV
       The Committee provides $75,000,000 for title IV pediatric 
     AIDS, which is $4,010,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level 
     and the administration request. Funds are awarded to 
     community health centers, family planning agencies, 
     comprehensive hemophilia diagnostic and treatment centers, 
     federally qualified health centers under section 
     1905(1)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act, county and 
     municipal health departments and other nonprofit community-
     based programs that provide comprehensive primary health care 
     services to populations with or at risk for HIV disease.
       The Committee intends that at least 90 percent of total 
     title IV funding be provided to grantees. With the exception 
     of funds provided through the CBC/Minority HIV/AIDS 
     initiative, the Committee expects the funding increase will 
     be primarily used to support maintenance and expansion of 
     existing care services, including the rising costs of 
     providing comprehensive care and the implementation of 
     quality management programs. The Committee intends that HRSA 
     use a significant portion of the remaining funds to expand 
     comprehensive services for youth. The Committee is pleased by 
     current efforts to facilitate ongoing communication with and 
     among grantees on the administration of the title IV program 
     and expects the agency to expand these efforts. The Committee 
     expects the agency to work with grantees to develop effective 
     title IV-specific site visit methodologies.
       Some 5 percent of the funds appropriated under this section 
     may be used to provide peer-based technical assistance. 
     Within this amount, sufficient funds are available to 
     maintain and expand work being done to create a national 
     consumer and provider education center on the use of various 
     strategies and planning in the care of children, youth, women 
     and families infected with or affected by HIV and AIDS.
     AIDS dental services -
       The Committee provides $16,000,000 for AIDS dental 
     services, which is $2,502,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     level and the administration request. This program provides 
     grants to dental schools, dental hygiene schools, and 
     postdoctoral dental education programs to assist with the 
     cost of providing unreimbursed oral health care to patients 
     with HIV disease.
       The Committee recognizes the importance of oral health care 
     providers in the diagnosis of HIV and in treating the painful 
     and debilitating oral manifestations of this disease. The 
     Committee supports this program as it improves access to oral 
     health services for low-income and uninsured people living 
     with HIV and AIDS by providing partial reimbursement to 
     dental education institutions for delivering care. The 
     Committee recognizes that these dental services are vital 
     because they are often the only services available to AIDS 
     patients since many State Medicaid programs do not cover 
     adult dental services.
     AIDS education and training centers
       The Committee provides $35,295,000 for the AIDS education 
     and training centers [AETC's], which is the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the administration request. AIDS 
     education and training centers train health care 
     practitioners, faculty, and students who care for AIDS 
     patients outside of the traditional health professions 
     education venues, and support curriculum development on 
     diagnosis and treatment of HIV infection for health 
     professions schools and training organizations. The targeted 
     education efforts by AETC's are needed to ensure the cost-
     effective use of the significant expenditures in Ryan White 
     programs and the AIDS drugs assistance program. The agency is 
     urged to fully utilize the AETC's to ensure the quality of 
     medical care and to ensure, as much as possible, that no 
     individual with HIV receives suboptimal therapy due to the 
     lack of health care provider information.
     Family planning
       The Committee provides $285,000,000 for the title X family 
     planning program. This is $19,945,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and $19,725,000 more than the administration 
     request. Title X grants support primary health care services 
     at more than 4,500 clinics nationwide. About 85 percent of 
     family planning clients are women at or below 150 percent of 
     poverty level. Title X of the Public Health Service Act, 
     which established the family planning program, authorizes the 
     provision of a broad range of acceptable and effective family 
     planning methods and preventive health services. This 
     includes FDA-approved methods of contraception.
       The Committee has increased funding for clinics receiving 
     Title X funds to address increasing financial pressures in 
     their effort to provide high-quality, subsidized family 
     planning services and preventive health care to (4.4 million 
     each year, many of whom are uninsured) low-income and 
     uninsured women. These pressures include rising medical costs 
     of newer and longer lasting contraceptive methods, 
     pharmaceuticals, and screening and diagnostic technologies 
     (as well as a rising uninsured population). The Committee 
     recognizes that due to these financial pressures, it will be 
     difficult for Title X clinics to serve the current number of 
     patients without a significant funding increase. The 
     Committee also recognizes that the increased availability of 
     new contraceptive methods and screening technologies will 
     improve women's health and result in a decrease in unintended 
     pregnancies nationwide.
       The Committee remains concerned that programs receiving 
     Title X funds ought to have access to these resources as 
     quickly as possible. The Committee, therefore, again 
     instructs the Department to distribute to the regional 
     offices all of the funds available for family planning 
     services no later than 60 days following enactment of this 
     bill.
       The Committee intends that at least 90 percent of funds 
     appropriated for Title X activities be for clinical services 
     authorized under section 1001 of the Act. All such funds for 
     section 1001 activities are to be provided to the regional 
     offices to be awarded to grantees to provide family planning 
     methods and services as specified by the Title X statute. The 
     Committee further expects the Office of Family Planning to 
     spend any remaining year-end funds in section 1001 
     activities.
     Community Based Abstinence Education Program
       The Committee provides $40,000,000 for this program, which 
     provides support for the development and implementation of 
     abstinence education programs for adolescents, ages 12 
     through 18. This is the same as the fiscal year 2002 level 
     and $32,979,000 less than the President's request. These 
     funds, together with the $50,000,000 in mandatory funds 
     provided through the Personal Responsibility and Work 
     Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, will make $90,000,000 
     available for abstinence education. These programs are unique 
     in that their entire focus is to educate young people and 
     create an environment within communities that support teen 
     decisions to postpone sexual activity until marriage. The 
     Committee intends that the Secretary fund grantees who are 
     currently receiving section 510 funds, but whose project 
     periods were scheduled to expire at the end of fiscal year 
     2002.
     Health care facilities
       The Committee has provided no funding for health care 
     facilities, which is $311,942,000 below the 2002 level and 
     the same as the administration request. Funds are made 
     available to public and private entities for construction and 
     renovation of health care and other facilities. The reduction 
     below last year's level is due to the funding of one-time 
     projects.
     Buildings and facilities
       The Committee provides $250,000 for buildings and 
     facilities, which is the same as fiscal year 2002 level and 
     the administration request.
     Rural hospital flexibility grants
       The Committee provides $45,000,000 for rural hospital 
     flexibility grants, which is $5,000,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and $20,000,000 more than the administration 
     request.
       This program administers the Rural Health Flexibility 
     Program previously administered by the Health Care Finance 
     Administration. Under this program, eligible rural hospitals 
     may convert themselves into limited service facilities termed 
     Critical Care Hospitals. Such entities are then eligible to 
     receive cost-based payments from Medicare. The grant 
     component of the program assists States with the development 
     and implementation of State rural health plans, conversion 
     assistance, and associated activities.
       Of the amount provided, the Committee includes $20,000,000 
     to continue the Small Rural Hospital Improvement Grant 
     Program, as authorized by Section 1820(g)(3) of the Social 
     Security Act and Public Law 107-116 and outlined in House 
     Report 107-342.
     Rural access to emergency devices
       The Committee provides $12,500,000 for rural access to 
     emergency devices, which is the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     level and $10,500,000 more than the administration request. 
     This program, which is to be administered through the Rural 
     Health Outreach Office, provides grants to expand placement 
     of automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) in rural areas 
     and to ensure that first responders and emergency medical 
     personnel are appropriately trained.
     Radiogenic diseases
       The Committee provides $2,000,000 for the Radiation 
     Exposure Compensation Act, which is $2,000,000 less than the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the administration request. This 
     program provides grants for the education, prevention, and 
     early detection of ragiogenic cancers and diseases resulting 
     from exposure to uranium during its mining and milling at 
     nuclear test sites.
     National practitioner data bank
       The Committee provides $19,500,000 for the national 
     practitioner data bank, which is $2,900,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 level

[[Page 844]]

     and the same as the administration request. The Committee and 
     the administration assume that full funding will be provided 
     entirely through the collection of user fees and will cover 
     the full cost of operating the data bank. Traditional bill 
     language is included to ensure that user fees are collected 
     to cover all costs of processing requests and providing such 
     information to data bank users.
     Health care integrity and protection data bank
       The Committee provides $5,600,000 for the health care 
     integrity and protection data bank, which is $500,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level and the same as the 
     administration request. The Committee and the administration 
     assume that full funding will be provided entirely through 
     the collection of user fees and will cover the full cost of 
     operating the data bank. The data bank is intended to 
     collect, maintain, and report on certain actions taken 
     against health care providers, suppliers, and practitioners.
     Healthcare access for the uninsured/Community access program
       The Committee provides no funding for this activity. In 
     fiscal year 2002, $120,027,000 was provided. The 
     administration requested no funds for this purpose. This 
     program is designed to increase the capacity and 
     effectiveness of community health care institutions and 
     providers who serve patients, regardless of their ability to 
     pay.
     Program management
       The Committee provides $143,354,000 for program management 
     activities for fiscal year 2003. This is $5,783,000 less than 
     the fiscal year 2002 level and $348,000 less than the 
     administration request.


               Medical facilities guarantee and loan fund

       The Committee has not included funding for the Medical 
     Facilities and Guarantee and Loan Fund. This fund was 
     established in 1972 under the Medical Facilities Construction 
     Program in order to make funds available for construction of 
     medical facilities. The fund is established in the Treasury 
     without fiscal year limitation to pay interest subsidies, 
     make payments of principal and interest in the event of 
     default on a guaranteed loan, and repurchase, if necessary 
     loans sold and guaranteed. There are sufficient carryover 
     funds from prior years' appropriations to pay defaults and 
     interest subsidy payments; therefore, no appropriation is 
     required to cover these payments.


                   Health education assistance loans

       The Committee provides no additional guarantee authority 
     for new HEAL loans in fiscal year 2003, which is the same as 
     the President's request.
       The Committee provides $7,000,000 to liquidate obligations 
     from loans guaranteed before 1992, which is the same as the 
     administration request and $3,000,000 less than the 2002 
     appropriation.
       For administration of the HEAL Program including the Office 
     of Default Reduction, the Committee provides $3,914,000, 
     which is $123,000 above the 2002 appropriation and the same 
     as the administration request.
       The HEAL Program insures loans to students in the health 
     professions and helps to ensure graduate student access to 
     health professions education, especially among minority, 
     disadvantaged students, and those from behavioral and mental 
     health fields. The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, changed 
     the accounting of the HEAL Program. One account is used to 
     pay obligations arising from loans guaranteed prior to 1992. 
     A second account was created to pay obligations and collect 
     premiums on loans guaranteed in 1992 and after. 
     Administration of the HEAL Program is separate from 
     administration of other HRSA programs.


                 Vaccine injury compensation trust fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$84,696,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................88,909,000
Committee recommendation.....................................88,909,000

       The Committee provides that $88,909,000 be released from 
     the vaccine injury compensation trust fund in fiscal year 
     2003, of which $2,991,000 is for administrative costs. The 
     total amount is $4,213,000 more than fiscal year 2002 and the 
     same as the administration request.
       The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program provides 
     compensation for individuals with vaccine-associated injuries 
     or deaths. Funds are awarded to reimburse medical expenses, 
     lost earnings, pain and suffering, legal expenses, and a 
     death benefit. The vaccine injury compensation trust fund is 
     funded by excise taxes on certain childhood vaccines.

               Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


                Disease Control, Research, and Training

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$4,303,256,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,874,444,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,387,249,000

       The Committee provides $4,387,249,000 for the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which is $83,993,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 level and $512,805,000 above the 
     budget request. The Committee recommendation includes 
     $84,500,000 in transfers available under section 241 of the 
     Public Health Service Act.
       The activities of the CDC focus on several major 
     priorities: provide core public health functions; respond to 
     urgent health threats; monitor the Nation's health using 
     sound scientific methods; build the Nation's health 
     infrastructure to insure our national security against 
     bioterrorist threats; promote women's health; and provide 
     leadership in the implementation of nationwide prevention 
     strategies to encourage responsible behavior and adoption of 
     lifestyles that are conducive to good health.
       The anthrax attacks of late last year set off an avalanche 
     of false alarms that produced thousands of samples for 
     testing. Each of these samples had to be handled as if 
     contaminated with the deadly Bacillus anthracis bacterium. 
     The Committee is aware of the sacrifices made to ensure the 
     accurate processing and testing of thousands of samples for 
     anthrax. The Committee commends the CDC, especially the 
     National Center for Infectious Diseases, National Institute 
     for Occupational Safety and Health, and National Center for 
     Environmental Health, for their efforts during this time of 
     uncertainty.


    Birth Defects, Developmental Disabilities, Disability and Health

       The Committee recommends $97,691,000 for birth defects, 
     developmental disabilities, disability and health which is 
     $7,781,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level and $8,368,000 
     above the administration request.
       Birth defects are the leading cause of infant death in the 
     United States. More than 150,000 infants are born with birth 
     defects each year in the United States. The Child Health Act 
     of 2000 created CDC's National Center on Birth Defects and 
     Developmental Disabilities. The Committee recognizes CDC as 
     the Nation's leader in assisting States in monitoring for 
     birth defects and developmental disabilities and improving 
     the health and wellness of people living with a disability. 
     The birth defects and developmental disabilities monitoring 
     programs collect, analyze, and make available data on the 
     incidence and causes of birth defects and developmental 
     disabilities.
       Autism.--Within the total provided, $1,368,000 above the 
     budget request is to expand autism surveillance activities. 
     The Committee is concerned about the lack of information 
     available on the prevalence, cause or effective treatment of 
     autism. Basic data collection and verification is integral to 
     better understanding the incidence of autism, the factors 
     that may be associated with a higher rate of incidence, and 
     effective treatment.
       Childhood birth defects and developmental disorders.--The 
     Committee recognizes the importance of helping children 
     suffering from birth defects and developmental disorders. 
     These include cleft lip, cleft palate, missing limbs and 
     other facial deformities from hemanjiomas, hemifacial and 
     microsomia to microtia, aural atresia, and craniosynostosis. 
     The Committee, therefore, urges the National Center on Birth 
     Defects and Developmental Disabilities to conduct research on 
     the incidence of birth defects including abnormalities of 
     structure, function, or body metabolism, the cost of 
     appropriate medical treatment, availability of insurance 
     coverage, and insurance coverage policies. The Committee 
     urges the Center to work with the National Foundation for 
     Facial Reconstruction and the American Society of Plastic 
     Surgeons to develop an information clearinghouse for parents 
     and physicians regarding appropriate medical treatment.-
       Disabilities Prevention Programs.--The Committee continues 
     to strongly support the CDC disabilities prevention program 
     which provides support to States and academic centers to 
     reduce the incidence and severity of disabilities, especially 
     developmental and secondary disabilities. Individuals living 
     with disabilities and their families need information on 
     medical, physical, and emotional needs, and resources and 
     support to reintegrate socially and economically into 
     society. The Committee is pleased by the partnerships between 
     the CDC and the disability-related information and support 
     centers in the areas of limb loss, paralysis and AD/HD and 
     has included sufficient funding to allow CDC to continue 
     these successful programs and partnerships at, at least, 
     their current funding levels and with existing partners.
       In particular, the Committee commends CDC for its work with 
     the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation to establish an 
     information and support center and to reduce secondary 
     disabilities among people with paralysis.
       The Committee encourages the continued support of 
     activities aimed at improving knowledge about the usefulness 
     and effectiveness of health promotion programs for persons 
     with disabilities.
       Duchenne muscular dystrophy.--The Committee has included 
     $4,000,000 to expand the epidemiological program in Duchenne 
     and Becker muscular dystrophy. The Center is expected to 
     gather and analyze extensive data on these diseases, 
     including a comparison of treatment approaches. -
       Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.--Within the total provided, 
     $1,000,000 above the budget request is to expand activities 
     related to Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS).

[[Page 845]]

       The Committee supports CDC's efforts to reduce the rates of 
     Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) through surveillance and 
     prevention programs. FAS, the country's leading known cause 
     of mental retardation and birth defects, devastates the lives 
     of as many as 12,000 newborn children and their families each 
     year, and is completely preventable. This increase will allow 
     CDC to expand surveillance activities to document the 
     magnitude of the problem and to develop and implement 
     prevention strategies.
       Folic acid education campaign to prevent birth defects.--
     Each year, an estimated 2,500 babies are born with neural 
     tube defects (NTDs), birth defects of the brain and spinal 
     cord, including anencephaly and spina bifida. CDC estimates 
     that up to 70 percent of NTDs could be prevented if all women 
     of childbearing age consume 400 micrograms of folic acid 
     daily, beginning before pregnancy. The Committee commends CDC 
     for its leadership in this area.
       Newborn Screening.--Title XXVI of the Children's Health Act 
     of 2000 provides that the Secretary shall award grants to 
     improve or expand the ability of State and local public 
     health agencies to provide screening to newborns and children 
     having or at risk for heritable disorders. The Committee 
     supports further research and demonstration projects for the 
     translation of new scientific knowledge into applied public 
     health screening programs. The Committee urges CDC to 
     coordinate with HRSA in translating the results of these 
     efforts, particularly in the areas of Fragile X Syndrome and 
     Cystic Fibrosis, into guidance for public health programs, 
     including State newborn screening programs.
       The Committee commends CDC for its early hearing detection 
     and intervention (EHDI) program for newborns, infants and 
     young children with hearing loss. Thirty States have received 
     cooperative agreement grants over the last 2 years (15 States 
     in fiscal year 2000 and another 15 States in fiscal year 
     2001) to assist in developing strong surveillance and 
     tracking systems. These grants ensure that infants referred 
     from newborn hearing screening programs receive appropriate 
     and timely diagnostic and early intervention services. The 
     Committee is concerned that of babies who were screened, only 
     56 percent who needed diagnostic evaluations actually 
     received them by 3 months of age. Moreover, only 53 percent 
     of those diagnosed with hearing loss were enrolled in early 
     intervention programs by 6 months of age. The Committee 
     believes that increased funding is required to ensure that 
     States develop appropriate surveillance and tracking systems 
     to provide timely and appropriate diagnostic and intervention 
     services to infants and toddlers.
       The Committee encourages the National Center on Birth 
     Defects and Developmental Disabilities to provide 
     clarification and guidance to States regarding how EHDI 
     surveillance, tracking, and data management programs are 
     affected by the Health Insurance Portability and 
     Accountability Act and the Family Education Rights and 
     Privacy Act
       To avoid duplication and interference, the Committee 
     expects CDC to coordinate projects funded with this 
     appropriation with EHDI projects conducted by the Health 
     Resources Services Administration, the National Institute on 
     Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, the National 
     Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, and the 
     Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
       Regional centers for birth defects research and 
     prevention.--The Committee encourages CDC to increase support 
     for research activities conducted by the eight regional 
     Centers for Birth Defects Research and Prevention. These 
     centers located in Arkansas, California, Georgia, Iowa, 
     Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Texas, conduct 
     epidemiological research on the prevention of birth defects. 
     For over 5 years, the Centers have identified cases and 
     obtained data for inclusion in the National Birth Defect 
     Prevention Study, the largest case-control study of birth 
     defects ever conducted. Now, the centers can begin to use 
     this data for studies that will lead to understanding the 
     biological mechanisms of the nearly 80 percent of birth 
     defects whose causes are unknown. An increase will allow 
     these centers to expand and intensify the study of genetic 
     and environmental causes of birth defects.
       Special Olympics Healthy Athletes Initiative.--The 
     Committee continues to be concerned about the unmet health 
     needs among persons with mental retardation. In March of 
     2001, this Committee held a field hearing in Anchorage 
     Alaska, during the World Winter Special Olympics Games. At 
     that hearing, numerous witnesses, including persons with 
     mental retardation, expressed their frustration in securing 
     needed health services and the severe consequences of not 
     being able to obtain such services in a timely and 
     appropriate way. Persons with mental retardation have more 
     health challenges and poorer access to health care than the 
     rest of the population. As a result, their lives are 
     unnecessarily shortened and the quality of their lives is 
     severely compromised.
       To address the unmet health needs among its athletes, 
     Special Olympics created the Healthy Athletes Program, which 
     provides Special Olympics athletes access to an array of 
     health assessment, education, preventive health services and 
     supplies, and referral for follow-up care where needed. These 
     services are provided to athletes without cost in conjunction 
     with competitions at local, State, national, and 
     international levels. Last year, this Committee established a 
     Special Olympics Healthy Athletes Initiative at CDC to 
     support these efforts. Sufficient funds have been included 
     this year to increase funding for that activity.
       Spina Bifida.--The Committee recognizes that Spina Bifida 
     is the leading permanently disabling birth defect in the 
     United States. While Spina Bifida and related neural tube 
     defects are highly preventable through proper nutrition, 
     including appropriate folic acid consumption, and its 
     secondary effects can be mitigated through appropriate and 
     proactive medical care and management, such efforts have not 
     been adequately supported or coordinated to result in 
     significant reductions in these costly conditions. In an 
     effort to improve the quality-of-life for individuals 
     affected by Spina Bifida and reduce and prevent the 
     occurrence of and suffering from this birth defect, the 
     Committee has provided $2,000,000 to support the 
     establishment of a National Spina Bifida Program. This 
     program should be established in coordination with a leading 
     national voluntary health agency which exists to promote the 
     prevention of spina bifida and to enhance the lives of all 
     affected. Such a national program will lead the nation's 
     efforts in addressing issues associated with this devastating 
     birth defect.
       State cooperative agreements for birth defects 
     surveillance.--The Committee encourages CDC to increase 
     support to States to develop, implement, and/or expand 
     community-based birth defects tracking systems, programs to 
     prevent birth defects, and activities to improve access to 
     health services for children with birth defects. CDC is now 
     assisting twenty-eight States with cooperative agreements.
     Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
       The Committee recommends $745,600,000 for chronic disease 
     prevention and health promotion, which is $1,622,000 below 
     the fiscal year 2002 level and $55,370,000 above the 
     administration's request.
       The unprecedented commitment to biomedical research in 
     recent years represents a critical investment in the future 
     health of our nation. The Committee recognizes, however, that 
     the benefits of basic research alone cannot be fully realized 
     unless results of this important work are effectively 
     translated into public health interventions to address costly 
     and prevalent conditions such as chronic diseases.
       Chronic diseases have had a profound human and economic 
     toll on our nation. Nearly 125 million Americans today are 
     living with some form of chronic condition, including cancer, 
     cardiovascular disease, diabetes, arthritis and various 
     neurological conditions such as epilepsy. These and other 
     chronic diseases now account for nearly 70 percent of all 
     health care costs, as well as 70 percent of all deaths 
     annually. By the year 2020, the affected population is 
     expected to reach 157 million Americans and represent 
     $1,000,000,000,000 in health care expenditures, equivalent to 
     over 80 percent of all anticipated health care expenditures. 
     Less than $1.25 per person, however, is directed towards 
     public health interventions focused on preventing the 
     debilitating effects traditionally associated with chronic 
     conditions. A few modifiable risk factors bring suffering and 
     early death to millions of Americans. Three such factors--
     tobacco use, poor nutrition, and lack of physical activity 
     are major contributors to our Nation's leading causes of 
     death.
       The Committee believes that the Federal investment in 
     chronic disease prevention remains inadequate. Recognizing 
     the need to establish chronic disease prevention as a 
     national priority, the Committee therefore provides an 
     increase of $55,193,000 over fiscal year 2002 levels to begin 
     to more appropriately address this national crisis.
       Within the total provided, the following funding levels are 
     for the specific program activities: heart disease and 
     stroke, $47,218,000; cancer prevention and control, 
     $290,526,000; arthritis, $14,803,000; health promotion, 
     $24,790,000; diabetes, $64,500,000; tobacco, $100,623,000; 
     nutrition, physical activity and obesity, $40,000,000; school 
     health, $58,235,000; safe motherhood, $57,565,000; oral 
     health, $10,791,000; prevention centers, $27,945,000; 
     epilepsy, $7,527,000; and iron overload, $477,000.
       Arthritis.--The Committee notes that Congress established 
     the CDC arthritis program in 1999 following the development 
     of the National Arthritis Action Plan (NAAP). The CDC 
     activities form the backbone of a multi-pronged response to 
     the Nation's leading cause of disability. Prior to this 
     initiative, there was no coordinated public health strategy 
     to prevent and appropriately treat the over 100 forms of this 
     painful, debilitating disease. Grants to States are a core 
     component of the CDC arthritis program. These partnerships 
     promote the development of a State-based network of local 
     activities to confront the burden of arthritis. This approach 
     also encourages the formation of broadly-based coalitions 
     with health care providers, community-based organizations,

[[Page 846]]

     and other stakeholders to coordinate and leverage their 
     resources. The Arthritis Foundation chapters across the 
     country have led this external effort.
       Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.--The Committee 
     has provided $7,000,000 for the Behavioral Risk Factor 
     Surveillance System (BRFSS). The Committee notes that 
     gathering, analyzing, and distributing data on behavioral 
     risk factors is key to addressing a host of health problems, 
     especially chronic diseases. The BRFSS program collects 
     behavior-related data so that scarce resources can be 
     directed efficiently to address chronic diseases, such as 
     heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, and vascular 
     diseases such as stroke. The Committee believes the increase 
     in BRFSS funding should be used to increase infrastructure at 
     the State and CDC levels; improve the rates of response of 
     survey questions; increase the timeliness of data; improve 
     CDC's web site to make data more accessible for analysis; and 
     create State demonstration projects to examine and assess 
     innovative methods in chronic disease health tracking.
       Cancer Prevention and Control.--The previous 5 years have 
     seen a major increase in the nation's investment in medical 
     research at the NIH, resulting in significant breakthroughs 
     for cancer and other serious diseases. Testimony at the 
     Committee's cancer hearing, in June, repeatedly referred to 
     the vital importance of prevention and public education 
     programs and the need to translate the increased research 
     funding into programs that reach people who are affected by 
     cancer. Specifically, there was discussion of the need for 
     increased application research funding in the nation's cancer 
     program, primarily housed at the CDC. The need to reach the 
     public, particularly medically underserved populations, with 
     the message of prevention and early detection of cancer 
     cannot be overstated. The seven CDC programs--Comprehensive 
     Cancer Control Initiative; National Cancer Registries 
     Program; Colorectal Cancer Screening, Education and Outreach; 
     Prostate Cancer Awareness Campaign; National Breast and 
     Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program; Ovarian Cancer 
     Program; Skin Cancer Program--included in the CDC's cancer 
     line item have proven to be highly effective, but are only a 
     starting point if we are to reduce the mortality from cancer. 
     The Committee is strongly supportive of the CDC cancer 
     programs focused on awareness, education and early detection 
     and has included a significant increase for these programs.
       The significant growth of cancer prevention and control 
     programs within State health agencies has resulted in the 
     recognition that improved coordination of cancer control 
     activities is essential to maximizing resources and achieving 
     desired cancer prevention and control outcomes. The Committee 
     commends CDC for its work with health agencies to enhance the 
     number and quality of cancer-related programs that are 
     available to the U.S. population and to develop an integrated 
     and coordinated approach to reduce the cancer burden through 
     prevention, early detection, treatment, and rehabilitation. 
     In fiscal year 2002, CDC funded 19 States and one Indian 
     Health Board to develop comprehensive cancer control programs 
     which help build the foundation for a nationwide, 
     comprehensive cancer control program. Comprehensive cancer 
     programs integrate the full range of cancer prevention 
     activities including research, evaluation, health education 
     and communication, program development, public policy 
     development, surveillance, and clinical services.
       The Committee includes the President's request for 
     increased funding for the Breast and Cervical Screening 
     program. CDC's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early 
     Detection Program has provided more than 3 million 
     potentially life-saving screening tests for women. Despite 
     its success in screening these women, the program is still 
     only able to screen 15-20 percent of the eligible population 
     due to the difficulties in finding these hard to reach women. 
     Therefore, the Committee recommends that 50 percent of funds 
     be used for actual provision of screening and clinical 
     services and the remaining 50 percent of funds be used by 
     States for outreach, effective management, public and 
     professional education, and quality assurance to ensure 
     enhancement of infrastructure development activities that 
     will provide screening and diagnostic services to eligible 
     women. The Committee's recommendation will enable more women 
     to receive these vital screening services.
       Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed 
     cancer for both men and women in the United States, and the 
     second leading cause of cancer related deaths. In 2001, 
     approximately 148,000 new cases were diagnosed and 56,000 
     people died from the disease. When colorectal cancer is 
     detected and treated early, survival is greatly enhanced. 
     However, despite the availability of proven screening tests, 
     only 37 percent of colorectal cancers are diagnosed while the 
     disease is still in a localized stage.
       The Committee is very pleased with the leadership of CDC's 
     National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable in promoting the 
     availability and advisability of screening to both health 
     care providers and the general public. The Committee 
     encourages CDC to continue to expand its partnerships with 
     State health departments, professional and patient 
     organizations, and private industry to combat this 
     devastating disease.
       As pancreatic cancer is the country's fifth leading cause 
     of cancer death, and 99 percent of people diagnosed with 
     pancreatic cancer die within 6 months, the Committee urges 
     the CDC to convene a series of meetings of CDC and other 
     agency officials, leading advocacy organizations who provide 
     information and education, and other key stakeholders, to 
     define the public health role of educating medical 
     professionals and the public about the risk factors, 
     symptoms, treatment options and palliative care methods 
     related to pancreatic cancer. These findings should be 
     presented in a report due to the Committee no later than 30 
     days prior to the fiscal year 2004 Appropriations hearings. 
     The report should include a budget and timeframe for 
     implementing the recommendations derived from these meetings.
       The Committee applauds the partnership between CDC and the 
     Lance Armstrong Foundation to address the needs of the over 9 
     million Americans living with, through and beyond cancer by 
     expanding the Agency's State-based comprehensive cancer 
     program to include issues of survivorship, including late 
     term effects and quality of life.
       Given the shortages and high vacancy rates of qualified 
     health personnel who work in laboratories to prepare and 
     analyze tissue and cell samples, the Committee urges CDC's 
     Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening Program to develop a 
     partnership with HRSA's Allied Health Special Projects 
     Program to support programs at schools which contribute to 
     solving the shortages.
       Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS).--The Committee is pleased 
     that CDC has branched into new and important areas of CFS 
     research and medical education in the first 3 years of the 4-
     year period in which $12,900,000 is being restored to the CFS 
     program at CDC. Since approximately half the funds remain, 
     the Committee instructs CDC to extend the payback period by 1 
     year, through fiscal year 2004. The Committee further expects 
     that CDC will provide sufficient funding, including funds 
     allocated through the payback program, to accelerate its CFS 
     research plan to identify the causes, risk factors, 
     diagnostic markers, natural history and economic impact of 
     CFS; to create a CFS patient registry; and to educate health 
     care providers about the detection, diagnosis and management 
     of CFS.
       Cooley's Anemia and Thalassemia.--In fiscal year 2002, the 
     Committee supplied funding for CDC to create a thalassemia-
     based blood safety and surveillance program, modeled after 
     the universal data collection program used for hemophilia. It 
     is the Committee's intention that this program be continued 
     in fiscal year 2003. In addition, the Committee believes that 
     the program will benefit from expanded interaction between 
     CDC and the Cooley's Anemia Foundation, particularly with 
     regard to educating patients, families, health providers and 
     the public about blood safety.
       Diabetes.--There is a diabetes epidemic in our nation. 
     Today, approximately 16 million Americans have diabetes, 
     including 5.9 million who do not know they have the disease. 
     Diagnosed diabetes rose 49 percent nationally between 1990 
     and 2000. Type 2 diabetes, once considered an adult disease, 
     is now found in children. Recently released results from the 
     largest-ever clinical study on diabetes prevention confirmed 
     that diabetes can be prevented in high-risk adults. The NIH-
     led and CDC-supported Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) 
     demonstrated that sustained lifestyle change, including 
     modest weight loss and physical activity, resulted in 
     prevention of diabetes in those diagnosed as ``pre-
     diabetic''. An additional 16 million Americans are ``pre-
     diabetic''. The Committee encourages CDC to work with State 
     Diabetes Control Programs to establish pilot projects to test 
     strategies that will become effective public health 
     interventions to prevent or significantly delay the onset of 
     diabetes in high-risk individuals and develop systems to 
     identify and monitor the number of people who are at highest 
     risk for developing diabetes.
       The high incidence of diabetes among Native Hawaiian 
     populations persists, and the Committee is pleased with CDC's 
     efforts to target this population, in particular to assist 
     the leadership of Native Hawaiian and Pacific Basin Islander 
     communities. It is important to incorporate traditional 
     healing concepts and to develop partnerships with community 
     centers, and the Committee encourages CDC to build on its 
     historical efforts in this regard. -Diabetes is also one of 
     the most serious health challenges facing American Indians 
     and Alaska Natives today. Some American Indian Tribes have 
     the highest rates of diabetes in the world. Approximately 
     half of American Indian adults have diabetes. On average, 
     American Indians and Alaska Natives are 2.8 times as likely 
     to have diagnosed diabetes as non-Hispanic whites of similar 
     age.
       Available data often underestimates the true prevalence of 
     diabetes in American Indians. The Navajo Health and Nutrition 
     Survey, published in 1997, showed that 22.9 percent of Navajo 
     adults age 20 and older had diabetes. Fourteen percent had a 
     history of diabetes, but another 7 percent were found to

[[Page 847]]

     have undiagnosed diabetes during the survey.
       In all 12 Indian Health Service Areas, diabetes is reported 
     as one of the top ten major health problems. 15.1 percent of 
     American Indians and Alaska Natives receiving care from IHS 
     have diabetes. Until recently, type 2 diabetes was rarely 
     diagnosed in children and adolescents. An alarming recent 
     development is the occurrence of type 2 diabetes, once called 
     ``adult-onset'' diabetes, with much greater frequency among 
     children, especially minority children including Native 
     American youth.
       The Committee expects CDC to place continued priority on 
     the prevention of diabetes among American Indians and Alaska 
     Natives.
       Epilepsy.--The Committee recognizes epilepsy, a chronic 
     neurological condition, as a significant public health 
     concern affecting over 2.3 million persons in the United 
     States including 300,000 American seniors over the age of 65. 
     For a long time epilepsy has been seen as a condition that 
     affects young people, often starting in early childhood; 
     sometimes lasting throughout life. The U.S. population is 
     aging and stroke, cardiovascular disease, brain tumors and 
     Alzheimer's disease are all causes of epilepsy in the 
     elderly. Further, the Committee acknowledges that CDC has 
     worked diligently over the last couple of years to promote 
     better public education and treatment of people with 
     epilepsy. Therefore, the Committee has provided increased 
     funding for the CDC to enhance its epilepsy efforts in 
     partnership with a national non-profit that works on behalf 
     of children and adults affected by seizures through research, 
     education, advocacy and service, and should include 
     activities addressing the relationship between older adults 
     and epilepsy; maximizing public and provider health education 
     programs in the schools, the public sector and in States; and 
     supporting prevention research on stigma and self-esteem.
       Glaucoma and other Vision Disorders.--Age-related threats 
     to sight, including age-related macular degeneration, 
     glaucoma, cataracts and diabetes retinopathy are expected to 
     nearly double by the year 2030 with the aging of the baby-
     boomer generation. Recognizing this emerging public health 
     threat, the Committee is aware of the demonstrated success of 
     vision screening programs in preventing blindness and vision 
     impairments among many of the more than 30 million adults 
     that suffer from eye-related disorders.
       The Committee is encouraged by the CDC's exploration of 
     strategies to implement a national initiative to combat the 
     effects of eye-related disorders, especially glaucoma. The 
     Committee has included funds for CDC to establish vision 
     screening and education programs in partnership with national 
     voluntary health agencies and for CDC to develop a national 
     surveillance system to monitor trends over time and assess 
     the economic costs of vision loss especially related to 
     glaucoma. In addition, the Committee concurs with the 
     President's request that $2,800,000 should be used to 
     continue or expand a model project that is testing and 
     evaluating the efficacy of glaucoma screening using mobile 
     units.
       Heart Disease and Stroke.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes a $10,000,000 increase for the CDC cardiovascular 
     programs as part of the Committee's initiative to prevent and 
     reveres heart disease. The Committee urges the CDC to 
     initiate research to examine strategies to prevent and 
     reverse heart disease, including mind/body approaches to 
     stress management, yoga, diet modifications and exercise 
     programs.The Committee is aware that many States still need a 
     State-based cardiovascular disease prevention and control 
     program, but in the past funding has not been made available. 
     In fiscal year 2001, only 28 States received CDC funding to 
     design and/or implement State-specific programs to prevent 
     and control heart disease, stroke and other cardiovascular 
     diseases even though cardiovascular diseases remain the No. 1 
     killer of men and women across all racial and ethnic groups 
     in the United States. The Committee strongly believes that 
     since cardiovascular diseases remain the No. 1 killer in 
     every State, each State should receive funding for a 
     Cardiovascular Health State Program and, therefore, has 
     increased funding for the Cardiovascular Health State 
     Program, allowing CDC to increase the number of States 
     supported by this program and to initiate research to examine 
     the causes of the regional disparity of cardiovascular 
     diseases.
       The Committee recommends an increase of $1,000,000 to 
     expand the WISEWOMAN program. WISEWOMAN provides additional 
     preventive services to low-income uninsured women screened in 
     CDC's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection 
     Program. CDC uses this established system to screen women for 
     other chronic disease risk factors, to respond to women with 
     risk factors (e.g. high blood pressure, high cholesterol) by 
     providing dietary and physical activity counseling and 
     programs. Since WISEWOMAN's inception approximately 10,000 
     low-income and uninsured women have been screened for high 
     blood pressure and cholesterol. In fiscal year 2002 CDC will 
     fund 12 WISEWOMAN programs.
       Stroke remains America's No. 3 killer, a major cause of 
     permanent disability and a key contributor to late-life 
     dementia. This year about 600,000 Americans will suffer a 
     stroke and nearly 170,000 will die. The drug tPA is the only 
     FDA-approved emergency treatment for clot-based stroke. Yet, 
     less than 5 percent of those eligible for tPA receive it. 
     Established by Congress during the fiscal year 2001 
     appropriations process, the Paul Coverdell National Acute 
     Stroke Registry is designed to track and improve the delivery 
     of care to patients with acute stroke. In fiscal year 2002, 
     the CDC supported activities to develop and test prototypes 
     for this registry in 8 sites. The Committee urges CDC to 
     continue to work with the National Institute of Neurological 
     Disorders and Stroke, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
     Institute at the National Institutes of Health, the Brain 
     Attack Coalition, and other pertinent professional 
     organizations, including hospitals, universities, State and 
     local health departments, and other appropriate partners 
     experienced in the treatment of stroke to further implement 
     this registry.
       Hemophilia.--The Committee expects CDC to continue working 
     closely with the National Hemophilia Foundation in 
     strengthening its disease management, prevention, outreach, 
     and blood safety surveillance programs to meet the needs of 
     persons with hemophilia, other bleeding and clotting 
     disorders, and, particularly, women with bleeding disorders. 
     The Committee requests a report by March, 2003 on CDCs 
     efforts to establish a genetic data bank for persons with 
     hemophilia and the resources required and steps to be taken 
     to expeditiously genotype the hemophilia community.
       Juvenile Diabetes.--The Committee is aware that a 
     surveillance system to track childhood diabetes has been 
     initiated that is proving beneficial to research for the 
     treatment and cure of the disease. The Committee encourages 
     CDC to extend and expand the childhood diabetes surveillance 
     system to track all American children suffering from the 
     disease.
       Kidney disease.--The Committee recognizes that kidney 
     disease is the ninth leading cause of death in the United 
     States, costing the Medicare program $12,000,000,000 
     annually. Recent epidemiologic research indicates that more 
     than 20 million Americans have signs of kidney disease and 
     that an additional 20 million individuals in this country are 
     at increased risk of kidney disease. Moreover, most of these 
     individuals are unaware of this danger to their health. The 
     Committee believes there is a need for public health programs 
     to identify and educate those who are threatened by kidney 
     disease and thereby reduce morbidity and improve outcomes. 
     Therefore, the Committee encourages CDC to develop a national 
     kidney disease action plan and a public health strategy to 
     combat kidney disease in this country.
       Micronutrients.--Deficiencies of micronutrients such as 
     iron, iodine, and vitamin A, affect nearly one-third of the 
     world's population, and result in reduced mental and physical 
     development of children, poor pregnancy outcomes, diminished 
     work capacity of adults, and increased morbidity and 
     premature mortality among populations. Effective and 
     inexpensive interventions such as dietary diversification, 
     food fortification and supplementation have eliminated most 
     micronutrient deficiencies in developed countries.
       The Committee has provided sufficient funding for CDC to 
     continue its efforts to eliminate micronutrient malnutrition. 
     The focus of these efforts is to support a number of national 
     and international efforts to assess mirconutrient status of 
     populations and to monitor and strengthen implementation of 
     interventions as well as to assess the impact of the 
     interventions over time. CDC has extensive expertise in 
     epidemiology, monitoring and assessment, and laboratory 
     science. These efforts reflect the unique contribution that 
     CDC can make to eliminate micronutrient deficiencies.
       Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity.--Obesity is 
     epidemic in the United States. Between 1980 and 1994, the 
     prevalence of obesity in the United States has increased by 
     100 percent in children and adolescents. More than 20 percent 
     of the adult population is 30 pounds or more overweight and 
     10 to 15 percent of children and adolescents are overweight. 
     The cost of diseases associated with obesity is almost 
     $100,000,000,000 per year. Risk factors associated with 
     obesity--physical inactivity and unhealthy eating--account 
     for at least 300,000 preventable deaths each year and 
     increase the risk for many chronic diseases like diabetes, 
     heart disease and cancer. The Committee is aware that the 
     CDC's own statistics show that native Americans, including 
     native Alaskans and native Hawaiians suffer higher rates of 
     obesity than other Americans.
       The Committee commends the substantial, comprehensive 
     efforts that CDC is directing to stem the obesity epidemic 
     across all life stages. CDC is coordinating national, State 
     and school-based programs to research and implement 
     interventions to increase physical activity levels and good 
     nutrition at all ages, to provide important health 
     information, and to monitor health and healthy behaviors in 
     the population. CDC currently funds 12 States to promote 
     physical activity and good nutrition to prevent and control

[[Page 848]]

     obesity. As part of its physical activity, nutrition and 
     obesity prevention initiative, the Committee has included a 
     significant increase for Nutrition, Physical Activity, and 
     Obesity at CDC.
       Oral Health.--The Committee recognizes that to effectively 
     reduce disparities in oral disease will require improvements 
     at the State and local levels. The Committee is pleased that 
     almost half of the States applied for grant funding from the 
     Division of Oral Health to target prevention programs and 
     resources to those at greatest risk. The Committee expects 
     the Division to advance efforts to reduce the disparities and 
     health burden from oral cancers that are closely linked to 
     chronic diseases like diabetes and heart disease.
       Prevention Centers.--The prevention centers form a 
     nationwide network of academic institutions that conduct 
     applied research designed to develop and test innovative 
     strategies for health promotion and disease prevention. The 
     primary goals of the program are to identify risk factors, to 
     identify barriers and facilitators to behavior change to 
     demonstrate the effectiveness of prevention interventions, to 
     increase collaboration among agencies and community partners, 
     and to train public health professionals in creative ways for 
     preventing chronic diseases and other health problems. The 
     Committee has included sufficient funds to expand the number 
     of prevention centers funded by CDC.
       The Committee continues to support within the prevention 
     center program a Tobacco Prevention Research Network to 
     increase the knowledge base on the most effective strategies 
     for preventing and reducing youth tobacco use, as well as on 
     the social, physiological and cultural reasons for tobacco 
     use among children.
       The Committee encourages the continued support of center 
     activities aimed at improving knowledge about the usefulness 
     and effectiveness of health promotion programs for persons 
     with disabilities.
       The Committee recognizes the urgency to discover novel 
     compounds to combat bioengineered (weapons-grade) 
     bioterrorist threats. Many of these threats require 
     antibiotics and antiviral agents with activity against drug 
     resistant strains of these bioengineered bioterrorist 
     weapons.
       Primary Immunodeficiencies Diseases.--In fiscal year 2002, 
     the Committee appropriated funding for a national physician 
     education and public awareness program related to primary 
     immunodeficiency diseases. It is the Committee's intent that 
     this program be continued in fiscal year 2003 and that CDC 
     continue to work closely with the Jeffrey Modell Foundation 
     to implement and continue the Foundation's plan for public 
     awareness and physician education. The Committee is also 
     pleased that CDC has recognized that these diseases 
     constitute a major public health issue and intends to pursue 
     appropriate public health interventions to address it with 
     other available resources.
       Prostatitis.--Prostatitis affects 10 percent of the male 
     population. It may be the trigger for both prostate 
     enlargement and prostate cancer. Prostatitis may act as a 
     reservoir for bacterial resistance and for the spread of 
     chronic disease in women and men by various pathogens. The 
     Committee encourages CDC to continue to investigate the 
     etiology of prostatitis, begin disease surveillance, increase 
     public awareness, and determine treatment and prevention.
       Safe Motherhood.--The Committee has increased funding for 
     the Safe Motherhood program as part of its Safe Motherhood 
     initiative. The purpose of this program is to improve the 
     chances that a woman will have a safe and healthy pregnancy 
     and delivery. Of the 4 million women who give birth in the 
     United States each year, over one-third have a pregnancy-
     related complication before, during, or after delivery. These 
     complications may cause long-term health problems or even 
     death. Unfortunately, the causes and treatments of pregnancy-
     related complications are largely unknown and understudied. 
     If fact, the United States ranks only 20th in maternal 
     mortality rates out of 49 developed countries. Every day, two 
     to three women die from pregnancy related complications. And 
     despite the fact that maternal mortality was targeted in 1987 
     as part of Healthy People 2000, the maternal mortality rate 
     in this country has not decreased in 20 years.
       School Health.--The Committee notes that obesity rates were 
     cut in half among girls in grades 6-8 who participated in a 
     school-based intervention program. The Committee applauds CDC 
     for establishing effective coordinated school health programs 
     in 20 States and two local education agencies. As part of its 
     physical activity, nutrition and obesity prevention 
     initiative, the Committee has included sufficient funds for 
     CDC to expand its coordinated school health program to 
     address risk behaviors such as tobacco use, unhealthy diets, 
     and physical inactivity.
       The Committee further recognizes the effectiveness of 
     school health programs as demonstrated by the significant 
     reductions in sexual risk behaviors among the nation's high 
     school students over the past decade. However, the Committee 
     is concerned that CDC's funding for the school health HIV 
     program has not increased in 10 years. To compensate, some of 
     the additional funding provided over last year's level is 
     directed to the school health HIV program and the Committee 
     urges CDC to use the funds to expand is prevention efforts 
     aimed at youth.
       Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.--The Committee notes the work 
     of CDC, the National Institute of Child Health and Human 
     Development and HRSA in developing model guidelines for death 
     scene protocol for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. The 
     Committee encourages CDC to implement projects to demonstrate 
     the effectiveness of the death scene protocol in a variety of 
     locales (urban, suburban, and rural) throughout the Nation. 
     The Committee expects CDC to be prepared to report on 
     progress on this initiative during the fiscal year 2004 
     budget hearings.
       Tobacco Use.--Tobacco use is the single most preventable 
     cause of death and disease in our society. It causes more 
     than 400,000 deaths in the United States each year, and costs 
     the nation $50,000,000,000 in medical expenses alone. 
     Children are especially hard hit by tobacco. Ninety percent 
     of adult smokers begin their habit as children. These funds 
     are intended to expand the capacity of all State and local 
     health departments, education agencies, and national 
     organizations to build comprehensive tobacco control programs 
     and to develop and begin implementation of a national public 
     education campaign to reduce access to and the appeal of 
     tobacco products among young people.
     Environmental Health
       The Committee recommends $189,489,000 for environmental 
     health activities which is $36,058,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $37,334,000 above the administration request.
       Within the total provided, the following funding levels are 
     for specific funding activities: $36,826,000 is for the 
     environmental health laboratory; $71,002,000 is for 
     environmental health activities; $38,887,000 is for the 
     asthma program; and $42,774,000 is for the childhood lead 
     poisoning program.
       Many of the public health successes that were achieved in 
     the 20th century can be traced to innovations in 
     environmental health practices. However, emerging pathogens 
     and environmental toxins continue to pose risks to our health 
     and significant challenges to public health. The task of 
     protecting people's health from hazards in their environment 
     requires a broad set of tools. First among these tools are 
     surveillance and data collection to determine which 
     substances in the environment are getting into people and to 
     what degree. It also must be determined whether or not these 
     substances are harmful to humans, and at what level of 
     exposure. Many scientists estimate that about two-thirds of 
     all cancers result from environmental exposure, but much 
     better data are needed to improve this estimate and determine 
     which exposures cause cancer and other diseases.
       The Committee is aware of concerns raised within and 
     outside Alaska about the safety of Alaskan wild foods. The 
     Committee encourages CDC to give careful consideration to a 
     State of Alaska program to monitor the safety of Alaskan wild 
     foods, including field studies of the effects of 
     environmental chemical contaminants and naturally occurring 
     metals in Alaskan wild foods, measurement of PCB levels in 
     remote arctic communities, documentation of mercury levels in 
     ancient humans, documentation of incidence of childhood 
     asthma, and development of public health recommendations on 
     Alaskan wild food consumption by subsistence users and 
     others.
       Asthma.--CDC's asthma activities focus on three areas: 
     tracking the disease to improve the Nation's ability to 
     determine asthma prevalence, severity, and management; 
     assuring that interventions are based on science; and working 
     to address this problem through partnerships including 
     providing technical assistance to non-governmental 
     organizations to carry out diverse community-based childhood 
     asthma control programs.
       The Committee is pleased with the work that the CDC has 
     done to address the increasing prevalence of asthma. However, 
     the increase in asthma among children remains alarming. The 
     Committee urges CDC to expand its outreach aimed at 
     increasing public awareness of asthma control and prevention 
     strategies, particularly among at-risk populations in 
     underserved communities. To further facilitate this effort, 
     CDC is urged to partner with voluntary health organizations, 
     such as the American Lung Association's Asthma Clinical 
     Research Centers, to support program activity consistent with 
     CDC's efforts to fund community-based interventions that 
     apply effective approaches demonstrated in research projects 
     within the scientific and public health community.
       Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention.--Since its inception 
     in fiscal year 1990, the CDC program has expanded to 
     approximately 40 project areas that encompass States, local 
     areas, and numerous communities and screens an estimated 1.75 
     million children annually. The program has developed its 
     first Geographic Information System (GIS) website using U.S. 
     Census data on income, race, and old housing to help State 
     and local health departments identify high-risk geographic 
     areas. The availability of such information will result in 
     more efficient, targeted screening.
       The Committee is concerned the current approach to lead 
     poisoning prevention cannot achieve the national goal of 
     ending


[[Page 849]]

     this disease by 2010. The Committee has provided an increase 
     above the budget request to support more concerted, 
     prevention-oriented strategies. The Committee encourages CDC 
     to target its grants to communities at high risk, promote 
     wide adoption of lead-safe work practices, emphasize 
     correction of identified lead hazards, make clearance dust 
     testing routine, and support community-based efforts to 
     assess and address health hazards in high-risk housing.
       Childhood Leukemia.--The Committee appreciates the CDC's 
     continuing work on the cancer cluster investigation in 
     Fallon, Nevada, and understands that preliminary results of 
     that investigation are due within the next few months. The 
     Committee strongly encourages the CDC to continue to devote 
     resources to this investigation.
       Environmental Health Laboratory.--The CDC environmental 
     health laboratory performs assessments for State 
     investigations of diseases (such as cancer and birth defects) 
     and investigations of chemical exposures, such as dioxin, 
     pesticides, mercury and cadmium. CDC is also working with 
     States to improve public health laboratories that assess 
     State level biomonitoring needs. CDC works closely with 
     academic institutions, other Federal agencies, and other 
     partners to measure human exposure to toxic substances and 
     the adverse effects of that exposure.
       The Committee recognizes CDC for its commendable work in 
     analyzing toxic exposures throughout the United States. The 
     Committee further recognizes that CDC's environmental 
     laboratory is unprecedented in the world for measuring toxic 
     exposures to humans and further commends CDC for publishing 
     the National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental 
     Chemicals, which provides information about the U.S. 
     population's exposure to 27 toxic substances, including heavy 
     metals and certain pesticides.
       The Committee supports the CDC biomonitoring program and 
     study of environmental toxins and their relationship to 
     chronic diseases, such as asthma, many birth defects, and 
     cancer to increase our understanding of the cause of many 
     chronic diseases and conditions and to facilitate the 
     development of effective prevention strategies.
       Health Tracking Network.--The Committee has included 
     $32,000,000 for the Health Tracking Network. In fiscal year 
     2001, the Committee first requested that CDC develop a plan 
     for a coordinated Nationwide Health Tracking Network. In 
     fiscal year 2002, the Committee provided $17,500,000 to 
     develop pilot programs in States as a first step in the 
     development of the Network. The fiscal year 2003 funds will 
     enable CDC to establish tracking networks in up to 15 
     additional States and create a Center of Excellence in public 
     health at an appropriate research university. The Committee 
     strongly urges CDC to assure that as States develop these 
     systems they build on existing efforts where appropriate, 
     including terrorism preparedness and other ongoing State 
     tracking and monitoring initiatives. The Committee urges that 
     all of the relevant centers, institutes, and offices within 
     the CDC be included in the development, testing, and 
     implementation of this nationwide project.
       The Committee further urges CDC to make every effort to 
     support systems that are flexible in their data content, 
     platform independent, and scalable to the entire Nation. The 
     Committee understands that this is a long term project, and 
     requests CDC to submit a vision statement for a Nationwide 
     Health Tracking Network as well as a plan for achieving this 
     vision.
       Rural Health.--The Committee is greatly concerned about the 
     health status of the residents of rural communities. The 
     Committee commends CDC for its efforts last year to conduct 
     an assessment of rural health problems. Sufficient funds have 
     been provided to continue this important effort.
     Epidemic Services and Response
       The Committee recommends $78,001,000 for epidemic services 
     and response which is $2,138,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     level and the same as the administration's request.
       CDC's epidemic services and response program provides 
     resources and scientific expertise for operating and 
     evaluating surveillance systems; developing and refining 
     research methods and strategies to the benefit of public 
     health practice; training public health professionals who are 
     prepared to respond to public health emergencies, outbreaks 
     and other assistance requests; and communicating with multi-
     faceted audiences accurate public health information and 
     effective messages. The scientific basis of this program is 
     applied epidemiology, in concert with other components of 
     sound public health practice. Findings from these disciplines 
     enable States, health organizations, foreign ministries of 
     health, and others in the health field to make sound 
     decisions and create effective policy. Information derived 
     from epidemiologic data and scientific reasoning provide 
     public health programs with an objective rationale to set 
     priorities, apply interventions and policies, and evaluate 
     public health programs. Within the epidemic services and 
     response program, CDC carries out a variety of applied 
     research and development activities. Areas of research 
     include: social determinants of health; aberration detection; 
     burden of disease; injury, and death; prevention 
     effectiveness; and health care quality. The Committee 
     recognizes that CDC maintains a keen appreciation for the 
     fact that local outbreaks of illness can develop rapidly into 
     epidemics, that previously unidentified health problems can 
     appear at any time, that contaminated food or defective 
     products may appear in the community without warning, and 
     that the threat of bioterrorism is present in many areas of 
     the world. When CDC participates in an investigation, all of 
     the resources of the agency are at the disposal of the 
     affected area, including its state-of-the-art laboratories.
     Health Statistics
       The Committee recommends $125,899,000 which is $780,000 
     below fiscal year 2002 and the same as the administration 
     request.
       CDC's statistics give us context and perspective on which 
     we can base important public health decisions. By aggregating 
     the experience of individuals, we gain a collective 
     understanding of our health, our collective experience with 
     the health care system, and our problems and public health 
     challenges. NCHS data are used to create a basis for 
     comparisons between population groups or geographic areas, as 
     well as an understanding of how trends in health change and 
     develop over time.
     HIV, STD, and TB Prevention
       The Committee recommends $1,168,532,000 for HIV, STD, and 
     TB Prevention, which is $33,532,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $33,532,000 above the administration request. 
     Of the amount provided, $860,293,000 is for HIV/AIDS 
     programs, of which $168,763,000 is for global HIV/AIDS 
     programs; $170,450,000 is for the STD program; and 
     $137,789,000 if for the Tuberculosis program.
       Recognizing the intersection among these diseases, and the 
     need for a focal point for leadership and accountability, CDC 
     combines HIV, STD, and TB activities to provide leadership in 
     preventing and controlling human immunodeficiency virus 
     infection, other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and 
     tuberculosis. CDC works in collaboration with partners at 
     community, State, national, and international levels, 
     applying well-integrated, multi-disciplinary programs of 
     research, surveillance, technical assistance and evaluation. 
     These diseases are not vaccine preventable and must be 
     controlled and prevented through identifying, diagnosing, and 
     treating infected persons; through provision of confidential, 
     culturally competent counseling to identify and reach those 
     who have been exposed to infection and who may not know it; 
     and through individual and population level health promotion 
     to reduce high risk behaviors.
       HIV/AIDS Prevention.--CDC's HIV/AIDS prevention programs 
     are working in every State and territory to prevent new 
     infections, link people who are already infected to medical 
     care and translate scientific research findings into 
     practical prevention programs available to every person at 
     risk. CDC will continue to adapt these prevention programs to 
     meet new and different needs.
       According to the CDC, between 4 million and 5 million 
     people in the United States are at continued behavioral risk 
     for HIV infection. The Committee recognizes that this is a 
     low estimate due to under-reporting by participants and the 
     lack of inclusion of schools, prisons, and the military. 
     Communities must be better equipped with local data to 
     identify and direct resources to those most at risk. They 
     must have an array of effective interventions available and 
     the capacity to implement and evaluate them at the local 
     level. They must also be able not only to address barriers 
     and deter risky behavior but also to encourage health 
     promotion behavior through a variety of individual and group 
     interventions, community-level supports, and structural level 
     changes. Because those at risk for or living with HIV 
     infection are often also at risk for other health problems, 
     HIV prevention must be integrated with other services such as 
     STD and TB screening and treatment, reproductive health 
     services, mental health services, and drug use prevention and 
     treatment.
       The Committee recognizes the role of State and local health 
     departments in providing comprehensive HIV prevention 
     programs targeted locally to address the prevention needs of 
     individual communities and in conducting surveillance 
     activities designed to monitor the course of the epidemic.
       The Committee recognizes that CDC is currently developing a 
     new program announcement to guide State and local HIV 
     prevention efforts beginning in January 2004. The Committee 
     encourages CDC to work with State and local health 
     departments to streamline the application process and reduce 
     the administrative burden on health departments.
       HIV prevention community planning is an important component 
     of the comprehensive HIV prevention programs administered by 
     State and local health departments nationwide. With nearly 10 
     years of experience with community planning, the Committee 
     urges the CDC to revise Federal guidance to be less 
     prescriptive and to encourage greater flexibility for 
     jurisdictions to implement models of community planning 
     appropriate for their jurisdictions including multi-year 
     planning and joint care and prevention planning.
       Global HIV/AIDS.--CDC works with governments in 25 
     countries in Africa, Asia and

[[Page 850]]

     Latin America and the Caribbean focusing on primary 
     prevention of HIV/AIDS; care and treatment of tuberculosis 
     and other opportunistic infections, palliative care and 
     appropriate use of antiretroviral medications; and 
     infrastructure and capacity development. The Committee 
     recognizes that it is not feasible for CDC to establish 
     programs in every country in need. The increase should 
     support rapid response teams and regional programs to address 
     the needs of countries that are not part of CDC's Global AIDS 
     Program and to foster regional approaches to HIV/AIDS 
     prevention, care and treatment.
       The Committee commends CDC for recognizing the urgent 
     public health need to develop new HIV prevention options by 
     increasing the funds available for microbicide research and 
     development. The Committee urges CDC to continue to expand 
     funding and staff for microbicide research and development 
     within funds provided for global AIDS. These funds could 
     support clinical trials of microbicides as set forth in CDC's 
     HIV Prevention Strategic Plan and its topical microbicide 5-
     year research agenda.
       Sexually transmitted diseases.--CDC's strategy for STD 
     prevention is to provide national and international 
     leadership through research, surveillance, policy 
     development, and assistance to States, territories and local 
     health departments in the delivery of services to prevent and 
     control the transmission of STDs and their complications. The 
     Committee recognizes that this year, more than 15 million 
     Americans will contract a STD. National surveillance of 
     syphillis, chlamydia, and gonorrhea is supported, and 
     sentinel surveillance strategies are being developed for new 
     viral STDs, specifically, human papillomavirus. Prevention 
     research is conducted to improve methods and delivery of 
     prevention services and to develop and refine interventions.
       The Committee has recommended increased funding for this 
     program to address priorities of CDC's sexually transmitted 
     disease program including infertility prevention and syphilis 
     elimination. Funds would support expansion of chlamydia 
     screening to reach more underserved women and enhanced rapid 
     response and community partnerships to eliminate syphilis
       Turberculosis (TB).--The Committee recommendation includes 
     increased funding for CDC's Tuberculosis program to begin to 
     implement the recommendations of the recent Institute of 
     Medicine Report entitled, ``Ending Neglect: The Elimination 
     of Tuberculosis in the United States'' which was a call to 
     triple research funding for TB to prevent and control the 
     disease; to advance efforts to maintain control of TB in the 
     United States by identifying and curing active TB; to speed 
     the decline of TB through target testing and treatment of 
     latent infection; and to advance global research and control 
     efforts. As the report recommends, CDC should partner with 
     private foundations on research, including the development of 
     vaccines, diagnostic tests, and new drugs and to test the 
     applicability of new tools, to achieve the recommendations.
       The Committee commends CDC for its continued efforts to 
     control TB in the United States, as demonstrated by the 8 
     years of declining numbers of TB cases in this country. 
     However, TB is the leading infectious disease killer in the 
     world with more than 2 billion people--or one-third of the 
     world's population--infected with Mycobacterium tuberculosis, 
     the causative agent of TB. In the next two decades, there are 
     predicted to be 249 million new active cases and 70 million 
     resulting deaths from TB. Worldwide, TB is the leading killer 
     of people who are HIV-infected, accounting for one-third of 
     AIDS deaths. While rates of TB in the United States have been 
     on a steady decline, this global crisis will continue to 
     directly impact this country until global control efforts are 
     more effective. Soon, more than half of all cases of TB in 
     the United States will be among foreign-born individuals. The 
     Committee urges CDC to consider working with the Immigration 
     and Naturalization Service to develop novel TB screening 
     strategies for individuals emigrating from high TB incidence 
     countries.
     Immunization
       The Committee recommends $652,895,000 for the program 
     authorized under section 317 of the Public Health Service Act 
     which is $25,294,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     above the administration request. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $14,000,000 in transfers available 
     under section 241 of the Public Health Service Act.
       The Omnibus Reconciliation Act [OBRA] of 1993 established a 
     new vaccine purchase and distribution system that provides, 
     free of charge, all pediatric vaccines recommended for 
     routine use by the Advisory Committee on Immunization 
     Practices to all Medicaid-eligible children, uninsured 
     children, underinsured, and native Americans through program-
     registered providers.
       Despite great success in lowering disease levels and 
     raising immunization coverage rates, much remains to be done 
     to ensure the protection of children and adults worldwide. 
     Approximately 1 million 2-year-old children in the United 
     States have not received one or more of the more established, 
     recommended vaccines. New vaccines, although greatly 
     beneficial to public health, complicate an already complex 
     immunization schedule and make it increasingly difficult to 
     ensure complete immunization. One of our Nation's greatest 
     challenges is extending our success in childhood immunization 
     to the adult population. The burden due to the occurrence of 
     vaccine-preventable diseases in adults in the United States 
     is staggering. As many as 50,000 U.S. adults die of 
     influenza, pneumococcal infections and hepatitis B. CDC is 
     addressing these obstacles to the greatest extent possible 
     and continues to provide leadership to reduce disability and 
     death resulting from diseases that can be prevented through 
     vaccination.
       The Committee has increased funding for the Section 317 
     immunization program. It has been brought to the Committee's 
     attention that costs of delivering vaccines to children in 
     remote frontier areas are substantially higher than in other 
     areas of the country because these communities are often only 
     accessible via aircraft. The Committee encourages CDC to 
     provide infrastructure support needed to deliver these 
     vaccines at the community level, including development of a 
     statewide immunization registry to ensure that all children 
     in remote rural areas are immunized. The Committee notes that 
     failure to immunize children in such areas results in deaths 
     each year from exposure to open sewage lagoons and 
     contaminated water.
       Global Immunization Activities.--The Committee includes 
     $148,788,000 for global immunization activities which include 
     $106,400,000 for polio vaccine, surveillance, and program 
     operations for the highly successful, yet unfinished polio 
     eradication efforts; and $42,388,000 for the purchase of 
     measles vaccine for measles mortality reduction and regional 
     measles elimination initiatives and to expand epidemiologic, 
     laboratory, and programmatic/operational support to WHO and 
     its member countries.
       While the United States has greatly reduced its burden of 
     vaccine preventable diseases through childhood immunization, 
     its children remain at risk due to widespread occurrence of 
     these diseases in other countries. CDC supports a broad range 
     of programmatic and research efforts to reduce the global 
     burden of these diseases. A record low of 480 polio cases 
     occurred worldwide in 2001, a decrease of more than 99.8 
     percent since 1988 when the polio eradication initiative was 
     launched. Endemic measles cases have been eliminated from all 
     but two countries in the Americas; however, measles remains 
     the largest single-cause of child vaccine preventable deaths 
     globally, with approximately 800,000 measles-related deaths 
     still occurring each year (450,000 in Africa). Each year, 
     diseases that could be prevented with available vaccines kill 
     3 million children worldwide. Vaccines that are now in late 
     stages of development could prevent almost 2 million 
     additional deaths. CDC Measles activities should build on 
     global disease control and surveillance infrastructure 
     developed for polio eradication.
     Infectious Disease Control
       The Committee recommends $334,471,000 for infectious 
     disease control, which is $9,975,000 below the fiscal year 
     2002 level and the same as the administration request.
       These activities focus on: national surveillance of 
     infectious disease; applied research to develop new or 
     improved diagnoses; prevention and control strategies; 
     working with State and local departments and private health 
     care providers to transfer application of infectious disease 
     prevention technologies; and strengthening the capability to 
     respond to outbreaks of new or reemerging disease.
       Infectious diseases are a leading cause of death worldwide, 
     accounting for one-quarter to one-third of the estimated 54 
     million deaths in 1998. Disease outbreaks endanger U.S. 
     citizens at home and abroad, threaten U.S. Armed Forces 
     overseas, and exacerbate social and political instability. 
     Outbreaks can interfere with the global marketplace, 
     affecting tourism, trade, and foreign investment. CDC's 
     strategies to combat infectious diseases invest in and build 
     upon both the public health system that was established over 
     a century ago to increase the preparedness to address the 
     emergence of dangerous new threats.
       The Committee is aware that in 1995, in partnership with 
     Federal, State, and local agencies, universities, private 
     industry, foreign governments, the World Health Organization 
     (WHO), and many non-governmental organizations, CDC launched 
     the first phase of a nationwide program to revitalize 
     national capacity to protect the public from infectious 
     disease threats. The second phase of CDC's effort, 
     ``Preventing Emerging Infectious Diseases: A Strategy for the 
     21st Century'', published in 1998, continues these 
     partnerships to build domestic and global capacity for 
     recognizing and responding to infectious diseases.
       Anti-microbial resistance.--The Committee is concerned over 
     the development of resistance in microbes to current 
     antimicrobial therapies. Bacterial resistance to common 
     antimicrobial agents has become one of the most serious 
     emerging infectious disease threats facing communities and 
     the health care system in the United States. Resistance to 
     drug therapies leaves entire populations vulnerable to both 
     simple infections and

[[Page 851]]

     complex bioterrorism, as almost all microbes have become 
     resistant to any commercially available product. To combat 
     this national health threat, the Committee recognizes a need 
     to discover and develop new pharmaceutical products to combat 
     these drug resistant microbes. In recognition of the growing 
     problem, the CDC's goal is to develop and evaluate new 
     antimicrobial drugs. With the CDC's mission and expertise in 
     world-wide surveillance, it is uniquely positioned to 
     facilitate the global bio-prospecting and development of new 
     pharmacologically active compounds in untapped ocean and land 
     environments to combat the growing threat posed by drug 
     resistant microbes.
       Recognizing that a greater effort is needed to confront 
     this problem, the Committee encourages CDC to provide 
     sufficient funds to begin to address several critical areas. 
     These include (1) development and evaluation of compounds 
     with antimicrobial activity against multidrug resistant 
     strains of Staphylococcus aureus, enterococcus, gram-negative 
     hospital acquired pathogens, and vancomycin-tolerant 
     pneumococcus; (2) development of demonstration projects to 
     combat antimicrobial resistance in the hospital and 
     community, particularly in rural settings; (3) development of 
     Centers of Excellence in Health Care Epidemiology, and (4) 
     enhancement of capacity at the CDC to support these and other 
     activities related to control of antimicrobial resistance.
       Antimicrobial Resistance Epicenter Program.--The Committee 
     applauds CDC on its support for the Prevention Epicenter 
     Program and recommends that CDC significantly expand and 
     enhance this program to address patient safety issues.
       Food Safety.--CDC established PulseNet in 45 State health 
     departments. PulseNet is a national network of public health 
     laboratories that performs DNA ``fingerprinting'' on bacteria 
     that may be foodborne. The PulseNet network has 
     revolutionized foodborne disease surveillance by allowing 
     near real-time comparison of these ``fingerprint'' patterns 
     through an electronic database at CDC. Matching patterns can 
     indicate possible nationwide outbreaks and provide an early 
     warning for public health investigation and intervention. The 
     Committee is pleased that CDC has developed and implemented a 
     state-of-the-art diagnostic and communications system to 
     improve parasitic disease diagnoses in the United States. 
     This system, known as DPDx, uses Internet communication to 
     rapidly exchange diagnostic images of parasites digitally 
     captured from microscopic slides. Using DPDx, public health 
     laboratories can obtain diagnostic assistance in real time, 
     allowing for rapid identification of possible outbreaks.
       Global Malaria Initiative.--The Committee continues to 
     recognize the tremendous impact of malaria in the developing 
     world, and notes malaria's increasing resistance to 
     antimalarial drugs designed to counter its pervasive effects. 
     New drugs must be developed, and the Committee urges the CDC 
     to continue its efforts to lead in new compound discovery.
       Hepatitis C.--The Committee is pleased with the initial 
     steps taken to implement the National Hepatitis C Prevention 
     Strategy including the appointment of Hepatitis C 
     coordinators in all 50 States plus the establishment of 15 
     large metropolitan area demonstrations. The Committee notes, 
     however, based on the CDC report Implementation Plan for the 
     National Hepatitis C Prevention Strategy that significant 
     deficiencies exist in mounting a full national response to 
     hepatitis C. The Committee recommends that CDC conduct a 
     National Hepatitis Coordinators Conference to train 
     coordinators to help States integrate hepatitis prevention in 
     State public health programs. The Committee requests a report 
     by June, 2003 which documents the treatment and 
     pharmaceutical needs of individuals served by the large 
     metropolitan demonstrations and the necessary funding 
     mechanisms needed to meet these needs.
       The Committee urges CDC to work with voluntary health 
     organizations and professional societies to promote liver 
     wellness and prevention of hepatitis. CDC is urged to review 
     options for a National Hepatitis Roundtable, similar to CDC's 
     Colorectal Cancer Roundtable.
       Pandemic Influenza.--Pandemic influenza is a particularly 
     virulent strain of influenza that arises spontaneously and 
     periodically. Examples include the outbreak of Spanish flu in 
     1918, that killed 500,000 people, and outbreaks in 1957 
     (Asian flu) and 1968 (Hong Kong flu). The Committee has 
     included funds for pandemic influenza activities. These funds 
     will allow CDC to strengthen global and domestic surveillance 
     capabilities in order to increase the likelihood of early 
     detection of an influenza pandemic and the effective tracking 
     of its spread.
       Patient Safety.--The Committee recommends increased funding 
     for patient safety activities. The Committee urges CDC to 
     expand the National Health Care Safety Network, a national 
     electronic medical error/adverse events monitoring system. 
     This system will encompass a representative sample of 
     hospitals in the United States, managed care organizations, 
     long-term care facilities, and other healthcare venues linked 
     to health departments and CDC. The funds can also be used to 
     enhance capacity for detection and response to medical errors 
     and other adverse healthcare events at State and local levels 
     through active monitoring, improved epidemiologic/root cause 
     investigation, and onsite intervention to promote patient 
     safety and improve patient outcomes.
       West Nile virus.--The Committee is aware of CDC's effort to 
     complete a national plan for West Nile virus response in the 
     United States. That includes developing a computerized 
     national surveillance system for West Nile virus and provides 
     funds to 53 health departments to build national capacity to 
     develop and implement effective surveillance, prevention, and 
     control of West Nile virus in the United States.
     Injury Prevention and Control
       The Committee recommends $149,385,000 for injury prevention 
     and control, which is $62,000 below the 2002 level and 
     $4,621,000 above the administration request.
       CDC is the lead Federal agency for injury prevention and 
     control. Programs are designed to prevent premature death and 
     disability and reduce human suffering and medical costs 
     caused by: fires and burns; poisoning; drowning; violence; 
     lack of bicycle helmet use; lack of seatbelt and proper baby 
     seat use; and other injuries. The national injury control 
     program at CDC encompasses nonoccupational injury and applied 
     research in acute care and rehabilitation of the injured. 
     Funds are utilized for both intramural and extramural 
     research as well as assisting State and local health agencies 
     in implementing injury prevention programs. The Committee 
     recognizes the vital role CDC serves as a focal point for all 
     Federal injury control activities.
       The Committee's recommended increase over the amount 
     proposed in the President's Budget for Injury Prevention and 
     Control which will enable CDC to continue the widespread 
     adoption of programs, policies, and practices that are 
     successful in reducing injuries and deaths, as well as 
     minimizing the adverse outcomes from injury. These funds will 
     allow current activities in fiscal year 2002 to continue, 
     including programs to support trauma information and 
     education, activities in childhood injury and violence 
     prevention and research and State programs to prevent injury 
     and violence.
       In addition, sufficient funds have been included to 
     continue support for all existing Injury Control Research 
     Centers.
       Traumatic Brain Injury.--The Committee has provided an 
     increase in the TBI Prevention Program to enable the program 
     to implement its new authorities enacted in 2000 regarding 
     TBI surveillance and registry, establish a One-Call 
     information Center, and expand awareness programs with an 
     emphasis on minority populations. This increase will assist 
     in filling significant gaps in information available at State 
     and Federal levels regarding the incidence and prevalence of 
     TBI, the resources available to victims of TBI, and the 
     nature of specific factors involving TBI in young children 
     and in institutionalized individuals.
       National Violent Death Reporting System.--In fiscal year 
     2002, Congress called on CDC to begin implementation of a 
     plan for a system for timely, complete, objective and 
     accurate information about violent deaths and injuries to 
     inform and evaluate policy and program efforts. The Committee 
     is pleased with the progress and has included $3,000,000 to 
     extend implementation of this model plan for the 
     establishment of a national violent death reporting system 
     (NVDRS) from 20 to 22 States. NVDRS will enable States to 
     understand more about the violence problem in their States. 
     The Committee urges CDC to continue to work with private 
     health and education agencies as well as State agencies in 
     the development and implementation of an injury reporting 
     system.
     Occupational Safety and Health
       The Committee recommends $274,899,000 for occupational 
     safety and health programs, which is $1,181,000 below the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and $27,581,000 above the 
     administration budget. The Committee recommendation includes 
     $41,900,000 in transfers available under section 241 of the 
     Public Health Service Act.
       The CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and 
     Health (NIOSH), is the only Federal agency responsible for 
     conducting research and making recommendations for the 
     prevention of work-related illness and injury. The NIOSH 
     mission spans the spectrum of activities necessary for the 
     prevention of work-related illness, injury, disability, and 
     death by gathering information, conducting scientific 
     biomedical research (both applied and basic), and translating 
     the knowledge gained into products and services that impact 
     workers in settings from corporate offices to constructions 
     sites to coal mines.
       The Committee recommends $88,760,000 for CDC's National 
     Occupational Research Agenda (NORA). This is the same funding 
     level as fiscal year 2002 and restores the $25,581,000 cut 
     proposed by the Administration. NORA is a critical scientific 
     research program that protects employees and employers from 
     the high personal and financial costs of work site health and 
     safety losses. Industries such as agriculture, construction, 
     health care, and mining benefit from the scientific research 
     supported by NORA. The program's

[[Page 852]]

     research agenda focuses on prevention of disease and injury 
     resulting from infectious diseases, cancer, asthma, hearing 
     loss, musculoskeletal disorders, traumatic injuries, and 
     allergic reactions, among others. In fiscal year 2002, NORA 
     supported more than $40,000,000 in extramural research 
     conducted by universities and other research institutions. 
     The Committee continues to strongly support NORA and 
     encourages expansion of its research program to cover 
     additional causes of work place health and safety problems.
       Construction Safety and Health.--The Committee once again 
     is very pleased with the progress that NIOSH has made in its 
     program directed at occupational illnesses and injuries in 
     the building and construction industry. According to the 
     Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of serious illnesses and 
     injuries in construction has dropped 32 percent from 1992 to 
     1997. The Committee is also pleased by NIOSH's new focus on 
     active intervention to prevent occupational injury and 
     illness in the construction industry, and the National 
     Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) for establishing research 
     priorities. However, the Committee is concerned with the 
     continued high fatality rate in the industry, and has 
     included funds to continue the program at no less than 
     current levels.
       Education and Research Centers.--The Committee commends the 
     work of the 15 university-based Education and Research 
     Centers (ERC's) and the smaller single discipline Training 
     Project Grants (TPG's). These regional centers are integral 
     to the Nation's efforts to improve the health and safety of 
     working men and women, and important to the future efforts of 
     NIOSH to implement the National Occupational Research Agenda 
     (NORA). Recognizing the important role Education ERCs play in 
     preventive health research and the training of occupational 
     safety and health professionals, and includes an increase of 
     $2,000,000 for ERCs.
       Farm Health and Safety.--The Committee has included funding 
     to continue the farm health and safety initiative. This 
     important initiative, begun in fiscal year 1990, has a 
     primary focus of reducing the incidence of fatal and nonfatal 
     injuries and occupational diseases among the millions of 
     agricultural workers and their families in the United States. 
     The Committee is particularly pleased with the research being 
     undertaken by the Agricultural Research Centers.
     Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant
       The Committee recommends $134,966,000 for the preventive 
     health and health services block grant, which is $1,000 below 
     the 2002 level and the same as the administration's request.
       The Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant 
     provides States with funds for services to reduce preventable 
     morbidity and mortality to improve the quality of life. The 
     Block Grant is the primary source of funding to States for 
     health education and risk reduction activities; cholesterol, 
     hypertension, and cancer screening; and programs to prevent 
     sex offenses. The strategy of the Block Grant is to provide 
     States with flexibility to tailor prevention and health 
     promotion programs to their health priority needs. Block 
     Grant funding enables States to provide money for developing 
     new programs; fund essential services that would otherwise go 
     unfunded; and address urgent, rapidly developing health 
     hazards such as disease outbreaks or environmental disasters.
     Public Health Improvement
       The Committee recommends $115,672,000 for public health 
     improvement, which is $32,528,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     level and $1,147,000 below the administration request. The 
     Committee recommendation includes $28,600,000 in transfers 
     available under section 241 of the Public Health Service Act.
       Our national public health system is the first line of 
     defense against preventable disease, disability and 
     bioterrorism. Virtually every health problem in our 
     communities--infectious disease outbreaks, chemical hazards, 
     chronic diseases, and injuries--is first recognized by local 
     public health professionals, who must work in concert with 
     State and national officials to control these threats, 
     prevent spread, and save lives. Despite steady increases and 
     shifts in the U.S. population there has been a decline in the 
     number of public health workers per capita in the past 
     decade. Schools of Public Health and Preventive Medicine 
     report that the majority of graduates do not seek employment 
     in public health agencies. Only an estimated 44 percent of 
     the Nation's current 448,000 public health practitioners have 
     had formal training in public health. One-half of all public 
     health nurses--the largest profession in public health--lack 
     a baccalaureate nursing degree. The majority of public and 
     private laboratory scientists lack access to continuing 
     education and training essential to using the cascade of new, 
     high-technology laboratory tests accurately and safely.
       Minority Health Disparities.--This program is intended to 
     help racial and ethnic minority communities mobilize and 
     organize their resources to support effective and sustainable 
     programs that will contribute to the elimination of health 
     disparities in the following six target health areas: infant 
     mortality, breast and cervical cancer screening and 
     management, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, HIV infection 
     and AIDS, and child and adult immunizations. REACH 2010 is a 
     two-phased, 5-year demonstration project. Phase I is a 12-
     month planning phase to support planning and development of 
     demonstration programs. Phase II is a 4-year implementation 
     and evaluation phase. The Committee is pleased with CDC's 
     commitment to the REACH 2010 Program. The planning (Phase I) 
     communities currently are establishing infrastructure to 
     support community-level data collection, establishing 
     collaborative partnerships, establishing linkages with other 
     State and local agencies, and working with Federal agencies 
     and other partners to identify promising prevention 
     strategies that have the greatest potential for reducing the 
     health disparities in the target populations.
       National Electronic Disease Surveillance System.--Accurate, 
     timely health information is a critical component of all 
     effective prevention and control efforts. Yet, only 55 
     percent of local health departments have high-speed, 
     continuous Internet access for finding the most recent health 
     guidelines and recommendations. Only 56 percent can 
     successfully receive broadcast health alerts. Only 50 percent 
     have access to community health information critical for 
     setting priorities, taking effective actions, and tracking 
     improvements in health status. The Committee is pleased with 
     CDC's work to integrate disease detection and monitoring to 
     ensure rapid reporting and follow-up.
       Prevention Research.--The Committee recommends $17,021,000 
     for the extramural prevention research program. This reverses 
     the virtual elimination of the program proposed in the 
     President's request. The prevention research program 
     translates biomedical research into practical public health 
     actions by sponsoring peer-reviewed research conducted by 
     academics who are linked with State and local health agencies 
     to develop improved interventions. The anthrax attacks of 
     last fall demonstrated dramatically the gaps in our Nation's 
     knowledge of how best to address industrial exposure, risk 
     factors, treatment, effective control measures, and 
     environmental cleanup. These and many other urgent questions 
     regarding infectious and chemical agents, mass trauma, and 
     radiological exposures need to be answered through additional 
     prevention research. The Committee supports this program 
     strongly and encourages CDC to expand the program's research 
     into additional areas of public health concern. There are 
     many areas of research that can pay dividends in both 
     improved health and reduced health care costs. The Committee 
     expects some of these funds to be used to support research on 
     ways to prevent disease and disability in rural areas and to 
     better utilize nurses and allied health professionals in 
     prevention and health promotion efforts.
       As more and more Americans use alternative and 
     complementary therapies to maintain and improve their health, 
     there is a growing need for better consumer information about 
     these therapies. The Committee expects CDC to expand their 
     effort in this area. Practice-based assessments and the 
     identification and study of promising and heavily used 
     complementary and alternative therapies and practices should 
     be undertaken and results published. The Committee expects 
     CDC to collaborate with the National Center for Complementary 
     and Alternative Medicine to assure that its efforts are 
     coordinated with efforts by this Center.
       The Committee is aware of research regarding saliva as a 
     cost-effective, non-invasive diagnostic tool for early 
     detection of breast cancer and encourages CDC to consider a 
     ``Saliva as a Diagnostic Tool'' research initiative.
     Buildings and Facilities
       The Committee recommendation includes $270,000,000 for the 
     planning, design, and construction of new facilities as well 
     as the repair and renovation of existing CDC facilities. This 
     is $20,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $270,000,000 above the administration request.
       The Committee recommendation includes $250,000,000 for 
     continuation of CDC's building program for its Atlanta 
     facilities and $20,000,000 to begin construction and purchase 
     equipment for CDC's infectious disease laboratory in Fort 
     Collins, Colorado. The Committee has long supported the rapid 
     implementation of CDC's Buildings and Facilities Master Plan 
     and is pleased with the progress made to date for the 
     agency's Atlanta, Georgia facilities. The Committee notes 
     that continuing to implement the Master Plan as quickly as 
     possible is essential for the public health security of our 
     Nation, particularly after the World Trade Center and anthrax 
     terrorist attacks of last year. Like some of its remaining 
     Atlanta, Georgia facilities, CDC's Fort Collins laboratory is 
     antiquated, it poses a health and safety threat to employees, 
     and it is inadequate for the job of responding to 
     bioterrorist attacks and other public health threats. The 
     facility suffers from severe overcrowding, significant 
     infrastructure failings including fragile cooling, heating 
     and air handling systems, lack of adequate fire alarms or 
     intercom systems, lack of functional sprinkler systems, and a 
     sinking foundation. The Committee urges replacement of the 
     existing Fort Collins laboratory as quickly as possible. 
     while others are in great need of complete renovation.

[[Page 853]]

       The Committee has provided bill language to allow CDC to 
     enter into a single contract or related contracts for the 
     full scope of development and construction of facilities and 
     instructs CDC to utilize this authority when constructing the 
     Fort Collins facility.
     Office of the Director
       The Committee recommends $49,749,000 for the Office of the 
     Director, which is $1,671,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     level and $4,870,000 above the administration request.
       The Office of the Director (OD) manages and directs 
     programs of the CDC. OD provides leadership, advises on 
     policy matters, and develops and evaluates progress of goals 
     and objectives related to disease prevention and control. OD 
     provides direction and coordination to the epidemiologic 
     activities of CDC and coordinates CDC's response to health 
     emergencies. In addition, OD coordinates and manages programs 
     on global health activities, minority health, and women's 
     health relating to disease prevention and control.
       Communications.--The Committee was concerned during last 
     year's anthrax crisis that there was the perception that CDC 
     was conveying incomplete messages, mixed messages, or no 
     messages at all to the American people. Clear information is 
     critical to public health and is central to the mission of 
     the CDC. Within funds available, the Committee recommendation 
     includes up to $10,000,000 to analyze CDC's communication 
     mechanisms in an effort to guarantee a fast, accurate, and 
     targeted flow of information not only during crisis but also 
     in day-to-day operations. CDC should report to the Committee 
     within 6 months of the enactment of this legislation as to 
     the specific plan of action for this effort.
       Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 
     Program.--The Committee commends CDC, and in particular, 
     NIOSH for its efforts under the Energy Employees Occupational 
     Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA). The Committee is 
     aware that the Department of Labor and NIOSH have already 
     received a large number of cancer claims and expect more 
     under this program. Most cancer claims will require dose 
     reconstruction in order to determine probability of 
     causation. The Committee is concerned that NIOSH may not have 
     adequate staff to handle this workload and urges the Director 
     of CDC to closely monitor the situation so that claims can be 
     promptly evaluated.
       The Committee expects CDC to report to the Committee prior 
     to next year's budget hearing on how it intends to address 
     this backlog issue.
       Field Staff.--The Committee has included bill language to 
     exempt employees of the Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention or the Public Health Service, detailed as field 
     assignees for purposes related to homeland security, from 
     full-time equivalent [FTE] employment limitations, 
     administrative ceilings, or targets. The effect of the bill 
     language is to furnish States, municipalities, and other 
     organizations with a sufficient number of field assignees to 
     implement important public health programs related to 
     homeland security.
       Inflammatory Bowel Disease.--It is estimated that up to 1 
     million people in the United States suffer from Crohn's 
     disease or ulcerative colitis, collectively known as 
     inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The Committee has 
     encouraged the CDC to work in partnership with the IBD 
     community to establish a national IBD epidemiology program to 
     further our understanding of these diseases. The Committee 
     understands that the CDC has recently entered into a 
     partnership with Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America to 
     initiate this important program. Now that this project has 
     been established through an investment by the patient 
     community, the Committee strongly encourages the CDC to 
     provide significant funding for this program in fiscal year 
     2003. Moreover, the Committee requests that the Director of 
     the CDC provide a report to the Committee no later than 6 
     months after the enactment of this legislation detailing the 
     progress that has been made in advancing this initiative.

                     National Institutes of Health

       With this year's appropriation, the Committee marks a 
     historic event: Funding for one of our great national 
     treasures, the National Institutes of Health, has been 
     doubled in just 5 years.
       Through past investments in the NIH, countless lives have 
     been saved; new vaccines, cures, diagnostics, and treatments 
     have been developed; and a thriving biomedical research 
     industry has been created. That extraordinary record of 
     achievement inspired the Committee in 1998 to embark upon the 
     ambitious goal of doubling the Nation's investment in 
     biomedical research.
       This goal could not have been achieved without widespread 
     support from scientists, who made a compelling case that the 
     additional funds could be put to good use, and from the 
     American people, millions of whom look to the NIH as their 
     best hope for medical cures and treatments. They, more than 
     anyone else, have reason to celebrate the completion of the 
     doubling effort.
       By steadfastly keeping NIH funding on track to achieve this 
     goal, the Committee has enabled the NIH to support far more 
     promising research than it was ever able to before, and to 
     advance into new areas of science, even as the doubling 
     project was underway. For example:
       --The NIH now funds nearly 10,000 more research grants than 
         it did before the doubling began. That's 10,000 more 
         ideas that could lead to vaccines, cures, and treatments, 
         as well as fundamental scientific breakthroughs that 
         could open up new opportunities for improving human 
         health;
       --The NIH now funds 40 percent more research centers than 
         it did in 1998. Such centers can provide the catalyst for 
         researchers of many backgrounds--not just physicians, but 
         mathematicians, computer scientists, physicists, social 
         scientists, and chemists--to come together to solve 
         fundamental science problems or develop novel cures. In 
         the process, the doubling effort has helped change the 
         way research is conducted.
       --The NIH can now support the training of over 1,500 more 
         scientists each year than it could in 1998. This 
         investment will help ensure there are enough trained 
         professionals ready to turn today's research advances 
         into tomorrow's treatments, diagnostics, vaccines, and 
         cures.
       --NIH funding for clinical trials has doubled from 
         $1,400,000,000 in 1998 to $2,800,000,000 today. This 
         increase has enabled NIH-funded scientists to get basic 
         research results into medical practice that much faster, 
         and the Nation to benefit more quickly from its 
         investments in biomedical research.
       The Committee understands that the impact of the doubling 
     effort will continue to be felt for many decades. But several 
     advances during the past 5 years offer a sense of the 
     benefits the Nation will reap in the future from today's 
     investments. They include: the mapping of the human genome, 
     which is revolutionizing biology and opening up entire new 
     fields of research; the FDA approval of Gleevec, the first 
     drug that directly turns off the signal of a protein known to 
     cause a cancer; and rapid advances in embryonic and adult 
     stem cell biology, areas of discovery that could lead to 
     revolutionary treatments and cures.
       While the NIH continues to invest in basic research, it is 
     also helping the Nation respond to new threats to the 
     homeland--specifically, to the threat of bioterrorism. NIH-
     funded scientists helped analyze the genetic code of the 
     anthrax strains used in last fall's anthrax attacks, in an 
     effort to catch the perpetrators, even as other NIH-supported 
     researchers helped advance our knowledge about how to design 
     new vaccines and cures for bioterrorist agents. The NIH is 
     now initiating an important bioterrirosm research initiative 
     to develop countermeasures to neutralize bioterrorist threats 
     from micro-organisms such as smallpox, anthrax, tularemia, 
     and plague.
       As the Committee marks the conclusion of the doubling 
     effort, it notes that the job of investing in biomedical 
     research is far from over. Heart disease, drug abuse, mental 
     disorders, cancer, diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and 
     other debilitating diseases and conditions continue to affect 
     millions of Americans on a daily basis. The Nation must 
     sustain the momentum of these investments, so future 
     generations can continue to benefit from the improvements in 
     human health that flow from the NIH.
       The Committee recommends $27,167,926,000 for the NIH. This 
     amount is $3,742,183,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the same as the budget request. For each 
     Institute and Center below, figures for the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the budget request have been adjusted to 
     reflect transfers to the NIBIB.


                       NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$4,128,351,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,642,394,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,642,394,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,642,394,000 
     for the National Cancer Institute [NCI]. This is equal to the 
     budget request and $514,043,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget 
     estimate include funds to be transferred from the Office of 
     AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NCI conducts and supports basic and applied 
     cancer research in prevention, early detection, diagnosis, 
     treatment, and rehabilitation. The Institute provides 
     training support for research scientists, clinicians, and 
     educators, and maintains a national network of cancer 
     centers, clinical cooperative groups, community clinical 
     oncology programs, cancer prevention and control initiatives, 
     and outreach programs to rapidly translate basic research 
     findings into clinical practice.
       The Committee continues to regard scientific investigation 
     into the cause, cure, prevention, and treatment of cancer as 
     one of the Nation's top priorities. Research offers the only 
     hope for putting a stop to a disease that wastes precious 
     human resources and contributes to spiraling health care 
     costs.
       Anti-cancer drugs.--The Committee is aware that the NCI is 
     collaborating on the development of synthetic small molecule 
     drugs that target both novel and known targets in cell cycle 
     regulation. The Committee

[[Page 854]]

     understands that these compounds leave normal, non-cancer 
     cells unharmed while inducing cell-suicide in cancer cells. 
     The Committee encourages the NCI to continue to fund this 
     unique research effort.
       Behavioral research.--The NCI is encouraged to continue its 
     recent emphasis on the interactions of genetic, 
     environmental, and lifestyle factors that affect cancer risk 
     and the prevention, detection, and treatment of cancer. The 
     Committee is particularly supportive of work on risk 
     determination and better communication of that risk to the 
     public and public health infrastructures. The NCI is uniquely 
     positioned to develop and expand large collaborative human 
     population studies that can help build the science base. The 
     NCI is also encouraged to expand research efforts to define 
     the biological, behavioral, and social bases of tobacco use 
     and addiction, and to refine treatment options for specific 
     groups (e.g. pregnant women or young smokers).
       Blood cancers.--The Committee urges the NCI to continue to 
     implement the research priorities for leukemia, lymphoma, and 
     multiple myeloma included in the May 2001 Progress Review 
     Group Report.
       Bone metastases.--The Committee understands that bone 
     metastases are common in a number of human cancers and 
     contribute heavily to morbidity, most prominently in prostate 
     cancer, breast cancer and multiple myeloma. Recognizing this, 
     the NCI is encouraged to promote research to understand the 
     underpinnings of tumor metastasis to the bone. The Institute 
     is also encouraged to focus on understanding the interaction 
     between tumor cells and a multitude of cells in the bone 
     microenvironment, as well as the role of extra cellular 
     matrix and a multitude of growth factors, cytokines and other 
     proteins on tumor survival and growth in the bone 
     microenvironment.
       Brain Tumor Progress Review Group.--The Committee is 
     concerned that the NCI and NINDS have not proceeded with 
     implementation of the Brain Tumor Progress Review Group's 
     recommendations on advancing brain tumor research. The 
     Committee strongly urges the NCI and NINDS to finalize their 
     plan for implementing the recommendations and to provide 
     additional funding for the NCI-NINDS Neuro-Oncology Program 
     to ensure that the Federal research agency is a leader in 
     brain tumor research. The two Institutes should also seek to 
     expand their collaborative brain tumor research ventures, 
     including interactive meetings involving scientists of 
     different disciplines and interdisciplinary grant 
     applications in brain tumor biology and etiology. The 
     Committee requests that the NCI and NINDS report on their 
     collaborative brain tumor research initiatives by December 
     31, 2003.
       Cancer and minorities.--The Committee remains concerned 
     that cancer rates for Native Hawaiians and other Native 
     American Pacific Islanders are disproportionately high. The 
     Committee encourages the NCI to expand its research in this 
     area.
       Cancer screening technologies.--The Committee recognizes 
     the importance of novel technologies such as plasma K-RAS DNA 
     in the NCI's efforts to develop non-invasive cancer screening 
     technologies for clinical use.
       Cancer survivorship.--With the advances that have resulted 
     from the ongoing commitment and investment in biomedical 
     research, and the resultant advances in cancer treatment, 
     cancer for many has become a chronic illness. Currently, 
     there are over 9 million cancer survivors in the Nation, and 
     this number is expected to grow dramatically. More must be 
     done to improve the understanding of the growing cancer 
     survivorship population, including determinations of 
     physiological and psychological late effects, prevalence of 
     secondary cancers, as well as further development of 
     effective survivorship interventions. The Committee supports 
     an aggressive expansion of the NCI Office of Cancer 
     Survivorship activities, to include the convening of a 
     consensus conference on cancer survivorship. The Committee 
     requests the Director of NCI to submit a report, by April 1, 
     2003, outlining the activities the NCI is undertaking to 
     enhance cancer survivorship research and to expand the Office 
     on Cancer Survivorship.
       Chronic lymphocytic leukemia.--The Committee strongly 
     encourages the NCI to increase the level of research aimed at 
     determining the underlying cause and optimum therapies for 
     CLL, the most common form of adult leukemia in the United 
     States. The Committee is encouraged by the NCI's willingness 
     to consider a supplementary application for research funding 
     for the CLL Research Consortium. The Committee further urges 
     the NCI to expand funding for the Consortium to speed up the 
     progress in finding significant scientific breakthroughs.
       Chronic myeloproliferative disorders.--Polycythemia vera, 
     idiopathic myelofibrosis and essential thrombocytosis are 
     malignant diseases of the bone marrow that are underserved 
     with respect to research funding, considering the number of 
     people they strike. These disorders are chronic and can 
     transform into acute leukemia. They offer great research 
     promise with respect to insights into the behavior of blood 
     cells, since the cells that they affect appear normal but 
     behave abnormally. The major obstacle to research into the 
     causes and the treatment of these disorders has been the lack 
     of Federal funds designated for this purpose. The Committee 
     strongly believes that the NCI should expand research into 
     these disorders, and it expects the NCI to report to Congress 
     by April 1, 2003, about existing efforts, as well as planned 
     future efforts, to better understand these disorders.
       Complementary and alternative cancer therapies.--The 
     Committee expects the NCI to expand its work and its 
     collaborative efforts with NCCAM to support research on 
     promising complementary and alternative cancer therapies as 
     well as on their integration with traditional therapies. 
     Thousands of Americans are turning to these therapies, and 
     consumers will benefit from a rigorous scientific review of 
     them.
       DES.--The Committee continues to strongly support increased 
     efforts to study and educate the public and health 
     professionals about the impact of exposure to the synthetic 
     hormone diethylstilbestrol (DES). The Committee expects the 
     NCI to continue its support of research in this area. In 
     addition, the Committee urges the NCI to continue its 
     agreement with the CDC to implement a national education 
     program for consumers and health professionals. The Committee 
     expects the NCI and these other agencies to continue to 
     consult with organizations representing individuals impacted 
     by DES as they carry out DES research and education efforts.
       Gynecologic cancers.--The Committee is concerned about the 
     patterns of care for gynecological cancers, and it urges the 
     NCI to expand CanCORS to gynecologic cancers. While the 
     Committee commends the NCI for funding four ovarian cancer 
     SPOREs and the one gynecologic cancer SPORE, it believes 
     research into other gynecologic cancers needs to be enhanced. 
     The Committee urges the NCI to continue funding ovarian 
     cancer SPORES and to consider creating SPORES specifically 
     for cervical and endometrial cancers.
       Imaging systems technologies.--The Committee is encouraged 
     by progress made by the NCI following its August 1999 
     conference on biomedical imaging, and it urges the NCI to 
     continue to take a leadership role with the Centers for 
     Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Food and Drug 
     Administration to avoid duplicative reviews of new imaging 
     technologies which may prevent their benefits from reaching 
     patients on a timely basis. The Committee is aware of the 
     great potential for improved patient care and disease 
     management represented by molecular imaging technologies, 
     especially positron emission tomography (PET) through its 
     ability to image the biology of many kinds of cancer and 
     other diseases. The Committee continues to support the NCI's 
     increased emphasis on examining the molecular basis of 
     disease through imaging technologies such as PET and 
     MicroPET. The Committee continues to encourage the large-
     scale testing of women for breast cancer and of men for 
     prostate cancer to demonstrate and quantify the increased 
     diagnostic and staging capabilities of PET relative to 
     conventional diagnostic and staging technologies including 
     mammography.
       Kidney and bladder cancers.--The Committee is concerned 
     that funding for kidney and bladder cancer has not kept pace 
     with that of other cancers. The Committee understands that 
     the NCI has worked with the scientific community to develop 
     an agenda for research into these cancers. The Committee 
     encourages the NCI to implement this agenda for other 
     urologic cancers in the coming fiscal year.
       Liver cancer.--The Committee encourages the NCI to work 
     closely with the NIDDK to investigate prevention, diagnosis 
     and therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma and other cancers of 
     the liver.
       Neurofibromatosis (NF).--Neurofibromatosis research has 
     significant potential for cancer patients since NF genes have 
     been implicated in the signaling process that determines cell 
     growth and cell differentiation. The Committee commends NCI 
     for recognizing NF's connection to many of the most common 
     forms of human cancers and commencing phase II clinical 
     trials of NF1 patients with plexiform neurofibromas. The 
     Committee encourages the NCI to strengthen its NF research 
     portfolio in such areas as further development of animal 
     models, natural history studies, therapeutic experimentation 
     and clinical trials.
       Pancreatic cancer.--The Committee is very concerned that 
     funding increases for pancreatic cancer research have not 
     risen at a rate commensurate with the severity of this 
     disease or the increases afforded the NCI for the past 5 
     years. Pancreatic cancer is the Nation's fifth-leading cause 
     of cancer death, and 99 percent of people diagnosed with 
     pancreatic cancer die within 6 months. Therefore, the 
     Committee strongly urges the NCI to: (1) fully implement the 
     recommendations outlined in the Progress Review Group on 
     pancreatic cancer during fiscal year 2003; (2) consider 
     funding five pancreatic cancer SPOREs by fiscal year 2004; 
     and (3) develop a plan to create a critical mass of 
     pancreatic cancer researchers and grants over the next 3 
     years. The Committee asks the NIH to address these 
     recommendations in a report to Congress by March 30, 2003.

[[Page 855]]

       The Committee also urges the NCI to explore new methods for 
     identifying genetic and environmental factors and gene-
     environment interactions that contribute to pancreatic 
     cancer, and to develop and implement methods for rapid case 
     ascertainment, which may include immediate electronic 
     reporting from pathology, radiology, and laboratory 
     departments.
       The Committee further notes the promise of utilizing 
     proteomic analysis of blood samples to diagnose pancreatic 
     cancer at its earliest stages. Proteomic analysis, which 
     involves the identification of specific protein patterns in 
     blood or other specimens that match known malignant patterns, 
     is quicker than identifying separate proteins and the genes 
     that create the proteins. This analysis was recently employed 
     for the detection of ovarian neoplasms and is presently under 
     study for the early detection of invasive prostate cancer. 
     The Committee encourages the NCI to rapidly identify 
     predictive proteomic patterns relevant to pancreatic cancer.
       Primary immunodeficiencies (PI).--Research has shown that 
     patients suffering from primary immunodeficiencies have a 
     100-200 times greater risk of developing cancer than persons 
     not suffering from PI. This has been a particular problem in 
     minority communities, where PI is often underdiagnosed. The 
     Committee urges the NCI to fund an aggressive research agenda 
     that will target methods of identifying undiagnosed patients 
     and appropriate treatments as a means of preventing cancer. 
     In addition, the Committee continues to urge NCI to play a 
     meaningful role in the national physician education and 
     public awareness campaign of the Jeffrey Modell Foundation.
       Prostate cancer.--Incidences of prostate cancer have been 
     on the rise in recent decades. Evidence is growing that in 
     addition to genetic disposition, numerous other factors--
     including lifestyle, nutritional imbalances, chronic 
     infections, and hormonal, psychological and environmental 
     components--play a role in the development of prostate 
     cancer. The Committee strongly urges the NIH to renew its 
     commitment to prostate cancer research, with a special 
     emphasis on accelerating new avenues for basic research, drug 
     development, and clinical research.


               NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,560,197,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,776,411,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,820,011,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $2,820,011,000 for 
     the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [NHLBI]. This 
     is $43,600,000 more than the budget request and $259,814,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
     provides leadership for a national research program in 
     diseases of the heart, blood vessels, lungs and blood, in 
     transfusion medicine, and in sleep disorders through support 
     of innovative basic, clinical, population-based, and health 
     education research.
       Advanced imaging technology for heart disease and stroke.--
     The Committee is aware that heart perfusion PET scans using 
     Rubidium-82 are considered the ``gold standard'' for 
     determining the extent of muscle damage to the heart 
     following a heart attack. The Committee encourages the NHLBI 
     to expand its research efforts into the role of biological 
     imaging and PET in delivering more accurate information to 
     determine appropriate treatment for heart disease patients.
       Behavioral research on positive health.--The Committee 
     notes that the NHLBI has sponsored important research 
     demonstrating the power of social connectedness to help speed 
     recovery after heart attacks. The Committee is interested in 
     research that helps reveal the pathways through which 
     positive experiences and emotions may enhance health or 
     protect against illness. The Committee encourages the NHLBI 
     to continue its work in this area and to expand where 
     possible any initiatives to increase basic behavioral 
     research on the etiology of disease resistance. The Institute 
     is also encouraged to examine initiatives that may be ready 
     for field-testing in community populations.
       Blood disorders.--The Committee commends the NHLBI for its 
     actions to establish a Transfusion Medicine/Hemostasis 
     Clinical Research Network and for the enhancements being made 
     to the existing network of sickle cell centers.
       Cardiovascular diseases.--The Committee continues to regard 
     research into the causes, cure, prevention and treatment of 
     heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular diseases as one 
     of the Nation's top priorities. Cardiovascular diseases 
     remain the leading cause of death in the United States and a 
     major cause of disability. The Committee is concerned that 
     funding in constant dollars for NHLBI's extramural Heart 
     Program has not kept pace with increases for the NIH at a 
     time when promising breakthroughs are on the horizon. The 
     Committee continues to believe that an intensive research 
     program on heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular 
     diseases should be a top priority of the NHLBI and of the 
     NIH. The Committee urges the Institute to place the highest 
     priority on cardiovascular research and has included 
     sufficient funds to allow the Institute to support existing 
     heart and stroke-related research and to invest in promising 
     research initiatives in this area.-
       Cardiovascular diseases in women.--The Committee is aware 
     that cardiovascular diseases remain a major cause of 
     disability and the leading cause of death of American women. 
     The clinical course of cardiovascular disease is different in 
     men than in women, and current diagnostic capabilities are 
     less accurate in women than in men. The Committee urges the 
     NHLBI to expand cardiovascular disease research in women, 
     including studies to develop safe, efficient and cost 
     effective diagnostic approaches for women. In addition, the 
     Committee encourages the NHLBI to create more informational 
     and educational programs for women patients and health care 
     providers on heart disease and stroke risk factors, as 
     authorized under Public Law 105-340, the Women's Health 
     Research and Prevention Amendments of 1998.
       Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).--The 
     Committee encourages the Institute to further research COPD 
     and to expand research on the pediatric origins of COPD, the 
     effects of environment on COPD, and the identification of 
     biomarkers that might predict complications of COPD, 
     including lung cancer.
       Cooley's anemia.--The Committee remains strongly supportive 
     of the Institute's creation of the Thalassemia Clinical 
     Research Network, which is composed of North America's 
     leading research entities on thalassemia, the medical term 
     for Cooley's anemia.
       Diamond-Blackfan Anemia.--The Committee is pleased that 
     NHLBI has conducted a workshop to evaluate the current state 
     of the science for the rare bone marrow deficiency disorder, 
     Diamond Blackfan Anemia (DBA). The Committee understands that 
     based on the findings of the workshop, NHLBI is developing a 
     comprehensive research strategy to investigate its genetic 
     predispositions to cancer, advanced treatment options, and 
     gene therapy. NHLBI should submit a report to the Committee 
     on the findings of the workshop and the subsequent research 
     strategy. The Committee also urges NHLBI to consider ways to 
     enhance the Diamond Blackfan Anemia National Registry so that 
     it may better facilitate research in this field.
       Disease networks.--The Committee is pleased with the 
     NHLBI's efforts to create disease networks in the areas of 
     asthma, sarcoidosis, and ARDS. The Committee encourages the 
     NHLBI to expand disease networks and to expand the network 
     concept to include the creation of tissue banks for 
     acquisition and distribution of tissue for asthma, COPD, and 
     interstitial lung disease.
       Heart disease and kidney disease.--There is a well-
     established and significant link between heart disease, 
     hypertension, and kidney disease. The Committee encourages 
     the NHLBI to increase its collaboration with the NIDDK to 
     develop cooperative research initiatives in this area, and it 
     urges the NHLBI to consider sponsoring a workshop on 
     hypertension as it relates to heart and kidney disease.
       Hemophilia.--The Committee commends the NHLBI for its role 
     in addressing hemophilia and for the Institute's strong 
     support of hemophilia gene therapy research. The Committee 
     notes the NHLBI program for women with bleeding disorders, 
     and it encourages the NHLBI to convene a consensus conference 
     to determine next steps for research. The Committee 
     recognizes the Institute's efforts to address the shortage of 
     trained hematology specialists through the establishment of a 
     clinical research network, and it urges the NHLBI to expand 
     support for strategies to ensure this critical issue is 
     addressed.
       Lung repair.--Respiratory failure is often a result of 
     irreversible lung injury. This may occur acutely in 
     conditions such as the acute respiratory distress syndrome 
     (ARDS) or chronically with disorders such as COPD or 
     pulmonary fibrosis. The Committee encourages the NHLBI to 
     promote the use of stem cells in animal models to study lung 
     repair and organogenesis as a novel method to reverse 
     respiratory failure.
       Marfan syndrome.--The Committee commends the NHLBI for its 
     past and ongoing support of research on aortic aneurysms, 
     which are pathologically related to Marfan syndrome. In 
     particular, the Committee commends the Institute for 
     providing funding support for the request for applications 
     that was initiated by NIAMS for heritable disorders of 
     connective tissue, which include Marfan syndrome. Marfan 
     syndrome is a life-threatening genetic disorder that affects 
     several organ systems and may result in rupture of the aorta 
     without the proper intervention.
       Minority cardiovascular health research.--The Committee 
     remains concerned that cardiovascular diseases 
     disproportionately affect minorities. For example, compared 
     with whites, blacks have a 1.3 times greater rate of nonfatal 
     stroke, a 1.8 times greater rate of fatal stroke, and a 1.5 
     times greater rate of heart disease death. The Committee 
     encourages the NHLBI to support new partnerships between 
     research-intensive medical centers and health care systems 
     that serve minority populations. Such partnerships would 
     facilitate the study of complex biological, behavioral, and 
     societal factors that contribute to

[[Page 856]]

     health disparities in cardiovascular disease; promote 
     research within the health care systems to improve minority 
     health and reduce health disparities; and provide training of 
     investigators to study cardiovascular diseases in minorities. 
     An important aspect of the programs would be the development 
     of community involvement in the research and outreach 
     strategies for patient recruitment and retention and emphasis 
     on prompt and effective communication of research findings to 
     health care practitioners.
       Minority health and lung disease.--The Committee is aware 
     that lung diseases disproportionately affect many minority 
     groups. The Committee encourages the NHLBI to work with other 
     Institutes and Centers to develop an epidemiologic approach 
     to determine the disproportionate impact of airway disease on 
     minority populations.
       Myeloproliferative disorders and myelodysplasia.--The 
     Committee urges the NHLBI to work with the NCI to develop new 
     research initiatives into the causes and targeted therapies 
     of myeloproliferative disorders and myelodysplastic 
     syndromes. These disorders are characterized by an overgrowth 
     of often abnormal cells in the bone marrow which may lead to 
     leukemia.
       National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP).--
     The Committee commends the NAEPP, which is administered by 
     the NHLBI, for its leadership in helping to educate 
     physicians, asthma patients, their families, and the general 
     public regarding asthma and its management. The Committee 
     encourages the NAEPP to enhance the role that its advisory 
     committee plays in helping to coordinate asthma education 
     throughout the United States. In addition, the Children's 
     Health Act of 2000 legislation included provisions for the 
     NAEPP to develop, in conjunction with other Federal agencies 
     and voluntary and professional health organizations, a 
     Federal plan to respond to asthma. This plan will include the 
     roles and responsibilities of several Federal agencies in 
     combatting asthma. The Committee encourages the NHLBI to move 
     forward quickly on this effort.
       Obesity-associated cardiovascular diseases.--Obesity is a 
     major risk factor for heart disease, stroke, and other 
     cardiovascular diseases. An estimated 61 percent of American 
     adults are overweight or obese, and excessive weight in 
     children and adolescents is of increasing concern. The 
     Committee encourages the NHLBI to support basic and clinical 
     studies to explain how excessive body weight contributes to 
     the development of cardiovascular diseases such as hardening 
     of the arteries, enlarged hearts, heart failure and irregular 
     heart beats. Major areas needing further research and 
     clarification include the role of fatty tissue in 
     inflammation, the effects of obesity on the growth of the 
     heart, blood vessel, respiratory, hormone and metabolic 
     systems; and the complex interactions between being 
     overweight and conditions such as chronic sleep loss, high 
     blood pressure and diabetes.
       Pediatric asthma.--The Committee recognizes that little is 
     known about the optimal treatment for asthma in infants and 
     young children. The Committee encourages NHLBI to use the 
     research amassed through the Pediatric Asthma Clinical 
     Research Network to provide clearer choices for childhood 
     asthma therapy, to encourage the development and 
     dissemination of new therapies, and to identify optimum 
     asthma management strategies for children.
       Pulmonary hypertension.--Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a 
     rare, progressive and fatal disease that predominantly 
     affects women. It causes deadly deterioration of the heart 
     and lungs and is a secondary condition in many other serious 
     disorders such as scleroderma and lupus. The Committee 
     commends the NHLBI's efforts to promote PH-related research, 
     and it encourages the Institute to increase funding for basic 
     research, gene therapy, and clinical trials of promising 
     pharmaceuticals.
       Scleroderma.--The Committee encourages the NHLBI to 
     undertake research initiatives on the cause of and treatment 
     options for scleroderma, a chronic and progressive disease 
     that predominantly strikes young women. Scleroderma can 
     result in complications that include pulmonary fibrosis, 
     pulmonary hypertension, myocardial fibrosis, cardiac 
     arrhythmias, pericarditis, and Raynaud's phenomenon.
       Sleep medicine.--The Committee commends the Institute and 
     its National Center for Sleep Disorders Research for the 
     progress being made to advance research into the relationship 
     between obstructive sleep apnea and obesity, hypertension, 
     cardiovascular diseases, and mortality. The Committee 
     encourages the Institute to accelerate these efforts and to 
     consider conducting multi-site clinical studies that will 
     assess effective treatments for patients with sleep apnea and 
     identify the functions of sleep for health, aging, and 
     prevention of disease.
       Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ).--The Committee 
     applauds the NHLBI for taking the initiative to investigate 
     research opportunities related to the cardiovascular and 
     sleep-related consequences of temporomandibular disorders, 
     and it encourages the Institute to act upon the 
     recommendations that ensued from an NHLBI workshop related to 
     these issues.
       Tuberculosis and AIDS interaction.--The Committee supports 
     the important research on the interaction of tuberculosis and 
     AIDS conducted by the NHLBI AIDS research program, and it 
     encourages NHLBI to strengthen its research in this important 
     area.
       Vascular disease and Alzheimer's.--There is a growing body 
     of evidence that cerebrovascular disease may be a key 
     mechanism in triggering the manifestation of Alzheimer's 
     disease. Autopsy data reveal that individuals whose brains 
     showed the plaques and tangles that are the hallmark of 
     Alzheimer's disease were much more likely to develop dementia 
     if they had also suffered a series of small strokes. Data 
     from longitudinal studies also suggest that high cholesterol 
     and hypertension may be significant risk factors in 
     Alzheimer's disease. The implications of these discoveries 
     are enormous, particularly for racial and ethnic groups that 
     are disproportionately affected by vascular disease. 
     Preliminary studies indicate that cholesterol-lowering drugs 
     and anti-hypertensive medications may also protect against 
     cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease. The Committee 
     urges the NHLBI to pursue this line of research and to work 
     collaboratively with the NIA.


         NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DENTAL AND CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$343,149,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................372,167,000
Committee recommendation....................................374,067,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $374,067,000 for the 
     National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research 
     [NIDCR]. This is $1,900,000 more than the budget request and 
     $30,918,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The 
     comparable amounts for the budget estimate include funds to 
     be transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NIDCR supports research and research training 
     to improve the oral health of the American people. The 
     Institute emphasizes ways to prevent disease in high-risk 
     groups, including the elderly, minority populations, and 
     individuals with medical conditions and medications that 
     compromise oral health. The research agenda includes studies 
     of craniofacial genes and birth defects; bone and joint 
     diseases; AIDS, other infections, and immunity; oral cancer; 
     chronic pain; epidemiology; biomaterials; and diagnostic 
     systems.
       Dental complications of Paget's disease.--The Committee 
     encourages NIDCR to support research on bone surrounding 
     teeth, oral and dental complications of Paget's disease, new 
     animal models of dentinogenesis imperfecta, orthodontic 
     manipulation in people with osteogenesis imperfecta and 
     biomarkers related to saliva. The Committee also encourages 
     NIDCR to continue its research on fibrous dysplasia.
       Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ).--The Committee is 
     aware that the Institute intends to broaden its scientific 
     base for TMJ research beyond studies on the psychological and 
     behavioral factors in the etiology or chronicity of TMJ 
     diseases and disorders that have long dominated the research 
     portfolio. The Committee urges investment in studies of 
     normal and abnormal structural and functional features of the 
     joint and related structures, using the tools of cell and 
     molecular biology as well as advanced imaging techniques. The 
     Committee asks that the NIDCR and other Institutes follow up 
     with research initiatives resulting from the spring 2002 TMJ 
     Association's meeting on joint and muscle dysfunction of the 
     TMJ.


    NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,466,380,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,604,647,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,637,347,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,637,347,000 
     for the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and 
     Kidney Diseases [NIDDK]. This is $32,700,000 more than the 
     administration's request and $170,967,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable amounts for 
     the budget estimate include funds to be transferred from the 
     Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NIDDK provides leadership for a national 
     program in three major disease categories: diabetes, 
     endocrinology, and metabolic diseases; digestive diseases and 
     nutrition; and kidney, urologic, and hematologic diseases. 
     The NIDDK plans, conducts, fosters, and supports a 
     coordinated program of fundamental and clinical research and 
     demonstration projects relating to the causes, prevention, 
     diagnosis, and treatment of diseases within these categories. 
     The Institute also supports efforts to transfer the knowledge 
     gained from its research program to health professionals, 
     patients, and the general public.
       Behavioral research.--The Committee encourages the NIDDK to 
     continue a research emphasis on the links between depression 
     and diabetes. Diabetics who have co-occurring depressive 
     symptoms have less success managing their illnesses. 
     Depression has been linked to poorer adherence to medical and 
     behavioral regimens and lower rates of exercise. The 
     Committee also notes that a recent NIDDK clinical trial on 
     diabetes, the

[[Page 857]]

     Diabetes Prevention Program, demonstrated that diet and 
     exercise could be more successful than medication in 
     preventing the development of diabetes in groups that faced a 
     high risk of diabetes. The NIDDK is strongly encouraged to 
     build on its investment in behavioral research, particularly 
     in areas that would add to the science base on the 
     maintenance of positive behavior change.
       Bladder disease research.--Bladder diseases have a 
     significant negative impact on the U.S. population. The 
     Committee urges the Institute to increase funds for the 
     urology program and other areas critical to bladder disease.
       Children and adolescent urological diseases.--While 
     research urologic diseases has led to advances in the care 
     and management of some urologic diseases affecting adults, 
     these diseases persist as a major cause of illness among the 
     most vulnerable population, children and adolescents. The 
     NIDDK should develop and implement an interagency plan for 
     pediatric urologic disease research. The Committee requests 
     the NIDDK to submit a status report prior to the fiscal year 
     2004 appropriations hearings that outlines the steps it is 
     taking to address the specific research needs of children and 
     adolescents suffering from urologic diseases and conditions.
       Chronic prostatitis.--The Committee requests that the NIDDK 
     increase funding for the Chronic Prostatitis Collaborative 
     Research Network. The Institute is also encouraged to 
     stimulate new and diverse research in chronic prostatitis by 
     convening a scientific and clinical workshop to be held in 
     fiscal year 2003 which will disseminate the findings of the 
     CPCRN and develop a strategic research plan.
       Cooley's anemia.--The Committee commends the outstanding 
     work being done at the NIDDK on such issues as iron 
     chelation, non-invasive iron measurement, fetal hemoglobin 
     and other topics that are critical to the health and well-
     being of Cooley's anemia patients. The development of a less 
     burdensome method of iron chelation, in particular, is a 
     critical priority as these patients currently must infuse 
     themselves with a drug pumped into their bodies up to 12 
     hours per night. Research directed at reducing this burden is 
     urgently needed.
       Diabetes in Native Hawaiians.--The Committee encourages the 
     NIDDK to investigate the incidence of diabetes in Native 
     American, Hawaiian, and Alaskan populations, as well as the 
     Mississippi Band of the Choctaw Indians and the Eastern Band 
     of the Cherokee Indians.
       Digestive diseases.--Diseases of the digestive system, such 
     as colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, irritable 
     bowel syndrome, hemochromatosis, celiac disease, and 
     hepatitis, affect more than one-half of all Americans at some 
     time in their lives. The Committee commends the NIDDK on the 
     success of its Digestive Disease Centers program in 
     addressing a wide range of disorders that result in 
     tremendous human suffering and economic cost. The Committee 
     encourages the Institute to expand this program.
       Gastroparesis.--Millions of Americans suffer from 
     gastroparesis, a condition caused by the failure of the 
     stomach to empty because of decreased motility. One of the 
     most common complications of diabetes, gastroparesis also 
     affects individuals with lupus, scleroderma, and is a 
     complication in the treatment of Parkinson's and asthma. In 
     up to 40 percent of cases, the cause of gastroparesis is 
     unknown. While researchers are exploring methods to diagnose 
     this disorder, effective treatments remain elusive. The 
     Committee strongly encourages NIDDK to place special emphasis 
     on developing and testing more effective, innovative 
     diagnostic tests and novel treatments, and on training health 
     care providers about this gastric neuromuscular disorder.
       Glomerular injury research.--The Committee is pleased with 
     the NIDDK's glomerular injury research initiatives, including 
     a clinical trial for patients with focal segmental 
     glomerulosclerosis. Further, the Committee continues to 
     encourage the NIDDK to consider initiating a scientific 
     conference on glomerular injury research, and to explore 
     support for gathering prevalence data on glomerular injury.
       Hematology.--The Committee is aware of the high-quality 
     hematology research in iron metabolism, gene regulation, and 
     stem cell plasticity currently funded by the Institute, and 
     it encourages the NIDDK to plan the next steps in setting 
     priorities for future research in these and other areas that 
     significantly impact a broad array of blood disorders.
       Hepatitis C.--The Committee remains concerned about the 
     disproportionate impact of hepatitis C among minorities. The 
     Committee encourages the NIDDK to expand research on better 
     treatment options for minorities, and to partner with the CDC 
     and voluntary health organizations to facilitate a prevention 
     and education campaign targeted at high-risk populations.
       Inflammatory bowel disease.--The Committee has been 
     encouraged in recent years by discoveries related to Crohn's 
     disease and ulcerative colitis, collectively known as 
     inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). These extremely complex 
     disorders represent the major cause of morbidity from 
     intestinal illness. The Committee commends NIDDK for its 
     strong leadership in this area and encourages the Institute 
     to expand research focused on: (1) the cellular, molecular 
     and genetic structure of IBD, (2) identification of the genes 
     that determine susceptibility or resistance to IBD in various 
     patient subgroups, and (3) translation of basic research 
     findings into patient clinical trails as outlined in the 
     research agenda developed by the scientific community 
     entitled, ``Challenges in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.'' In 
     addition, the Committee encourages NIDDK to continue to 
     strengthen its partnership with the IBD community and expand 
     its Digestive Disease Centers program. The Committee requests 
     that the Institute provide a report on the progress made 
     throughout the NIH in all of these areas by October 1, 2003.
       Interstitial cystitis.--The Committee is very concerned by 
     the direction of interstitial cystitis (IC) research at the 
     NIDDK in the last two budget cycles. Despite strong 
     congressional interest in expanding such research, the NIDDK 
     did not invest in new IC-specific research grants during 
     fiscal year 2002 and has thus far not committed to doing so 
     in fiscal year 2003. The Committee urges the NIDDK to reverse 
     this trend and aggressively support research that will 
     enhance the basic science knowledge of IC through IC-specific 
     research.
       The Committee is pleased that NIDDK has pledged continued 
     support and expansion of the IC Clinical Trials Group. The 
     Committee is aware that the group is making good progress on 
     the evaluation of BCG for the treatment of IC. Ancillary 
     studies, including urinary marker studies, are being done 
     concurrently, and will help provide an understanding of the 
     differences between responders and non-responders. The 
     Committee feels strongly that funding for ancillary studies 
     should be included in the recompetition of the RFA for the 
     ICCTG clinical centers. This will ensure peer review, and at 
     the same time, avoid possible significant delays in funding 
     of the ancillary studies should they be offered through a 
     different mechanism.
       The Committee is also pleased that the NIDDK completed a 
     draft of the recommendations put forth by the Bladder 
     Research Review Group and had planned to issue its final 
     report in 2002. The Committee urges that the strategic plan's 
     recommendations regarding IC be implemented and fully funded 
     as soon as possible. The Committee requests a full update on 
     this and all IC-related research activities as part of the 
     NIDDK's written testimony for the fiscal year 2004 Senate 
     appropriations hearing.
       Irritable bowel syndrome.--The Committee remains concerned 
     about the increasing frequency of irritable bowel syndrome 
     (IBS), and it encourages NIDDK to partner with other 
     Institutes and Centers to enhance research on this disorder, 
     including studies on its prevalence.
       Islet cell transplantation.--The Committee is pleased with 
     NIH-supported research involving the transplantation of 
     insulin-producing islet cells into individuals with juvenile 
     diabetes. The Committee encourages the NIDDK to work closely 
     with the NIAID on initiatives to create and maintain immune 
     tolerance to transplanted islet cells. In addition, the 
     Committee encourages the NIDDK to vigorously pursue all 
     avenues of research that could lead to alternative supplies 
     of insulin-producing cells, including stem cell technology.
       Juvenile diabetes.--The Committee urges the NIDDK to 
     continue development of a vaccine to prevent juvenile 
     diabetes, and to collaborate with other Institutes on this 
     project. In addition, the Committee commends the NIDDK for 
     its efforts to determine the genetic origins of juvenile 
     diabetes, including the development of a Type 1 Diabetes 
     Genetics Consortium, which will collect and share valuable 
     DNA information from juvenile diabetes patients from studies 
     around the world. The Committee encourages the NIDDK to 
     continue and expand this effort to determine the genetics of 
     the complications of diabetes, such as retinopathy, kidney 
     disease and neuropathy. The Committee also remains concerned 
     about reports of a shortage of pediatric endocrinologists, 
     and it urges the NIDDK to enhance efforts to address this 
     serious problem.
       Kidney disease and end-stage renal disease.--Diabetes is 
     the leading cause of kidney failure and end-stage renal 
     disease. The Committee urges the NIDDK to expand research 
     into early prevention and therapeutic intervention of kidney 
     disease to prevent end-stage renal failure. The Committee 
     also encourages the NIDDK to consider launching a permanent 
     kidney disease clinical research mechanism. Finally, the 
     Institute is urged to address an anticipated workplace 
     shortage in nephrology by launching new training initiatives 
     and workshops to foster interest in the field.
       Kidney disease clinical research.--The Committee previously 
     noted the current inherent problems in conducting kidney 
     disease research due to the lack of a permanent 
     infrastructure, such as a clinical trials cooperative group. 
     The Committee commends the NIDDK for its leadership in moving 
     forward in this area, by holding an initial workshop to 
     develop strategies that will strengthen kidney research and 
     enhance researchers' abilities to translate research findings 
     to the bedside, facilitate clinical trials, and recruit

[[Page 858]]

     patients for studies. The Committee urges the NIDDK to 
     continue with these efforts, and to make the necessary funds 
     available in this fiscal year to launch a permanent kidney 
     disease clinical research mechanism.
       Live-donor liver transplantations.--More than 1,300 people 
     died over the past year because of the lack of a donor liver, 
     and there were almost 18,750 individuals on the list waiting 
     for liver transplantations. In view of this continuing 
     shortage of organ donors, the Committee is pleased that an 
     award has been made for the establishment of six clinical 
     centers and a data coordinating center to focus research on 
     the need to improve the outcome of both donors and recipients 
     involved in such transplants.
       Mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS).--The Committee is pleased with 
     the efforts made by the NIDDK to enhance research efforts in 
     the area of MPS, both to achieve a greater understanding of 
     these disorders and to pursue the development of effective 
     therapies. The Committee encourages the NIDDK to continue its 
     strong investment in MPS-related research, including bone and 
     joint involvement and pathophysiology of brain damage as they 
     relate to MPS disorders. The NIDDK is further encouraged to 
     build on collaborative efforts with the NINDS, NICHD and 
     appropriate Institutes and Centers involved in this research.
       Non-alcoholic Steatohepatitis.--The Committee is pleased 
     that the Institute has provided funding for six clinical 
     centers and one data coordinating center to focus additional 
     research on non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), which is 
     the second most common cause of liver disease after hepatitis 
     C. In view of the fact that NASH is increasing rapidly in 
     children, the Institute is encouraged to collaborate with the 
     NICHD to expand this award to include a more significant 
     focus on children.
       Osteoporosis.--The Committee encourages the NIDDK to 
     collaborate with the NIAMS to conduct large-scale trials to 
     determine the most effective and least costly way to combine 
     treatments for osteoporosis, both to prevent bone breakdown 
     and build new bone. The Committee also urges the NIDDK to 
     consider co-funding grants with NCCAM and the Office of 
     Dietary Supplements regarding the nutritional and hormonal 
     influences of calcium on bones, as well as the 
     bioavailability of various calcium supplements.
       Pediatric kidney disease.--Although significant strides 
     have been made in understanding kidney disease in adults, 
     much less is known about its complications in children, 
     including obstacles to full growth potential and 
     neurocognitive development. For this reason, the Committee is 
     disappointed that children were not included in a prospective 
     cohort study of chronic renal insufficiency, particularly in 
     light of recent initiatives calling for greater participation 
     of children in studies of this nature. Given the long-term 
     implications when children reach adulthood, the Committee 
     strongly urges the NIDDK to undertake research into the 
     history and treatment of (1) cardiovascular problems in 
     children suffering from chronic kidney disease, giving 
     careful consideration to the role of hypertension, lipid 
     abnormalities, obesity, cardiovascular calcification and 
     cardiac arrhythmia, and (2) neurocognitive and developmental 
     deficits including learning disabilities, with related issues 
     of chronic neurological, intellectual and emotional 
     impairment; poor linear growth; and abnormal bone formation.
       Pediatric liver disease.--The Committee is pleased that the 
     NIDDK has taken steps to increase research on biliary 
     atresia, the most common cause of liver transplantation in 
     children. The Committee notes that metabolic causes of liver 
     disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are also 
     significant causes of liver disease in children. Therefore, 
     it urges additional research focused on these diseases and 
     other forms of pediatric liver disease.
       Polycystic kidney disease (PKD).--The Committee is pleased 
     that the NIDDK has implemented most of the PKD Strategic Plan 
     as established in early fiscal year 1999, and that has 
     sponsored another PKD Strategic Planning Meeting to chart the 
     next 3- to 5-year course for this promising field of study. 
     Likewise, the Committee is encouraged to know that the NIDDK 
     will launch the PKD Interventional Trials Network this year 
     and will partner with the private sector to increase the 
     quality of this project. The Committee is pleased to note 
     that both the ARPKD gene discovery (for infantile PKD) and 
     the Intracellular Calcium Channel breakthrough for ADPKD in 
     February 2002 were discovered by NIH-funded scientists. The 
     Committee strongly urges NIDDK to take advantage of this 
     unprecedented PKD research momentum and accelerate its 
     research efforts toward creating effective clinical 
     interventions for the 600,000 Americans afflicted with PKD.
       Training grants.--The Committee is very concerned that so 
     few investigators have focused their careers on diseases of 
     the pancreas and pancreatic cancer. The Committee urges the 
     NIDDK to increase the number of training grants, fellowship 
     and career development programs, and seed grants that are 
     specifically aimed at increasing the number of researchers, 
     including young investigators, to pancreatic diseases.
       Urinary incontinence.--Urinary incontinence afflicts 
     approximately 13 million adults in the United States, 85 
     percent of whom are women. The Committee urges the NIDDK to 
     enhance its support of urinary incontinence research 
     following the recommendations of the Bladder Research 
     Progress Review Group. In addition, the Committee encourages 
     the NIDDK to increase the number of clinical sites in the 
     Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network Initiative.
       Urological diseases.--Urological diseases have a 
     significant impact on men, women and children in this country 
     and represent a major public health issue that will increase 
     as the population ages. The Committee has previously 
     expressed its concern over the adequacy of the urology basic 
     science research effort. The Committee therefore strongly 
     encourages the NIDDK to make the investments in urology 
     research needed to achieve significant improvement in the 
     ability of physicians to diagnose and treat these diseases 
     and to relieve the human suffering they cause.
       Urologist shortage.--The Committee is aware of the shortage 
     of urologists entering research careers. It encourages the 
     NIDDK to initiate career development awards appropriate for 
     urologists and other surgeons, taking into account the 
     specific requirements for training and experience that 
     urology residency and fellowship training programs must meet. 
     The NIDDK should consider modifying the current research time 
     requirements and develop alternative career pathways suitable 
     for urologic fellowship training programs.
       Urology Interagency Coordinating Committee.--Several 
     Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense and the 
     Veterans Administration, have a role in urology research. In 
     order to strengthen trans-institutional research, the 
     Committee encourages the NIDDK to provide funds to the 
     Urology Interagency Coordinating Committee to foster such 
     research.
       Urology research centers.--The Committee is impressed with 
     the results produced by the O'Brien urology research centers, 
     which bring together a critical mass of scientists who focus 
     on a particular aspect of urologic disease. The Committee 
     urges the NIDDK to increase the number and funding of these 
     centers and ensure that there is focus on pediatric urology; 
     prostate growth and disease; female urology, including 
     incontinence, infection, interstitial cystitis, and bladder 
     function and development; and tissue engineering and 
     genetics. These centers should also be able to develop 
     exploratory projects and provide support for resident and 
     fellow research opportunities.
       Women's urological health.--The Committee is concerned with 
     the lack of progress at NIDDK in developing a women's 
     urological health initiative. The conference held 4 years ago 
     identified important research issues and needs, but there has 
     been little subsequent action. The Committee strongly urges 
     the Institute to implement the conference recommendations in 
     the coming fiscal year and address the management problems 
     that caused this delay in action.


        NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,312,780,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,424,405,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,466,005,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,466,005,000 
     for the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and 
     Stroke [NINDS]. This is $41,600,000 more than the budget 
     request and $153,225,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget estimate 
     include funds to be transferred from the Office of AIDS 
     Research.
       Mission.--The NINDS conducts and supports a broad range of 
     research and research training on the normal function of the 
     brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nerves, and on 
     neurological and neuromuscular disorders. Neurological 
     research includes epidemiology studies to identify risk 
     factors for disease; laboratory studies to examine the 
     structure and function of nerve cells; and brain imaging 
     studies to understand how the brain is affected by disease 
     and how it operates to carry out tasks such as learning and 
     memory. New approaches for the diagnosis, treatment, and 
     prevention of brain disorders are evaluated in studies with 
     patients and those at risk for brain disorders.
       Alzheimer's disease.--The NINDS continues to play an 
     integral role in widening the scientific base of knowledge 
     about Alzheimer's disease. For example, scientists have 
     developed an antisense molecule that, when introduced 
     intravenously, reversed learning and memory deficits in mice 
     with an Alzheimer's-like disease. The Committee believes that 
     the potential of antisense therapy for Alzheimer's and 
     related disorders is promising. The Committee urges the NINDS 
     to continue to assign a high priority to its Alzheimer's 
     research portfolio. In addition, the Committee urges the 
     NINDS, in collaboration with the NIA and NIMH, to expand its 
     research into early diagnosis of Alzheimer's using PET 
     imaging of the brain.
       Ataxia telangiectasia (A-T).--A-T is a genetic disease that 
     attacks in early childhood.

[[Page 859]]

     It progressively affects coordination and severely 
     compromises the immune system. Children with A-T are highly 
     likely to develop cancer, and rarely live beyond their teens. 
     The Committee encourages the NINDS to work with the NCI and 
     other appropriate Institutes to support research aimed at 
     understanding the underlying causes of A-T with the goal of 
     translating this basic research into treatments for the 
     disease.
       Batten disease.--The Committee is disappointed with the 
     pace of research regarding Batten disease. The Committee 
     strongly urges the Institute to increase funding for such 
     research by actively soliciting grant applications for Batten 
     disease and taking aggressive steps to assure that a vigorous 
     research program is established.
       Brain tumors.--The Committee encourages the NINDS to 
     continue working with the NCI to carry out the 
     recommendations of the recently issued Report of the Brain 
     Tumor Progress Review Group.
       Duchenne muscular dystrophy.--The Committee commends NIH 
     for initiating the muscular dystrophy cooperative research 
     centers. These centers will support interdisciplinary teams 
     of accomplished investigators undertaking basic and clinical 
     research to improve treatment options for patients with 
     Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy. The Committee expects 
     NINDS to work cooperatively with NIAMS and NICHD to expand 
     the research undertaken by the centers program.
       Dystonia.--The Committee continues to support the expansion 
     of research and treatment developments regarding the 
     neurological movement disorder dystonia, which is the third 
     most common movement disorder after tremor and Parkinson's 
     disease. The Committee encourages the NINDS to support 
     additional research on both focal and generalized dystonia, 
     and it commends the Institute for its study of the DYT1 gene 
     and encourages expansion in this research area. Furthermore, 
     the Institute is encouraged to support epidemiological 
     studies on dystonia and to increase public and professional 
     awareness of this disorder.
       Epilepsy.--Epilepsy remains a major, unsolved public health 
     problem affecting the lives of over 2.5 million Americans and 
     their families. The Committee applauds the development of 
     benchmarks for epilepsy research resulting from the ``Curing 
     Epilepsy: Focus on the Future'' conference held in March 
     2000, and it encourages the NINDS to expand research into the 
     prevention, treatment, and eventual cure of epilepsy. In 
     addition, the Committee urges the NINDS to address critical 
     research issues related to the impact of seizures on young 
     children, women, the elderly and those with intractable or 
     uncontrolled epilepsy. The Committee commends the Institute 
     on the anti-epileptic drug development program that has led 
     to the discovery of many important anti-epileptic 
     medications, and it encourages the Institute to further 
     develop this program with specific research plans and goals.
       Fragile X.--Fraglie X is a single-gene neurological disease 
     resulting in mental disorders, cognitive impairment and 
     seizures. The Committee urges the NINDS to enhance its 
     research activities on Fragile X and to include Fragile X 
     patients in its studies of related disorders. The Committee 
     also urges the NINDS to coordinate these efforts with other 
     Institutes working on related activities, including the NIMH 
     and the NICHD.
       Mucoploysaccharidosis (MPS).--The Committee commends the 
     NINDS for sponsoring a scientific conference focusing on 
     central nervous system issues and the barriers to and 
     development of effective therapies for MPS disordersm, and 
     urges the NINDS to solicit investigator proposals resulting 
     from the findings of the conference. The Committee also 
     encourages the NINDS, in collaboration with the NIDDK and the 
     NICHD, to support current MPS research and use all available 
     mechanisms to further stimulate and enhance efforts to better 
     understand and treat MPS disorders.
       Neurofibromatosis.--Neurofibromatosis (NF) is a genetic 
     disorder of the nervous system that causes tumors to grow 
     along nerves anywhere on or in the body. The Committee is 
     aware that recent advances in research have linked NF to 
     cancer, brain tumors, learning disabilities and heart 
     disease, and it urges the NINDS to expand its NF basic and 
     clinical research portfolio.
       Spinal muscular atrophy.--Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is 
     the most common genetic killer of infants and the most 
     prevalent genetic motor neuron disease. While there is 
     currently no cure for the disease, the research outlook is 
     promising. Researchers have already identified the genes 
     involved in SMA as well as compounds that may lead to 
     potential treatments. The Committee understands that the 
     severity of the disease, its relatively high incidence, and 
     the possibility of imminent treatments have led the NINDS to 
     explore the idea of using SMA as a model for a new approach 
     to funding translational research. The Committee strongly 
     endorses that plan, and it urges the NINDS to devote 
     sufficient resources to such an effort to maximize chances of 
     success, and evaluate whether a similar approach would work 
     for other diseases.
       In addition, the Committee strongly urges the Institute to 
     increase funding for SMA research by aggressively soliciting 
     grant applications, and it encourages the Institute to 
     consider establishing centers of excellence for basic and 
     applied research in SMA. Lastly, the Institute is encouraged 
     to support epidemiological studies on SMA and to increase 
     public and professional awareness of the disease.
       Stroke.--The Committee continues to regard research into 
     the causes, cure, prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of 
     stroke as one of the Nation's top priorities. The Committee 
     commends the NINDS for convening a Stroke Progress Review 
     Group, consisting of researchers, clinicians, pertinent 
     organizations and advocacy groups. This Group crafted a 
     report that will serve as a blueprint for a long-range 
     strategic plan on stroke research.
       The Committee is concerned that funding for stroke research 
     over the years may not have kept pace with the scientific 
     opportunities and the number of Americans afflicted with 
     stroke. The Committee encourages the NINDS to dedicate more 
     resources to stroke research and to expand its stroke 
     education program. The Committee also encourages the NINDS to 
     expand its research efforts into the utility of PET scans of 
     the brains of stroke victims to determine whether brain 
     tissue damage from stroke may be reversible.
       Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ).--The Committee 
     commends the Institute for its initiative in conducting a 
     workshop on Neurobiology of Craniofacial/Deep Tissue 
     Persistent Pain, designed to attract neuroscience 
     investigators to explore these little-understood areas of 
     acute and chronic pain. The Committee expects a report on 
     initiatives and research growing out of the workshop and 
     urges, in addition, that research be conducted in 
     collaboration with the NHLBI and other pertinent institutes 
     on other aspects of sensory-motor dysfunction associated with 
     TMJ diseases and disorders, including autonomic nervous 
     system involvement, dysphagia, alterations in proprioception, 
     and a range of speech, breathing, and sleep problems.
       Traumatic brain injury (TBI).--There are at least 1.5 
     million people who sustain a traumatic brain injury (TBI) 
     annually, and at least 5.3 million people who live with a 
     disability as a result of TBI. The Committee urges the NINDS 
     to expand bench science research on the mechanisms of this 
     disorder and to begin translational research into clinical 
     settings.
       Tuberous sclerosis.--Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a 
     genetic disorder that attacks several different organ 
     systems, causing tumor growth in the brain, heart, kidney, 
     lungs and skin. TSC often manifests itself through seizures, 
     chronic kidney disease, autism and sometimes mental 
     retardation. The Committee looks forward to receiving the TSC 
     research plan currently being developed by NINDS and private 
     patient foundations, and encourages the Institute to enhance 
     its research efforts in this field through all available 
     mechanisms, including the development of a comprehensive 
     patient registry, epidemiological studies and the development 
     of animal models and cell lines. The Committee looks forward 
     to receiving a progress report prior to the fiscal year 2004 
     hearings.


         NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,534,539,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,990,473,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,727,473,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,727,473,000 
     for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases 
     [NIAID]. This is $263,000,000 less than the budget request 
     and $1,192,934,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. Included in these funds is $100,000,000 to be 
     transferred to the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, Malaria, 
     and Tuberculosis. The comparable amounts for the budget 
     estimate include funds to be transferred from the Office of 
     AIDS Research.
       The Committee recommendation includes bill language that 
     allows the NIAID to spend up to $150,000,000 on extramural 
     facilities construction.
       Mission.--The NIAID is the lead NIH Institute charged with 
     developing vaccines and supporting research on allergies, 
     acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), sexually 
     transmitted diseases, turberculosis, tropical diseases, and 
     other infectious diseases--including those likely to be used 
     as agents of bioterrorism. To accomplish this mission, the 
     NIAID supports and conducts basic and clinical research and 
     research training programs in infectious diseases, whether 
     they are naturally occurring or the result of a bioterrorist 
     attack, and in diseases caused by, or associated with, 
     disorders of the immune system.
       Advanced vaccine/device combination.--The Committee is 
     aware of new vaccine/device delivery systems that could 
     increase vaccine efficacy, use far less vaccine, and require 
     fewer doses. The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of 
     Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) is currently conducting 
     research and development on vaccine/device combinations to 
     improve the performance of vaccines against weaponized 
     organisms, including anthrax, plague, and staphylococcus

[[Page 860]]

     enterotoxin B. The Committee encourages NIAID to work with 
     USAMRIID on this effort.
       Asthma, allergic diseases, and drug allergy.--The Committee 
     encourages the NIAID to continue its efforts on asthma and 
     expand its research into the area of drug allergy. Penicillin 
     allergy alone causes 400 deaths each year in this country. 
     The Committee encourages the NIAID, in collaboration with 
     other Institutes as appropriate, to implement a program that 
     will begin to address this need.
       Asthma research and management.--The Committee is very 
     pleased with the NIAID's leadership regarding asthma research 
     and management. The Committee recognizes the role the 
     Institute has played in the Inner City Asthma Study and the 
     importance of this effort concerning morbidity and mortality 
     among underserved populations, particularly children. The 
     Committee encourages the NIAID to continue to improve its 
     focus and effort on asthma management, especially as it 
     relates to children. The Committee also encourages the NIAID 
     to collaborate more aggressively with voluntary health 
     organizations to support asthma prevention, treatment, and 
     research activities. Additionally, recent studies suggest 
     that a variety of viral and bacterial agents, including 
     agents used for immunization, may play a role in the 
     development of asthma. The Committee encourages the Institute 
     to expand research into the role that infections and vaccines 
     may play in the development of asthma.
       Eye diseases.--The Committee encourages the Institute to 
     collaborate with the NEI on research involving eye-related 
     viruses and infectious diseases.
       Food allergy.--An estimated 7 million individuals suffer 
     from food allergies in the United States, with up to 6 
     percent of all children under the age of 3 experiencing these 
     potentially life-threatening allergies. The Committee urges 
     the NIAID to implement a program to stimulate more research 
     in this area.
       Hemophilia.--The Committee supports the NIAID's efforts to 
     ensure access for persons with hemophilia to clinical trials 
     for improving treatment of HIV and complications of 
     hemophilia, including hepatitis C (HCV). The Committee, in 
     particular, is encouraged by the NIAID's leadership in 
     supporting research related to liver disease progression and 
     response to HCV treatment among HIV/HCV co-infected persons 
     with hemophilia, and it urges the Institute to continue its 
     efforts in this area.
       Hepatitis C.--The Committee encourages the NIAID to support 
     the virology and immunology portions of the NIDDK's HALT-C 
     clinical trial. The HALT-C trial is a multi-center, 
     randomized, controlled study designed to determine if using 
     interferon over several years will suppress the hepatitis C 
     virus, prevent progression to cirrhosis, prevent liver 
     cancer, and reduce the need for liver transplantation. In 
     addition, the Committee understands that limited clinical 
     trials in Europe have partially validated the premise that 
     the most effective way to eliminate the hepatitis C virus is 
     to initiate an aggressive treatment at the inception of the 
     virus. The Institute is encouraged to collaborate with the 
     NIDDK and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to 
     establish and validate treatment guidelines for use with 
     individuals with acute hepatitis C at its inception.
       Inflammatory bowel disease.--The Committee continues to 
     note with interest a scientific research agenda for Crohn's 
     disease and ulcerative colitis (collectively known as 
     inflammatory bowel disease) entitled ``Challenges in 
     Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD).'' This report identifies 
     strong linkages between the functions of the immune system 
     and IBD. The Committee encourages the Institute to expand its 
     research partnerships with the IBD community in fiscal year 
     2003 and expand research focused on (1) the immunology of IBD 
     and (2) the interaction of genetics and environmental factors 
     in the development of the disease.
       Juvenile diabetes.--The Committee is aware that the Immune 
     Tolerance Network is investigating methods to create and 
     maintain tolerance to transplanted insulin-producing islet 
     cells in recipients with juvenile diabetes. The Committee 
     understands that the goal of this investigation is to 
     eliminate the need for patients to undergo long-term 
     immunosuppressive therapy after transplantation. The 
     Committee encourages the NIAID to continue and expand this 
     area of research, including developing additional protocols 
     focused on islet cell transplantation into individuals with 
     juvenile diabetes.
       Primary immune deficiency diseases.--The Committee is 
     concerned that the primary immune deficiency community would 
     be at significant risk for contracting smallpox if the Nation 
     were to initiate a large-scale smallpox vaccination campaign. 
     Therefore, the Committee encourages the NIAID to give 
     priority consideration under its accelerated bioterrorism 
     research program to a study of the potential benefits of 
     immune globulin intravenous (IGIV) in the fight against 
     smallpox. The Committee also understands that the NIAID 
     intends to establish a cooperative consortium of 
     investigators to address clinical and pre-clinical research 
     questions on PI, including the molecular and cellular 
     characterization of patients with novel phenotypes, and the 
     development of new models, novel diagnostics, and new 
     treatment approaches, such as gene therapy. The Committee 
     urges the NIAID to move ahead aggressively with this 
     initiative. In addition, the Committee would like to see the 
     NIAID's current research project that is testing a new 
     screening method for underserved populations replicated in 
     other urban centers. Finally, the Committee continues to 
     support greater involvement by the NIAID in the Jeffrey 
     Modell Foundation's national campaign for physician education 
     and public awareness of these diseases.
       Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ).--The Committee 
     urges NIAID to incorporate the autoimmune and inflammatory 
     processes involved in temporomandibular diseases and 
     disorders into its research portfolio. The collection of 
     tissue samples from TMJ patients and people without TMJ 
     disease has been suggested as part of a patient registry, to 
     determine whether inflammatory mediators, growth factors, 
     cytokines and other cell and molecular factors affecting 
     immunity may differ between people with and without TMJ 
     disease.
       Transplantation.--The Committee is aware of the wide gap 
     between the supply of and demand for transplanted organs. The 
     Institute is encouraged to expand research on organ 
     transplantation, including the development of artificial 
     organs, hepatocyte transplantation, xenotransplantation, 
     live-donor liver transplantation, split liver 
     transplantation, and other research focuses as appropriate.
       Tuberculosis.--Tuberculosis continues to account for more 
     deaths worldwide than any other infectious disease and for 
     over a quarter of all preventable adult deaths. The Committee 
     commends the NIAID for its aggressive program of tuberculosis 
     research, and it encourages a greater emphasis on the 
     development of a vaccine, as noted by the NIAID's ``Blueprint 
     for Tuberculosis Vaccine Development.''


             NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,700,139,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,854,984,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,853,584,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $1,853,584,000 for 
     the National Institute of General Medical Sciences [NIGMS]. 
     This is $1,400,000 less than the budget request and 
     $153,445,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. 
     The comparable amounts for the budget estimate include funds 
     to be transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--NIGMS supports research and research training in 
     the basic biomedical sciences. Institute grantees, working in 
     such fields as cell biology, biophysics, genetics, 
     developmental biology, pharmacology, physiology, biological 
     chemistry, bioinformatics, and computational biology, study 
     normal biological processes to better understand what goes 
     wrong when disease occurs. In this way, NIGMS supplies the 
     new knowledge, theories, and technologies that can then be 
     applied to the disease-targeted studies supported by other 
     NIH components. NIGMS-supported basic research advances also 
     regularly find applications in the biotechnology and 
     pharmaceutical industries. The Institute's training programs 
     help provide the scientists needed by industry and academia 
     to maintain United States leadership in biomedical science.
       Behavioral science research and training.--As the NIH 
     Institute most concerned with basic research, the NIGMS has 
     provided leadership in basic research on physiological and 
     biological structures and functions that may play roles in 
     numerous health conditions. The Committee encourages the 
     NIGMS to develop collaborations with other Institutes, such 
     as the NCI and NIMH, and the Office of Behavioral and Social 
     Sciences Research to fund basic research to integrate 
     physiological knowledge of predisease pathways with 
     behavioral studies.
       Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP).--The Committee 
     understands that translating the human genome into cures and 
     therapies is the next great challenge for modern medicine. To 
     meet that challenge, a new generation of scientists must be 
     trained. The MSTP is a highly competitive program that trains 
     physicians for careers in biomedical research by supporting 
     them as they earn both M.D. and Ph.D. degrees. The Committee 
     strongly urges the NIGMS to provide additional funds to 
     increase the number of promising physicians it trains through 
     this program.
       Minority scientist training programs.--The Committee 
     commends the NIGMS for its training programs that have a 
     special focus on increasing the number of minority 
     scientists, such as the Minority Access to Research Careers 
     (MARC) and Minority Biomedical Research Support (MBRS) 
     programs.


        NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,113,087,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,213,817,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,213,817,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,213,817,000 
     for the National Institute of Child Health and Human 
     Development [NICHD]. This is equal to the budget

[[Page 861]]

     request and $100,730,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget estimate 
     include funds to be transferred from the Office of AIDS 
     Research.
       Mission.--The NICHD is that component of the NIH which is 
     responsible for conducting and supporting research on 
     maternal and child health, the population sciences, and 
     medical rehabilitation. Research encompassed by these areas 
     targets infant mortality; genetic diseases, including birth 
     defects; mental retardation; gynecological health and 
     contraceptive development and evaluation; pediatric, 
     maternal, and adolescent AIDS; developmental biology; vaccine 
     development; demographic and behavioral research; and 
     restoration or enhancement of function in individuals 
     experiencing physical disability due to injury, disease, or 
     birth defect.
       Autism.--The Committee commends the NICHD for maintaining 
     funding levels for the NIH centers of excellence in autism, 
     and it urges the Institute to continue to do so. In addition, 
     the Committee urges the NICHD to find ways to expand the pool 
     of autism researchers.
       Demographic research.--The Committee is pleased with the 
     development of a long-range plan for demographic research 
     supported by the NICHD, and the continued active 
     collaboration with other Federal offices and agencies in 
     carrying out its mission. Contributions of the NICHD program 
     to increasing knowledge of fatherhood, marriage, immigration, 
     and the implications of increasing racial and ethnic 
     diversity are of high importance. The Committee encourages 
     the NICHD to continue focusing attention on family and 
     community factors in examining the health and development of 
     poor children. The Committee further encourages the Institute 
     to continue its attention to data and training needs for 
     policy-relevant demographic research.
       Duchenne muscular dystrophy.--The Committee commends 
     NICHD's participation in the initiation of the muscular 
     dystrophy cooperative research centers and expects NICHD to 
     work cooperatively with NIAMS and NINDS to expand the 
     research undertaken by the centers program.
       Environmental effects on child health and development.--The 
     Committee applauds the NICHD on its efforts to work 
     collaboratively with the Environmental Protection Agency and 
     the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on developing 
     the Longitudinal Cohort Study on Environmental Effects on 
     Child Health and Development, which is now called the 
     National Children's Study. This study aims to quantify the 
     effects of environmental exposures plus the biological and 
     social factors on child health and development. The Committee 
     is pleased that the NICHD is undertaking a strategic planning 
     process that strongly emphasizes a collaborative process 
     between the biomedical and behavioral sciences and reaffirms 
     its commitment to this entire effort.
       Fragile X.--Fragile X, the most common inherited cause of 
     mental retardation, results from the failure of a single gene 
     to produce a specific protein. Researchers at the NICHD have 
     made great strides in understanding the mechanism by which 
     this genetic defect causes mental retardation, seizures, 
     aggressive outbursts and severe anxiety. Fragile X has the 
     potential to be a powerful research model for other forms of 
     X-linked mental retardation, as well as neuropsychiatric 
     disorders, including autism, schizophrenia, mood disorders, 
     and pervasive developmental disorder. The Committee is 
     gratified that the NICHD has enhanced its research efforts on 
     Fragile X internally, in cooperation with other Institutes, 
     and by partnering with the FRAXA Research Foundation in the 
     issuance and funding of a Request for Applications to 
     research scientists. The Committee notes that the Children's 
     Health Act of 2000 calls for the establishment of at least 
     three Fragile X research centers. The Committee is pleased 
     that the NICHD has issued a Request for Applications to 
     implement this in fiscal year 2003. The Committee strongly 
     urges the NICHD to allocate sufficient funds for expediting, 
     expanding, and enhancing the work of these centers.
       Infertility and contraceptive research.--The Committee 
     continues to place a high priority on research to combat 
     infertility and speed the development of improved 
     contraceptives. The NICHD is urged to continue aggressive 
     activities in this area, including individual research grants 
     and those of the infertility and contraceptive research 
     centers.
       Juvenile diabetes.--The Committee encourages the NICHD to 
     expand research using newborn screening tests, specifically 
     to determine the causes of juvenile diabetes and to develop 
     methods to prevent the disease. In addition, the Committee is 
     aware of efforts to develop a vaccine to prevent juvenile 
     diabetes and is encouraged by the early promise of this 
     research. The Committee urges the NICHD to collaborate with 
     the NIDDK in this important research initiative and with the 
     CDC on the creation of a national surveillance system to 
     track individuals with juvenile diabetes.
       Maternal-fetal medicine.--The Committee is pleased with the 
     progress of the Maternal Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network. 
     The Committee urges the NICHD to continue and expand its 
     support of the Network to enable researchers to continue to 
     collect data and more efficiently study complicated 
     pregnancies with a focus on pre-term birth and maternal 
     complications. In addition, the Committee urges the NICHD to 
     increase research in the area of pregnancy-related 
     complications, with a special emphasis on issues related to 
     minority health disparities.
       Osteogenesis imperfecta.--The Committee encourages the 
     Institute to increase its research on osteogenesis 
     imperfecta, especially genetic therapies, animal models, drug 
     treatment, and rehabilitation.
       Pediatric kidney disease.--Kidney disease remains a 
     persistent and little-understood problem among infants, 
     children, and adolescents. The NICHD is strongly urged to 
     undertake research to identify factors responsible for poor 
     linear growth, abnormal bone formation and cognitive deficits 
     in children; epidemiological studies designed to quantify the 
     magnitude of the problem and identify which kidney diseases 
     present the highest risk; and initiatives aimed at maximizing 
     the academic potential of children with kidney disease.
       Pediatric liver disease.--The Committee urges the Institute 
     to pursue opportunities to participate with the NIDDK and 
     other Institutes on pediatric liver disease research, 
     particularly in the areas of biliary atresia and non-
     alcoholic steatohepatitis.
       Primary immunodeficiencies (PI).--The Committee continues 
     to be impressed by the comprehensive commitment that the 
     NICHD has shown in addressing PI, particularly with regard to 
     the Institute's partnership with the Jeffrey Modell 
     Foundation, the NCI, the NIAID, and the CDC on a national 
     physician education and public awareness campaign. The 
     Committee encourages the NICHD to continue and expand its 
     involvement in this campaign.
       Skeletal growth.--The committee encourages the NICHD to 
     support research in abnormal and normal skeletal growth and 
     development, including rickets and chronic under-nutrition, 
     use of oral contraceptives and anabolic steroids, lactation, 
     and pregnancy.
       Specialized centers for research.--The Committee commends 
     the NICHD for its innovative program of specialized centers 
     for research in reproductive medicine at minority 
     institutions.
       Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.--The Committee is pleased 
     with NICHD's continued efforts to extend the reach of its 
     successful ``Back to Sleep'' campaign to underserved 
     populations and daycare providers. The Committee also 
     commends NICHD's attempts to further its progress in SIDS 
     research by initiating a third SIDS 5-year research plan.
       Traumatic brain injury (TBI).--The Committee commends the 
     NICHD and the National Center for Medical Rehabilitation 
     Research for their efforts in establishing a TBI clinical 
     trials network to investigate the efficacy of rehabilitation 
     services for TBI victims. The Committee supports further 
     research by the Center to investigate methods of improving 
     decision-making functions and related cognitive skills of TBI 
     victims.
       Urogynecology program.--The Committee is encouraged by the 
     NICHD's accomplishments to date in establishing a research 
     portfolio on pelvic floor disorders and urinary incontinence. 
     The Committee encourages the Institute to fund grant 
     applications for tissue structure, epidemiological studies, 
     urinary incontinence, and clinical trials intervention 
     programs. The Committee also encourages the NICHD to include 
     the effects of pregnancy on a woman's chance for later 
     urogynecologic problems in the future ``National Children's 
     Study.''
       Vulvodynia.--Research indicates that millions of American 
     women suffer from vulvodynia, a painful and often 
     debilitating disorder of the female reproductive system. 
     Despite its prevalence, very little attention has been paid 
     to the disorder by health professionals or researchers. Since 
     fiscal year 1998, the Committee has called on the NICHD to 
     support research on the prevalence, causes, and treatment of 
     vulvodynia. While some initial steps have been taken, the 
     Committee continues to be very concerned with the lack of 
     research progress made in this important area and the lack of 
     priority placed on it by the NICHD. The Committee expects the 
     Institute to provide a significant increase in funding for 
     research on vulvodynia.


                         NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$581,191,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................629,990,000
Committee recommendation....................................634,290,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $634,290,000 
     for the National Eye Institute [NEI]. This is $4,300,000 more 
     than the budget request and $53,099,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation. The comparable amounts for the 
     budget estimate include funds to be transferred from the 
     Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NEI is the Nation's Federal resource for the 
     conduct and support of laboratory and clinical research, 
     research training, and other programs with respect to 
     blinding eye diseases, visual disorders, mechanisms of visual 
     function, preservation of sight, and the special health 
     problems and

[[Page 862]]

     needs of individuals who are visually impaired or blind. In 
     addition, the NEI is responsible for the dissemination of 
     information, specifically public and professional education 
     programs aimed at the prevention of blindness.
       The Committee is pleased that vision impairment is a 
     priority area in the national Healthy People 2010 initiative. 
     The Institute is urged to develop the data on the extent of 
     the problem of eye disease, especially among the aging 
     population, and the economic consequences of eye disease so 
     progress in these areas can be measured.
       Age-related macular degeneration.--Age-related macular 
     degeneration (AMD) is the most common form of irreversible 
     blindness for persons over the age of 65. More than 1.6 
     million Americans over age 50 suffer from AMD, and this 
     number is expected to triple by the year 2020. NEI-supported 
     research has demonstrated that early detection and treatment 
     can slow the onset of this sight-threatening disease, thereby 
     maintaining the independence and quality of life of the 
     elderly. Therefore, the Committee encourages the NEI, through 
     the National Eye Health Education Program (NEHEP), to launch 
     an education and outreach program relating to AMD to increase 
     public awareness about the need for early detection and 
     diagnosis, recognition of symptoms, and treatments for the 
     disease. The Committee likewise encourages the NEI to expand 
     its intramural research efforts on this disease.
       Bioengineering.--The Committee commends the NEI for its 
     longstanding support for new technologies specifically aimed 
     at improving the understanding of ocular and visual systems. 
     The Committee encourages the NEI to continue its research in 
     these critical areas and to expand its research in tissue 
     bioengineering related to artificial corneas, adult stem cell 
     research aimed at replacing or regenerating cornea tissue, 
     and other applications of innovative technologies that will 
     enhance or restore vision.
       Diabetic eye diseases.--The Committee is pleased with the 
     NEI's initiative to develop and evaluate more rapidly new 
     treatments for macular edema through a new multicenter 
     clinical trials network. The Committee is aware that diabetic 
     retinopathy is the leading cause of new cases of blindness in 
     this country. Diabetic macular edema, secondary to diabetic 
     retinopathy, is a major cause of vision loss due to the 
     leakage of fluids and other materials from damaged blood 
     vessels. The Committee encourages the NEI to continue to 
     implement the recommendations of the Diabetes Research 
     Working Group related to diabetic eye disease.
       Health disparities.--NEI-supported researchers have found 
     that the prevalence of non-insulin-dependent diabetes 
     mellitus (NIDDM) is two to three times higher in Hispanics 
     than in non-Hispanic whites. The Committee is pleased with 
     the NEI's progress in implementing its Spanish language 
     education program ``Ojo con su vision,'' and it encourages 
     the NEI to continue its targeted health education activities 
     and messages to increase awareness of diabetes and its 
     complications in the Hispanic population.
       National Eye Health Education Program.--The National Eye 
     Health Education Program (NEHEP) is coordinated by the NEI in 
     partnership with over 60 national organizations that conduct 
     eye health education programs. The Committee commends the NEI 
     for its development of the Low Vision Education Program to 
     increase awareness of low vision and its impact on the 
     quality of life, particularly among African-American and 
     Hispanic populations that are at increased risk of vision 
     loss from sight-threatening diseases. The Committee is 
     particularly pleased with ``The Eye Site,'' an award-winning 
     traveling exhibit directed toward people with low vision, 
     their families and friends, and health care and service 
     professionals.
       Neurodegenerative eye diseases.--The Committee is pleased 
     to learn of the significant advances made in research on 
     neurodegeneration across a range of eye diseases, including 
     retinitis pigmentosa, ocular albinism, macular degeneration, 
     and glaucoma. In light of these developments, the Committee 
     urges the NEI to increase its support and conduct of research 
     on these neurodegenerative eye diseases, including support 
     for genomic and proteomic resources and for collaborative 
     multidisciplinary research.
       Sjogren's syndrome.--The Committee commends the NEI for 
     supporting grants in dry eye and Sjogren's-related research 
     and encourages continued investigation into improved 
     therapeutics for dry eye. An important initial step in dry 
     eye research and Sjogren's is obtaining epidemiology data, 
     and the Committee encourages the NEI to pursue this research.


          NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$566,118,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................614,258,000
Committee recommendation....................................617,258,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $617,258,000 
     for the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 
     [NIEHS]. This is $3,000,000 more than the budget request and 
     $51,140,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The 
     comparable amounts for the budget estimate include funds to 
     be transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The mission of the NIEHS is to define how 
     environmental exposures affect health; how individuals differ 
     in their susceptibility to these effects; and how these 
     susceptibilities change with time. This knowledge, coupled 
     with prevention and communication programs, can lead to a 
     reduction in environmentally associated diseases and 
     dysfunctions.
       Environmental Health Sciences Centers.--The Committee 
     continues to strongly support the Environmental Health 
     Sciences Centers program and believes that a fully funded 
     centers program is critical to carrying out the expanding 
     mission of the NIEHS. The Committee strongly urges the 
     Institute to maintain the centers' current funding levels.
       Hormone-disrupting chemicals.--The Committee encourages the 
     NIEHS to enhance research on the health effects of exposure 
     to hormone-disrupting chemicals. The committee also 
     encourages the NIEHS to collaborate with the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention, the United States Geological 
     Survey, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other 
     appropriate agencies in this effort. This collaboration will 
     contribute to a better understanding of how hormone-
     disrupting chemicals lead to the development of reproductive, 
     nervous, and immune system disorders, and cancer, 
     particularly as a consequence of pre-natal exposures.
       Volcanic emissions.--The Committee continues to be 
     concerned about the public health aspects of volcanic 
     emissions in Hawaii. Such emissions present significant acute 
     and long-term health problems, and the Committee urges the 
     development of a multidisciplinary approach to this problem.


                      NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$893,130,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................968,699,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,000,099,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,099,000 for 
     the National Institute on Aging [NIA]. This is $31,400,000 
     more than the budget request and $106,969,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable amounts for 
     the budget estimate include funds to be transferred from the 
     Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NIA conducts biomedical, behavioral, and 
     social research related to the aging process to prevent 
     disease and other problems of the aged, and to maintain the 
     health and independence of older Americans. Research in aging 
     over the last two decades demonstrates that aging should not 
     be equated with inevitable decline and disease.
       Age-related bone diseases.--The committee encourages the 
     NIA to coordinate research with NIAMS into age-related 
     changes in bone and the skeleton, including osteoporosis, 
     osteogenesis imperfecta, and Paget's disease.
       Alzheimer's disease.--An estimated 4 million Americans now 
     suffer from Alzheimer's disease, a degenerative brain 
     disorder that robs its victims of the ability to care for 
     themselves; places enormous physical, emotional and financial 
     burdens on family caregivers; and each year drains 
     $100,000,000,000 from our economy. Left unchecked, an 
     estimated 14 million individuals will be stricken over the 
     next few decades, while the annual cost of caring for 
     Alzheimer's victims will soar to $375,000,000,000. The 
     Committee 3 years ago challenged the NIH and the scientific 
     community to launch a full-scale assault on Alzheimer's 
     disease that focuses on preventing or delaying its onset. The 
     NIA responded by embarking on a multi-Institute prevention 
     initiative that encompassed basic, epidemiological, 
     behavioral and clinical research. As a result of these 
     efforts, science is now at the point where effective 
     treatment and prevention of the disabling effects of 
     Alzheimer's are within reach. In light of the dramatic 
     strides that have already been made in understanding 
     Alzheimer's disease, scientists believe that an investment of 
     $1,000,000,000 as soon as possible will produce the answers 
     necessary to conquer Alzheimer's. The Committee urges the NIA 
     to expand its investment in Alzheimer's disease research, 
     focusing especially on its pathology, the identification of 
     risk factors, more effective treatments, and large-scale 
     clinical trials. In addition, advances in genetics and 
     imaging now make it possible to study Alzheimer's in ways 
     that were never before possible. The Committee encourages the 
     NIA to apply this new knowledge to ongoing longitudinal 
     studies.
       The Committee also urges the NIA to focus on early 
     detection of Alzheimer's disease so that clinical 
     interventions to slow or stop the progression of the disease 
     may be undertaken. The Committee notes that positron emission 
     tomography (PET) may identify Alzheimer's disease at an early 
     stage and encourages the NIA, in collaboration with the NINDS 
     and the NIMH, to expand its research efforts into early 
     diagnosis of Alzheimer's using PET and other brain imaging 
     methods.
       Behavioral research.--The Committee recognizes the NIA's 
     efforts to spur research on aging and cognitive function, and 
     it urges the Institute to focus on the many difficult 
     questions involved in long-term maintenance of positive 
     behavior change. The Committee applauds efforts in the 
     Behavioral and Social

[[Page 863]]

     Research branch to encourage multidisciplinary and 
     interdisciplinary behavioral economics research that may 
     address questions of savings and resource allocation in the 
     pre- and post-retirement populations.
       Cardiovascular aging research.--Cardiovascular diseases 
     remain America's leading causes of death of older men and 
     women and a significant cause of disability. The Committee 
     urges the NIA to make cardiovascular research a priority.
       Claude D. Pepper Older American Independence Centers.--The 
     Committee continues to strongly support these successful 
     centers, which focus on developing innovative and cost 
     effective ways to enhance the independence of older 
     Americans. The centers also play the critical role of 
     developing top level experts in geriatrics. The Committee 
     strongly urges the NIA to make all possible efforts to expand 
     these centers to include a school of nursing.
       Demographic and economic research.--The Committee commends 
     the NIA for its demography and economic research. It is 
     impressed by the importance of the findings from the Health 
     and Retirement Study and the National Long Term Care Survey 
     regarding the continuing decline in physical and cognitive 
     disability. The Committee urges the NIA to expand funding for 
     these studies and to explore the economic and social impact 
     of the decline for families and society. The Committee also 
     encourages the NIA to assess the role of health as a factor 
     in premature retirement.
       Older Americans with mental illness.--The Committee is 
     concerned about the growing population of older Americans who 
     suffer from mental illness. This is often an underserved 
     population, particularly in rural areas. The Committee 
     encourages the NIA to target funds to study and identify 
     vulnerable older adults who are at risk for such mental 
     illnesses as depression, anxiety, and psychoses. Because 
     advanced practice psychiatric nurses work in a variety of 
     settings, the Committee believes they may be in a unique 
     position to be a critical component of research related to 
     the assessment and treatment of older adults with these 
     disorders.


  NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$448,699,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................486,624,000
Committee recommendation....................................489,324,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $489,324,000 
     for the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal 
     and Skin Diseases [NIAMS]. This is $2,700,000 more than the 
     budget request and $40,625,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget estimate 
     include funds to be transferred from the Office of AIDS 
     Research.
       Mission.--NIAMS conducts and supports basic and clinical 
     research and research training, and the dissemination of 
     health information on the more than 100 forms of arthritis; 
     osteoporosis and other bone diseases; muscle biology and 
     muscle diseases; orthopedic disorders, such as back pain and 
     sports injuries; and numerous skin diseases. The research 
     agenda of NIAMS addresses many devastating and debilitating 
     diseases that afflict millions of Americans. These diseases 
     of the joints, muscles, bones, connective tissues, and skin, 
     in the aggregate, will affect nearly every American at some 
     point in their lives, causing tremendous human suffering and 
     costing the Nation billions of dollars in both health care 
     and lost productivity. The research activities of this 
     Institute serve the concerns of many different special 
     populations, including women, minorities, children, and the 
     elderly.
       Duchenne muscular dystrophy.--The Committee commends NIH 
     for initiating the muscular dystrophy cooperative research 
     centers. These centers will support interdisciplinary teams 
     of accomplished investigators undertaking basic and clinical 
     research to improve treatment options for patients with 
     Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy. The Committee expects 
     NIAMS to work cooperatively with NINDS and NICHD to expand 
     the research undertaken by the centers program.
       Gender differences in musculoskeletal biology.--Recent 
     scientific advances have begun to make it possible to 
     understand underlying gender-dependent differences that 
     contribute to differences in disease incidence and severity 
     between males and females. Osteoarthritis, rheumatoid 
     arthritis, and osteoporosis are expressed to a greater extent 
     in females. The Committee encourages NIAMS to work to 
     identify the extent of these gender differences in 
     musculoskeletal disorders and develop a plan for addressing 
     the questions that require further research.
       Marfan syndrome.--Marfan syndrome is a life-threatening 
     genetic disorder affecting several organ systems including 
     musculoskeletal, cardiovascular and ophthalmologic systems. 
     To further boost research in this area, the Committee 
     encourages NIAMS to consider all available mechanisms of 
     funding for research on Marfan syndrome. The Committee 
     commends NIAMS for taking the lead role in the vital support 
     of research on heritable disorders of connective tissue, 
     which include Marfan syndrome. The Committee is pleased to 
     note that NIAMS has issued a Request for Applications for 
     heritable disorders of connective tissue.
       Metabolic bone diseases.--The Committee urges NIAMS to 
     enhance its research into all metabolic bone diseases, to 
     support research that applies new developments in genomics 
     and proteomics to osteoporosis and related bone diseases, and 
     to conduct large-scale clinical trials to determine whether 
     agents that prevent bone loss reduce fracture risk in women 
     with low bone mass.
       Osteogenesis imperfecta.--The Committee encourages the 
     Institute to pursue new osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) research 
     opportunities arising out of the 2002 scientific workshop on 
     OI, including life-threatening respiratory and cardiovascular 
     problems related to osteogenesis imperfecta.
       Scleroderma.--The Committee is encouraged by the NIAMS's 
     growing interest in scleroderma, a chronic and progressive 
     disease that predominantly strikes young women. More research 
     is critically needed to identify the genetic risk factors for 
     scleroderma and to develop safe and effective treatments. The 
     Committee encourages the NIAMS to collaborate with other 
     Institutes, including the NHLBI, NIDDK, and NIDCR, to 
     generate more comprehensive research opportunities for 
     scleroderma.
       Skeletal repair.--The Committee encourages NIAMS to explore 
     the stimulation of skeletal repair by biophysical agents 
     including mechanical strain, ultrasound, and electrical 
     energy. This research would be valuable to interdisciplinary 
     interests including trauma, aging, rehabilitation and 
     exercise physiology, and tissue engineering.
       Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ).--The Institute is 
     urged to initiate research on the unique features of the 
     temporomandibular joint as well as explore to what extent 
     temporomandibular diseases and disorders share common 
     pathogenic mechanisms with osteoarthritis in other joints and 
     musculoskeletal pain. The recommendations from the recent TMJ 
     Association meeting on joint and muscle dysfunction of the 
     TMJ, which NIAMS co-sponsored, can serve as guidance for the 
     NIAMS TMJ research agenda.
       Tissue reengineering.--There is growing interest in the 
     possibility that tissue engineering will provide a biological 
     solution to the critical clinical need for organs and 
     tissues. The Committee encourages NIAMS to consider holding a 
     workshop to help educate clinicians, who can apply the 
     advances to patients, about this new field.


    NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DEAFNESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION DISORDERS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$341,965,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................370,805,000
Committee recommendation....................................372,805,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $372,805,000 
     for the National Institute on Deafness and Other 
     Communication Disorders [NIDCD]. This is $2,000,000 more than 
     the budget request and $30,840,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget 
     estimate include funds to be transferred from the Office of 
     AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NIDCD funds and conducts research and 
     research training in the normal and disordered processes of 
     human communication, specifically in the areas of hearing, 
     balance, smell, taste, voice, speech, and language. The 
     Institute addresses the special biomedical and behavioral 
     problems of people who have communication impairments or 
     disorders; contributes to health promotion and disease 
     prevention; and supports efforts to create devices that 
     substitute for lost and impaired sensory and communication 
     functions.
       Dysphonia.--The Committee continues to be pleased with the 
     NIDCD's expanding intramural research program with respect to 
     dysphonia. The Committee encourages the NIDCD to explore 
     possibilities for a more active extramural research effort on 
     dysphonia, and collaboration with other NIH Institutes on 
     this important disorder.
       Early detection and intervention.--The Committee supports 
     expanded research on the early detection, diagnosis, and 
     intervention of infants with deafness and other communication 
     disorders, as well as on new intervention strategies to 
     prevent otitis media and other childhood causes of hearing 
     loss.
       Genetic deafness.--The Committee encourages the NIDCD to 
     conduct research into the genetic basis for normal and 
     disordered communication, especially auditory system 
     proteomics, and into interventions that prevent or treat 
     genetic deafness.
       Hair cell regeneration.--The Committee urges NIDCD to give 
     a high priority to new and important directions for inner ear 
     hair cell regeneration.
       Hearing devices.--The Committee encourages the NIDCD to 
     expand research that would improve the benefits of cochlear 
     prostheses and improve remediation of less-than-profound 
     hearing loss through hearing aids and/or new prostheses and 
     drug-delivery systems.
       Language acquisition.--The Committee encourages the NIDCD 
     to explore the biological bases and genetics of language, as 
     well as infant speech perception and language acquisition. It 
     also encourages the Institute to develop clinical 
     applications such as genetic screening for all communication 
     disorders.

[[Page 864]]

       Noise-induced hearing loss.--The Committee continues to be 
     concerned by the number of Americans who suffer from noise-
     induced hearing loss. The NIDCD's Wise Ears! campaign has the 
     potential to make significant inroads towards educating 
     Americans of all ages, and the Committee strongly supports 
     its expansion.
       Presbycusis.--Presbycusis, the gradual loss of hearing from 
     aging, will become more common as the Nation's population 
     grows older. The Committee encourages research on the central 
     and peripheral mechanisms leading to presbycustic hearing 
     loss and on strategies that would prevent hearing loss in our 
     senior population.
       Preventing hearing loss.--The Committee supports expanded 
     research on prosthetic and pharmacological therapies for 
     hearing loss from noise stress, ototoxic drugs and other 
     traumas.
       Tinnitus.--The Committee encourages the Institute to expand 
     its research into mechanisms underlying peripheral and 
     central tinnitus.


                 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING RESEARCH

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$120,428,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................130,438,000
Committee recommendation....................................131,438,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $131,438,000 
     for the National Institute of Nursing Research [NINR]. This 
     is $1,000,000 more than the budget request and $11,010,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The National Institute of Nursing Research [NINR] 
     supports clinical and basic research on biological and 
     behavioral aspects of critical national health problems. The 
     Institute's programs have established a scientific basis for 
     research that seeks to reduce the burden of acute and chronic 
     illness and disability for individuals of all ages; improve 
     the quality of life by preventing and delaying the onset of 
     disease or slowing its progression; and establishing better 
     approaches to promoting health and preventing disease. The 
     NINR supports programs essential to improving clinical 
     environments by testing interventions which influence patient 
     health outcomes and reduce costs and demands for care.
       Adolescent research intervention.--Adolescents are prone to 
     risky behaviors that endanger their present and future 
     health, such as smoking, eating unhealthy foods, excessive 
     drinking of alcohol, and physical inactivity. The Committee 
     supports the NINR's research interventions that address 
     multiple risks across adolescent populations and settings, 
     such as school, work, and the community, to reduce youthful 
     risk-taking and its consequences.
       Alzheimer's disease.--The Committee is pleased that the 
     NINR plans to expand research on long-term care recipients' 
     health care needs and interventions. Working in collaboration 
     with the NIA and other Institutes, the NINR is playing a 
     critical role in improving care for individuals with 
     Alzheimer's disease through research aimed at maintaining 
     functional mobility and preventing complications from co-
     occurring illnesses, excess disability, and premature 
     decline.
       Collaboration with NIMH.--The Committee acknowledges the 
     long-term mentorship program established by NINR in 
     collaboration with the National Institute of Mental Health to 
     prepare mental health nurses with the skill sets required for 
     competitive research proposals to the NIH. The Committee 
     recommends continued collaboration with NIMH to generate 
     initiatives.
       Health disparities.--The Committee commends the NINR for 
     its active role in research to abolish health disparities and 
     urges continued emphasis, particularly in light of findings 
     that the health care of minorities, even those who are 
     insured, is lower in quality. The NINR's efforts to build 
     community partnerships for research on key health issues that 
     are identified by the minority community members themselves 
     are an important step in the right direction.
       Family caregivers.--The Committee commends the NINR for its 
     research to assist the Nation's estimated 24 million to 27 
     million family caregivers, who provide an average of 18 hours 
     of unpaid care a week to their ill relatives. The Committee 
     is encouraged by findings showing that nursing interventions 
     can improve caregiver skill levels, morale, and quality of 
     life, and it supports enhanced research in this area. The 
     Committee is also pleased that the NINR is expanding 
     caregiver research directed at professional caregivers who 
     serve those residing in nursing homes and in assisted living 
     facilities.
       Juvenile diabetes.--The Committee is aware of reports of 
     adolescents with juvenile diabetes engaging in behavior that 
     will accelerate damaging complications, such as neglecting to 
     take insulin for purposes of weight loss. The Committee 
     encourages the NINR to increase its attention to adolescents 
     with juvenile diabetes, specifically regarding consequences 
     of the disease's psychological impact. In addition, the 
     Committee is aware of the important role that Ph.D. nurses 
     play in research to find cures for diseases such as juvenile 
     diabetes. The Committee encourages the Institute to expand 
     measures to increase the numbers of Ph.D. nurses.
       Nursing shortage.--The Committee is very concerned about 
     the shortage of nurses. The NINR's efforts to build nursing 
     research capacity are essential to ensure a sufficient supply 
     of well-prepared investigators to address the health needs of 
     tomorrow. The Committee encourages the NINR to implement 
     programs that bring students into the research stream at a 
     younger age and to diversify research and training 
     opportunities in reaching out to minorities.
       Palliative care.--The Committee commends the NINR for its 
     efforts to advance the science of end-of-life/palliative 
     care, and it encourages continued emphasis and expansion.


           NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON ALCOHOL ABUSE AND ALCOHOLISM

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$384,071,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................416,773,000
Committee recommendation....................................418,773,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $418,773,000 
     for the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism 
     [NIAAA]. This is $2,000,000 more than the budget request and 
     $34,702,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The 
     comparable amounts for the budget estimate include funds to 
     be transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NIAAA conducts biomedical and behavioral 
     research for improving prevention and treatment and reducing 
     or eliminating the associated health, economic, and social 
     consequences of alcohol abuse and alcoholism. NIAAA provides 
     leadership in the country's effort to combat these problems 
     by developing new knowledge that will decrease the incidence 
     and prevalence of alcohol abuse and alcoholism and associated 
     morbidity and mortality. NIAAA addresses these questions 
     through an integrated program of biomedical, behavioral, and 
     epidemiologic research on alcoholism, alcohol abuse, and 
     related problems. This broad-based program includes various 
     areas of special emphasis such as medications development, 
     fetal alcohol syndrome, genetics, neuroscience and moderate 
     drinking.
       Alcohol treatment services.--Given the rapid growth of 
     managed behavioral health care, the Committee is concerned 
     that more needs to be known about how alcohol treatment 
     services are delivered under managed care arrangements and 
     the specific characteristics of behavioral health components 
     of health insurance plans and managed care organizations. The 
     Committee continues its support of the NIAAA Advisory 
     Council's comprehensive plan for health services, 
     particularly its recommendation to prioritize research to 
     understand the effects of managed care on treatment services. 
     The Committee acknowledges the NIAAA's progress in 
     implementing this recommendation, and it encourages the 
     Institute to consider supporting additional research in this 
     area.
       Alcoholic liver disease.--Alcoholic liver disease remains a 
     major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. 
     The Committee notes that recent research suggests that free 
     radicals are a principal vehicle through which alcohol 
     damages the liver, and that antioxidants look increasingly 
     promising as a potential treatment. The Committee encourages 
     the Institute to expand its research on alcoholic liver 
     disease, particularly regarding the interaction between 
     hepatitis C and alcohol in liver disease.
       Brain mapping and organ imaging in alcoholism.--The 
     Committee notes the rapid progress made through advanced 
     imaging technology in mapping the brain pathways that are 
     involved in alcohol addiction and alcohol-related brain 
     damage. The Committee urges the Institute to expand research 
     on brain mapping in alcoholics. Where possible, the Institute 
     should collaborate with the NIBIB and other NIH Insitutes and 
     agencies on the development of advanced instrumentation to 
     further the understanding of alcohol dependence and alcohol-
     related medical disorders.
       College drinking.--The Committee applauds the NIAAA Task 
     Force Report on College Drinking--``A Call To Action: 
     Changing the Culture of Drinking at U.S. Colleges''--
     especially its goal of providing university and college 
     presidents, policymakers, and researchers with information 
     and recommendations on the effectiveness of current 
     interventions and encouraging them to embrace rigorous 
     research-based solutions. The Committee is pleased that the 
     NIAAA website Collegedrinkingprevention.gov has over 2 
     million hits and has received over 15 awards since it 
     appeared in April, reflecting the concern and interest in 
     this national public health problem. The Committee believes 
     the Task Force's proposed research-based recommendations 
     should be implemented in as many colleges and universities as 
     soon as possible.
       Health disparities.--Evidence suggests that alcohol affects 
     genders and subpopulations differently, and that some groups 
     suffer more adverse effects than others. The Committee 
     encourages the Institute to work collaboratively with the 
     NCMHD to study the role of gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic 
     status, and other variables in determining the effects of 
     alcohol use and abuse.

[[Page 865]]

       Identification of molecular targets of alcohol in the 
     brain.--The Committee notes the success of NIAAA-funded 
     investigators in identifying molecular targets of alcohol in 
     the brain. The characterization of these targets may lead to 
     the discovery of compounds that block specific effects of 
     alcohol. The Committee is pleased to learn that this strategy 
     has led to the prevention of alcohol-related birth defects in 
     mice, and it encourages the Institute to stimulate additional 
     research on the molecular basis for the actions of alcohol.
       Longitudinal studies.--The Committee encourages the 
     Institute to undertake longitudinal studies that recruit 
     subjects in early adolescence to examine gene-environment 
     interactions impacting alcohol abuse and alcoholism during 
     the course of an individual's life. The Institute is 
     encouraged to partner with other institutes, agencies and 
     organizations deemed appropriate, including the NICHD and 
     SAMHSA.
       Medications development for alcoholism treatment.--The 
     Committee is aware of advances in the understanding of how 
     genetics and environment influence the response to alcohol. 
     The Committee urges the Institute to encourage studies on the 
     influence of psychological and social factors on the success 
     of treatment, and develop new medications for the treatment 
     of alcoholism and alcohol-related disorders.
       Multidisciplinary research on fetal alcohol syndrome.--The 
     Committee recognizes that fetal alcohol syndrome is among the 
     most common preventable cause of mental impairment. The 
     Committee supports the Institute's efforts to understand the 
     biological mechanisms through which alcohol causes damage to 
     the developing fetus. The Committee also urges the Institute 
     to aggressively pursue research that will lead to effective 
     strategies for the prevention and treatment of fetal alcohol 
     syndrome.
       Native Alaskans.--The Committee is aware of serious 
     problems with alcohol and substance abuse among Native 
     Alaskans and of the need for translating research into 
     clinical applications for this population. The Committee 
     urges the NIAAA to sponsor a Research to Practice Forum to 
     focus on bridging the gap between researchers and 
     practitioners and translating scientific research into 
     clinical applications, and to support the implementation of 
     any recommendations developed at the forum.
       Prevention of alcohol abuse in adolescents.--The Committee 
     is very concerned about the increasing number of alcohol-
     related deaths on college campuses and increasing alcohol use 
     among elementary and secondary school-aged children. The 
     Committee urges the Institute to pursue collaborations with 
     other Institutes, such as the NICHD and NIMH, to study the 
     causes of alcohol abuse among this age group and to devise 
     strategies for effective prevention and intervention.


                    NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$887,733,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................964,613,000
Committee recommendation....................................968,013,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $968,013,000 
     for the National Institute on Drug Abuse [NIDA]. This is 
     $3,400,000 more than the budget request and $80,280,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     numbers for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--Created in 1974, NIDA supports about 85 percent 
     of the world's biomedical research in the area of drug abuse 
     and addiction. The Committee commends NIDA for demonstrating 
     through research that drug use is a preventable behavior and 
     that addiction is a treatable disease. NIDA's basic research 
     plays a fundamental role in furthering knowledge about the 
     ways in which drugs act on the brain to produce dependence, 
     and contributes to understanding how the brain works. In 
     addition, NIDA research identifies the most effective 
     pharmacological and behavioral drug abuse treatments. NIDA 
     conducts research on the nature and extent of drug abuse in 
     the United States and monitors drug abuse trends nationwide 
     to provide information for planning both prevention and 
     treatment services. An important component of NIDA's mission 
     is also to study the outcomes, effectiveness, and cost 
     benefits of drug abuse services delivered in a variety of 
     settings and to assure dissemination of information with 
     respect to prevention of drug abuse and treatment of drug 
     abusers.
       Collaboration with SAMHSA and other agencies.--The 
     Committee encourages NIDA to continue to collaborate with 
     SAMHSA and other agencies to bridge the existing gap between 
     research and practice. The Committee is pleased that NIDA 
     plans to support CSAT's Addiction Technology Transfer 
     Centers. The Committee believes that this collaborative 
     effort will have a significant impact on how communities 
     receive and develop the skills, systems, and necessary 
     support to implement new research findings.
       Community-friendly behavioral therapies.--Research-based 
     behavioral treatments are often criticized as too lengthy, 
     costly, complex, or difficult for treatment providers to 
     integrate with more traditional methods of care. The 
     Committee applauds NIDA's efforts to remedy this situation by 
     developing and bringing behavioral therapies to community 
     treatment centers. NIDA is urged to encourage researchers to 
     make behavioral treatments more ``community friendly,'' while 
     still maintaining their effectiveness. The Committee is 
     pleased that NIDA has expanded the scope of its research 
     beyond testing new treatments to include studies on financing 
     and organizational adaptation and change. The Committee 
     encourages NIDA to continue testing new treatments in 
     clinical trials and supporting research on how to move 
     effective treatments into health care systems.
       Hepatitis C treatment.--The Committee notes the high 
     incidence of hepatitis C among the U.S. population that uses 
     drugs. Research into the efficacy of treating such 
     individuals for hepatitis C concurrently with drug dependency 
     protocols such as methadone is highly recommended.
       Information dissemination.--The Committee urges NIDA to use 
     both the existing National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical 
     Trials Network infrastructure and the new prevention 
     infrastructures that are currently being established as part 
     of NIDA's new Prevention Research Initiative to ensure that 
     findings are put into practice in communities across the 
     country.
       Methamphetamine.--The Committee continues to be concerned 
     about methamphetamine abuse across the Nation, especially in 
     the Midwest. The Committee again urges NIDA to expand its 
     research on improved methods of prevention and treatment of 
     methamphetamine abuse.
       Nicotine.--The Committee applauds NIDA's efforts to support 
     a comprehensive research portfolio that has indisputably 
     demonstrated the addictive nature of nicotine. The Committee 
     encourages NIDA to work independently and, where possible, 
     collaborate with other Institutes and organizations to 
     identify and develop targets for new treatments. The 
     Committee recognizes that treating addiction to nicotine 
     remains among the most cost-effective approaches to reducing 
     cancer risk.
       Prevention research.--The Committee is pleased that NIDA 
     has launched a multi-component National Prevention Research 
     Initiative that will involve partners at the State and local 
     levels. The Committee urges NIDA to expand this initiative to 
     test the effectiveness of new and existing science-based 
     prevention approaches in different communities, while also 
     studying how best to adapt the programs for local needs.
       Stress and substance abuse.--Stress plays a major role in 
     the initiation and continuation of drug use, and in relapse 
     to addiction. The Committee encourages the NIDA to increase 
     its research portfolio on this topic as well as on post-
     traumatic stress disorder and substance abuse.
       Translating basic research.--NIDA's strong basic research 
     foundation has provided great insight into the addiction 
     process and has helped identify molecular targets for the 
     development of medications as well as new behavioral 
     treatment strategies as well. The Committee urges NIDA to use 
     translational research to continue to rapidly bring knowledge 
     from the lab into clinical practice.


                  NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,238,093,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,343,088,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,350,788,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,350,788,000 
     for the National Institute of Mental Health [NIMH]. This is 
     $7,700,000 more than the budget request and $112,695,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The research programs of the Institute lead the 
     Federal effort to identify the causes of--and the most 
     effective treatments for--mental illnesses, which, according 
     to a report recently issued by the Surgeon General of the 
     United States, afflict more than one in five American adults. 
     One result of the Federal research investment has been a 
     growing awareness that undiagnosed and untreated mental 
     illness, in all its forms and with all of its consequences, 
     is as damaging as physical illness to the Nation's well-
     being.
       Alzheimer's disease.--The NIMH continues to play an 
     important part in efforts to develop effective treatment 
     strategies for Alzheimer's disease. Already underway is a 
     large-scale, multi-site study to identify the best medication 
     treatment strategies for the behavioral problems that co-
     occur in Alzheimer's. In addition, the NIMH's newly formed 
     Aging Workgroup has undertaken an exhaustive review of its 
     current aging-related research portfolio, with a view toward 
     enhancing coordination and collaboration with other NIH 
     institutes. The Committee is pleased with the steps the NIMH 
     has already taken, and it encourages the Institute to 
     continue its efforts to reduce the psychiatric burden of 
     Alzheimer's disease, including research into the relationship 
     between Alzheimer's and depression.
       Autism.--The Committee notes that, that under the 
     leadership of the NIMH, the NIH has quickly carried out the 
     provisions of the Children's Health Act with respect to 
     establishing autism centers of excellence and the

[[Page 866]]

     Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee. The Committee is 
     also encouraged by grants from the NIMH to investigate 
     treatment options, including pharmaceutical research 
     targeting the unique needs of the autism community in both 
     children and adults. The Committee urges the NIMH to continue 
     to fund behavioral and clinical research as well as other 
     promising areas of research related to autism spectrum 
     disorders.
       Borderline personality disorder (BPD).--The Committee 
     understands that failure to recognize and adequately treat 
     BPD can have devastating consequences such as substance 
     abuse, domestic violence, and even suicide. The Committee 
     urges the NIMH to expand its research on this disease.
       Elderly mental health.--The Committee is concerned that 
     despite substantial funding increases for the NIMH in recent 
     years, the Institute's sponsorship of extramural research on 
     the mental health of the elderly has not kept pace with its 
     funding of research for other populations. Therefore, the 
     Committee urges the NIMH to expand research in this area 
     through all available mechanisms.
       Fragile X.--Fragile X causes cognitive impairment, mental 
     disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder, and extreme 
     anxiety. The Committee urges the NIMH to conduct research on 
     the neurobiological basis of Fragile X, characterize the 
     mental health symptoms of Fragile X, and investigate 
     effective treatments and promising new psychopharmacologic 
     interventions that target those symptoms. The Committee also 
     urges the NIMH to include Fragile X in its studies of related 
     neuropsychiatric disorders and to work with other Institutes 
     such as the NICHD and the NINDS to develop cooperative 
     research support mechanisms in this area.
       Frontier mental health needs.--The Committee commends the 
     NIMH on its outreach efforts to determine the differences in 
     mental health needs which may exist in remote frontier 
     communities. The Committee encourages the NIMH to expand its 
     research efforts into these communities, which are often 
     ignored in research projects but which continue to suffer 
     from high incidences of mental health problems.
       Health disparities.--The Committee is encouraged by the 
     NIMH's efforts to determine the causes for the 
     disproportionate impact of mental disorders on racial and 
     ethnic minority groups and to investigate methods of 
     addressing and alleviating health disparities based on race 
     and ethnicity. The Committee urges the NIMH to act on its 
     strategic goals to achieve a more ethnic and racially diverse 
     pool of mental health investigators through minority-focused 
     training and career development mechanisms; to ensure 
     inclusion of minority groups in clinical trials funded by the 
     NIMH; to obtain an accurate measurement of the extent of 
     mental health disparities across communities of color; and to 
     use basic behavioral science to determine cultural 
     differences in stress, coping and resilience.
       Major Depression and Bipolar Disorder.--More than 20 
     million children and adults in the Nation are affected by 
     major depression or bipolar disorder, and depression has been 
     shown to be a leading cause of disability worldwide. 
     Depression and bipolar disorders are also prominently 
     associated with suicide. The Committee is aware that the NIMH 
     has developed ``Breaking Ground, Breaking Through: The 
     Strategic Plan for Mood Disorders Research'' in consultation 
     with nationally recognized scientific experts, members of the 
     National Advisory Mental Health Council, and representatives 
     of consumer groups. This plan summarizes the current state of 
     the science on major depression and bipolar disorder across 
     the life span, provides a vision of achievable scientific 
     goals, and recommends research priorities. It also addresses 
     the causes, diagnosis, and improvement of interventions at 
     the level of individual patients and service systems, as well 
     as prevention. The Committee encourages the NIMH to continue 
     its efforts to understand, treat, and prevent these 
     illnesses.
       Native Hawaiians.--The Committee remains concerned that 
     Native Hawaiians and other Native American Pacific Islanders 
     continue to suffer disproportionately from mental health 
     problems. The NIMH is encouraged to continue its efforts to 
     address this area.
       Portfolio balance.--The Committee commends the NIMH for a 
     balanced approach to research that includes basic 
     neuroscience, behavioral science, health services research 
     and clinical research. The Committee applauds, for example, 
     the NIMH's leadership in working quickly to address urgent 
     public health problems. NIMH research has shown that, for 
     some individuals, exposure to violent or traumatic events can 
     result in very significant mental health repercussions. 
     Recent school violence and the events of September 11, 2001, 
     have proven that this information is crucial and directly 
     applicable. The Committee supports the NIMH's determination 
     to speed the translation of research results into practical 
     societal benefits, including improved mental health services 
     for those who need them.
       Translating behavioral and social sciences research.--The 
     Committee supports translational research in the behavioral 
     and social sciences to address how basic behavioral processes 
     inform the diagnosis, treatment, and delivery of services for 
     patients, particularly for young people, with mental 
     disorders. To further the translation of research knowledge 
     into practice, the Committee encourages ongoing collaboration 
     between the NIMH and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health 
     Services Administration to reduce the current lag time 
     between the discovery of an effective treatment or 
     intervention and its availability at the community level. The 
     Committee also promotes the establishment of translational 
     behavioral research as a priority funding area for the NIMH.


                National Human Genome Research Institute

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$429,312,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................465,137,000
Committee recommendation....................................468,037,000

       The Committee recommendation includes $468,037,000 for the 
     National Human Genome Research Institute [NHGRI]. This is 
     $2,900,000 more than the budget request and $38,725,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NHGRI coordinates extramural and intramural 
     research as well as research training for the NIH component 
     of the Human Genome Project, an effort to determine the 
     location and sequence of the estimated 30,000 to 40,000 genes 
     which constitute the human genome. The Division of Extramural 
     Research supports research on genetic sequences of both human 
     and non-human genomes, DNA sequencing technology development, 
     database management and analysis, and studies of the ethical, 
     legal, and social implications of human genome research. The 
     Division of Intramural Research focuses on applying the tools 
     and technologies of the Human Genome Project to understanding 
     the genetic basis of disease and developing DNA-based 
     diagnostics and gene-based therapies. Since its 
     establishment, the intramural program has developed a strong 
     research program in collaboration with several other NIH 
     Institutes to study and better understand rare and complex 
     genetic diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, breast 
     cancer, colon cancer, and melanoma.
       The Committee notes that during fiscal year 2003, the field 
     of genetics will observe a major anniversary, and the 
     National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) will reach 
     an unprecedented accomplishment. Fifty years ago, in April of 
     1953, Drs. James D. Watson and Francis Crick reported the 
     discovery of the double helix structure of DNA, a landmark 
     achievement in the annals of scientific research. In 2003 the 
     Human Genome Project expects to complete the final DNA 
     sequence of the human genome, in time for the 50th 
     anniversary of the Watson-Crick paper. The Committee commends 
     the NHGRI for completing the Human Genome Project both years 
     ahead of schedule and under budget. While we have now entered 
     the era in which science begins to unravel the great mystery 
     of the human genome in order to understand the function of 
     each of our genes, completely understanding that mystery will 
     clearly take many more years of discovery.
       The Committee is pleased that even as it completes the 
     sequence of the human genome, the NHGRI is planning for the 
     future of genomic science and of the institute. The Committee 
     encourages consultation with outside experts in such fields 
     as genetics, genomics, medicine, biotechnology, the law, 
     social policy and ethics as a way to prepare for the future. 
     The development of a specific and bold new research plan for 
     the NHGRI will certainly ensure continued scientific advances 
     and greatly assist the Congress as it sets funding priorities 
     in the coming years.
       Behavioral research.--Recent research has revealed that 
     different genes can be turned on or turned off at different 
     points in a person's life. Understanding what events or 
     behaviors influence gene expression is an important frontier 
     of scientific knowledge. The Committee encourages the NHGRI 
     to develop collaborations with other Institutes and the 
     Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research to support 
     integrative research aimed at understanding the role of 
     environmentally induced gene expression in the course of 
     disease and in the promotion of health.
       Epilepsy.--The Committee encourages the Institute to 
     continue to intensify its efforts to identify epilepsy genes 
     for the more than 40 different types of epilepsy, and to 
     assist the NINDS in the search for a genetic fingerprint 
     diagnostic test aimed at improving drug therapy for epilepsy. 
     The Committee further encourages the Institute to coordinate 
     efforts with the NINDS to create a national consortium to 
     identify new epilepsy susceptibility genes through a large-
     scale genotype: phenotype screen. The Committee urges the 
     Institute to continue to make epilepsy research a priority 
     and to coordinate research efforts with other Institutes 
     through the Interagency Epilepsy Coordinating Committee.
       Haplotype map.--The Committee supports the development of a 
     ``haplotype map'' of the human genome, if possible through a 
     public-private partnership. This comprehensive resource for 
     human biomedical research will capture the complete catalogue 
     of the common genome ancestral segments (``haplotype

[[Page 867]]

     blocks'') observed in human populations. This map will 
     provide a new tool for scientists to scan the entire genome 
     and identify more rapidly and effectively those genetic 
     variations associated with disease risk and drug response in 
     the human population. That, in turn, will help researchers 
     develop an understanding of the complex biological processes 
     that give rise to disease and assist scientists in 
     discovering preventive measures, treatments and cures for 
     these illnesses. The haplotype map and similar tools will 
     help genomic science bridge the gap from basic science to 
     applications for human health.
       Non-human genomes.--The Committee endorses the rigorous 
     scientific process that the NHGRI has developed for selection 
     of non-human genomes to sequence using NHGRI-supported 
     sequencing capacity. This peer review process, whereby 
     investigator- or community-initiated proposals are submitted 
     for consideration by the NHGRI, ensures that organisms for 
     genomic sequencing will be selected on the basis of specific, 
     well-defined scientific goals, taking advantage of the rigor, 
     robustness and fairness provided by scientific discussion and 
     peer evaluation.
       The Committee is pleased that the NHGRI has indicated its 
     interest in sequencing the cow and chicken genomes. The 
     Committee encourages the Institute's efforts to expand genome 
     sequencing to other mammalian and avian genomes, and to 
     ensure that sequence information of these species is made 
     publicly available to all without restriction.
       Privacy.--The Committee remains concerned about the proper 
     use of genetic information and encourages the NHGRI's ongoing 
     efforts, though its ELSI program, to examine the privacy and 
     fair use of genetic information. Other important issues 
     related to human genetics research and its consequences 
     should also be studied, including: the appropriate use of 
     genetic tests; the protection of human subjects who 
     participate in genetic research; the development of policies 
     to guide research into genetic variation; and complex social 
     issues, such as how genetics informs concepts of race and 
     ethnicity.
       Type 1 Diabetes Genetics Consortium.--The Committee is 
     aware of the development of a Type 1 Diabetes Genetics 
     Consortium, which will collect and share valuable DNA 
     information from juvenile diabetes patients from studies 
     around the world. The Committee encourages the NHGRI to 
     collaborate with the NIDDK in efforts to determine the 
     genetic origins of juvenile diabetes by directing resources 
     towards this important initiative.


      National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$261,951,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................271,200,000
Committee recommendation....................................283,100,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $283,100,000 
     for the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and 
     Bioengineering [NIBIB]. This is $11,900,000 more than the 
     budget request and $21,149,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget estimate 
     include funds to be transferred from the Office of AIDS 
     Research.
       Mission.--The NIBIB improves health by promoting 
     fundamental discoveries, design and development, and 
     translation and assessment of technological capabilities in 
     biomedical imaging and bioengineering, enabled by relevant 
     areas of information science, physics, chemistry, 
     mathematics, materials science, and computer sciences. The 
     Institute plans, conducts, fosters, and supports an 
     integrated and coordinated program of research and research 
     training that can be applied to a broad spectrum of 
     biological processes, disorders and diseases and across organ 
     systems. The Institute coordinates with the biomedical 
     imaging and bioengineering programs of other agencies and NIH 
     Institutes to support imaging and engineering research with 
     potential medical applications and facilitates the transfer 
     of such technologies to medical applications.
       The Committee recognizes the contribution bioengineering 
     brings to medicine. Bioengineering improves the quality of 
     life through its contribution to advances in science and 
     technology related to health. The Committee understands that 
     this newly created Institute must have adequate resources to 
     begin its important task of supporting high-quality research.
       Juvenile diabetes.--The Committee is aware that imaging and 
     bioengineering technologies could have widespread 
     applications for the treatment and prevention of diseases and 
     conditions such as juvenile diabetes. The Committee 
     encourages the NIBIB to collaborate with the NIDDK on the 
     development and application of imaging technologies to 
     evaluate and track the progress of biologic events non-
     invasively, specifically the investigation and monitoring of 
     beta cell destruction during the onset of juvenile diabetes 
     and indications of graft rejection following the 
     transplantation of whole organs, tissue, or cells. The 
     Committee also encourages the Institute to collaborate with 
     the NIDDK to develop non-invasive metabolic sensor 
     technologies for the monitoring of glucose and metabolism in 
     individuals with juvenile diabetes.
       Molecular imaging technologies.--The Committee encourages 
     the Institute to provide increased funding for molecular 
     imaging technologies such as positron emission tomography 
     (PET) and microPET to take advantage of the capacities of 
     molecular imaging to detect disease process at the molecular 
     level and to monitor the effectiveness of targeted gene 
     therapies now under development. The Committee also 
     encourages the Institute to develop its research agenda in 
     close collaboration with other, disease-specific Institutes 
     at NIH, so that new imaging technologies are closely tied to 
     the research projects being supported by the NIH.
       Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ).--The Committee is 
     mindful of the dismal history of failures in the case of 
     plastic and other materials used in implants to replace parts 
     of the temporomandibular joint. The Committee urges the 
     Institute to make studies of the TM joint and related 
     structures a high priority.


                 National Center for Research Resources

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$986,505,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,065,272,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,161,272,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,161,272,000 
     for the National Center for Research Resources [NCRR]. This 
     is $96,000,000 more than the budget request and $174,767,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The NCRR develops and supports critical research 
     technologies and shared resources that underpin research to 
     maintain and improve the health of our Nation. The NCRR 
     programs develop a variety of research resources; provide 
     biomaterial and resources for complex biotechnologies, 
     clinical research, and specialized primate research; develop 
     research capacity in minority institutions; and enhance the 
     science education of pre-college students and the general 
     public.
       Extramural construction.--The Committee has included bill 
     language identifying $125,000,000 for extramural biomedical 
     facility renovation and construction. This is an increase of 
     $15,000,000 over the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and 
     $48,000,000 over the budget request. These funds are to be 
     awarded competitively, consistent with the requirements of 
     section 481A of the Public Health Service Act, which 
     allocates 25 percent of the total funding to institutions of 
     emerging excellence.
       Federal loan guarantee program.--The Committee understands 
     that the Administration has been considering a program that 
     would guarantee loans for construction of research facilities 
     at institutions conducting NIH-supported biomedical research. 
     The Committee is very interested in a Federal loan guarantee 
     program, which has the potential to address the huge 
     requirement for new and upgraded research facilities that has 
     been generated by the doubling of the NIH budget. The 
     Committee requests a report, to be submitted by June 1, 2003, 
     describing how such a program would work, the potential 
     benefits and costs both to the Federal Government and to the 
     institution, and how a loan guarantee program would be 
     integrated with the current grant program.
       General Clinical Research Centers.--In fiscal year 2002, 
     the NCRR supported more than 80 General Clinical Research 
     Centers (GCRCs) to provide people across the country with 
     local access to clinical research programs focused on a wide 
     range of diseases and disorders. GCRCs are also directly 
     involved in translating basic science discoveries to 
     improvements in patient care. For fiscal year 2003, the 
     Committee has provided $312,000,000, an increase of 
     $40,000,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level, for the GCRC 
     program as authorized by Section 481C of the Public Health 
     Service Act. The Committee intends that this increase should 
     be used to provide the resources necessary to upgrade GCRC 
     facilities with the sophisticated technologies needed to 
     apply the mapping of the human genome to the study of human 
     disease and respond to the threat of bioterrorism; expand 
     clinical research training efforts, including the recently 
     announced Mentored Clinical Research Scholar Program Award; 
     expand staffing as recently mandated by NCRR to assure 
     patient safety and maximum compliance with new regulatory 
     requirements; and support local GCRC pilot projects as 
     approved by the NCRR Advisory Council.
       Health disparities research.--The Committee commends the 
     NCRR for its proposal to establish comprehensive centers for 
     health disparities research and looks forward to learning 
     more about this important new initiative.
       IDeA grants.--The Committee has provided $220,000,000 for 
     the Institutional Development Award (IDeA) Program authorized 
     by section 402(g) of the Public Health Service Act. This is a 
     $60,000,000 increase over fiscal year 2002. Within the total 
     provided, $90,000,000 is for the Biomedical Research 
     Infrastructure Network (BRIN) initiative and $130,000,000 is 
     for the Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE) 
     initiative.
       The Committee strongly supports the IDeA program, and urges 
     the NCRR to further expand these initiatives. The Committee 
     understands that the NCRR intends to review

[[Page 868]]

     and evaluate the BRIN mechanism this year, and awaits the 
     results of this critical evaluation. The focus of IDeA should 
     continue to be improving the necessary infrastructure at 
     research institutions within the IDeA States, so that they 
     may develop a critical mass of competitive biomedical 
     researchers that will enhance our nation's overall biological 
     research capacity.
       Institutional animal resources.--The Committee commends the 
     NCRR for its support of recent efforts to upgrade animal 
     research facilities at minority health professions schools 
     including the recent competitive supplement to Research 
     Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) for developing and 
     improving institutional animal resources. The Committee 
     encourages the NCRR to continue to work in partnership with 
     the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities 
     to support this initiative.
       Islet cell research.--The Committee encourages NCRR to 
     facilitate islet cell research by creating additional sites, 
     isolating insulin-producing cells for both distribution to 
     researchers as well as for transplantation, and improving 
     methods to store and transport insulin-producing cells.
       National Primate Research Centers.--The Committee values 
     the critical role played by the eight National Primate 
     Research Centers (NPRCs). These centers conduct specialized 
     basic and applied biomedical research and offer essential and 
     valuable services to other researchers across the United 
     States. The Committee urges the NCRR to engage with the NPRCs 
     in an assessment process to identify NPRC and NPRC-user 
     needs, and to provide the Committee with a summary of the 
     findings.
       Plant-based medicinal products.--The Committee remains 
     interested in efforts to develop plant-based medicinal 
     products, and it encourages the NCRR to collaborate with 
     plant scientists, particularly in rural America, in 
     developing novel useful products.
       Positron emission tomography.--The Committee continues to 
     urge the NCRR to support research resource centers for the 
     development and refinement of positron emission tomography 
     (PET) as a unique imaging technology to diagnose and stage 
     diseases of the brain, including Alzheimer's disease.
       Research Centers in Minority Institutions.--The Committee 
     continues to recognize the critical role played by minority 
     institutions at both the graduate and undergraduate level in 
     addressing the health research and training needs of minority 
     populations. These programs help facilitate the preparation 
     of a new generation of scientists at these institutions. The 
     Committee urges the NCRR to continue to support the Research 
     Centers in Minority Institutions program.


   National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine [CCAM]

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$104,592,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................113,249,000
Committee recommendation....................................114,149,000

       The Committee has included $114,149,000 for the National 
     Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, an 
     increase of $900,000 above the budget request and $9,557,000 
     over the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       The Committee strongly supports the work of the National 
     Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. The Center 
     is charged with ensuring that complementary and alternative 
     therapies be rigorously reviewed to provide consumers with 
     reliable information.
       The Committee expects that funding for existing and new 
     Centers supported by NCCAM will be maintained and directs the 
     Center to undertake field investigations and a program for 
     the collection and evaluation of outcome data on promising 
     alternative therapies. The Committee expects NCCAM to expand 
     its support of CDC's field investigations program and of AHRQ 
     literature reviews and data-analysis efforts. The Committee 
     also expects the Center to allocate sufficient funds to 
     develop and disseminate a comprehensive set of fact sheets on 
     CAM therapies to inform the public and health professionals 
     of the state of scientific knowledge about these therapies.
       The Committee has included sufficient funds for NCCAM to 
     increase support for the chiropractic research center.


       National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$157,742,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................186,929,000
Committee recommendation....................................186,929,000

       The Committee has included $186,929,000 for the National 
     Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the same as 
     the budget request and $29,187,000 over the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The comparable amounts for the budget estimate 
     include funds to be transferred from the Office of AIDS 
     Research.
       Mission.--The NCMHD advises the NIH Director and Institute 
     and Center (IC) directors on the development of NIH-wide 
     policy issues related to minority health disparities 
     research, research on other health disparities, and related 
     research training. Among other activities, the NCMHD 
     develops, in consultation with the NIH Director, IC 
     directors, and the advisory council, a comprehensive 
     strategic plan that identifies and establishes objectives, 
     priorities, budgets, and policy statements governing the 
     conduct and support of all NIH minority health disparities 
     research, research on other health disparities, and related 
     research training activities. It also administers funds for 
     the support of minority health disparities research and other 
     health disparities research, by awarding grants and 
     leveraging the programs of the ICs.
       The Committee is encouraged by the opportunities that exist 
     for the NCMHD to help further advances in improving the 
     health of minorities and eliminating health disparities 
     through the expanded conduct and support of research, 
     research training, community outreach, and accelerated 
     dissemination of research findings in cancer, heart disease, 
     asthma, stroke, sickle cell disease, obesity, diabetes, 
     substance abuse, mental health, infant mortality, HIV/AIDS, 
     and chronic pulmonary diseases. Considerable opportunities 
     are at hand for improving clinical outcomes in the short- and 
     long-term. The NCMHD is encouraged to capitalize on 
     opportunities provided by recent advances in biomedical, 
     clinical and behavioral research by strengthening its focus 
     on efforts to unravel the genomic analysis of diseases that 
     disproportionately affect minorities including the ethical, 
     legal and social implications of this research; applying 
     advanced knowledge from prevention, behavioral, 
     translational, clinical and basic research to developing and 
     implementing effective innovative approaches that address 
     obesity and diabetes across communities of color; ensuring 
     the integration of advances in health care, practice, and 
     self-management in clinicians' guides and health care 
     delivery; applying knowledge that has been learned with 
     respect to stress and diet response mechanisms, and 
     environmental risk factors for cancer, heart disease, asthma 
     and stroke; applying advances stemming from unraveling the 
     physiology and genetics of diabetes; furthering 
     implementation of recommendations stemming from the various 
     IOM studies on improving minority health; developing 
     innovative strategies for improving the health status and 
     health outcomes of minority adolescents, young adults and 
     elderly; furthering the understanding of the dietary link in 
     arthritic diseases; strengthening and expanding the 
     involvement and participation of minority organizations 
     including minority community-based organizations in research, 
     outreach, awareness and prevention activities.
       Glomerular injury.--The Committee understands that 
     glomerular injury, a group of diseases which effect the 
     filtering mechanisms of the kidney, are more prevalent among 
     African Americans than the general population. The Committee 
     urges the NCMHD to explore collaboration with the NIDDK to 
     conduct and support research activities related to glomerular 
     injury.
       Lung diseases.--The Committee is concerned with the 
     disproportionate impact of lung diseases affecting 
     minorities. The Committee encourages the Center to partner 
     with other agencies to develop an epidemiologic approach to 
     determine the disproportionate impact of airway disease on 
     minority populations.
       Strategic plan.--The Committee commends the NCMHD for its 
     leadership in addressing the longstanding problem of health 
     status disparities in minority populations. The Committee 
     looks forward to reviewing the strategic plan for health 
     disparities research currently being developed by the NCMHD. 
     The Committee continues to encourage the NCMHD to implement 
     its successful research endowment program as an ongoing 
     initiative, and to establish the centers of excellence 
     program. Finally, the Committee encourages the Director of 
     the NCMHD to coordinate with the NIH Director and the NCRR in 
     support of extramural facility construction and the 
     development of other research infrastructure at minority 
     health professions schools.


 John E. Fogarty International Center for Advanced Study in the Health 
                                Sciences

Appropriations, 2002........................................$56,918,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................63,380,000
Committee recommendation.....................................60,880,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,880,000 
     for the Fogarty International Center [FIC]. This is 
     $2,500,000 less than the budget request and $3,962,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The comparable 
     amounts for the budget estimate include funds to be 
     transferred from the Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--Adapting research advances in biomedicine to 
     populations at home and abroad requires a continuing 
     commitment to basic science as well as rigorous clinical and 
     applied (epidemiological) studies. Examples are vaccines, 
     anti-infective agents, drugs, and more efficient diagnostic 
     tools, combinations of interventions, and health policies to 
     reduce the risk of disease and its associated human, social 
     and economic consequences. These challenges will benefit from 
     a more coordinated and multi-disciplinary approach to global 
     health needs. It is the mission of the FIC to address these 
     challenges by forging collaborations with a range of domestic

[[Page 869]]

     and global partners in international research and training to 
     pursue three core objectives: first, to accelerate the pace 
     of discovery and its application by special projects enabling 
     scientists worldwide to share conceptual insights, analytic 
     methods, data sets, patient cohorts, or special environments; 
     second, to engage and assist young as well as more 
     established U.S. investigators to address scientific 
     challenges related to global health; and third, to help 
     develop a cadre of highly capable young foreign investigators 
     positioned to cooperate with U.S. scientists in areas of the 
     world that, due to geography, genetics, or disease burdens, 
     provide unique opportunities to understand disease 
     pathogenesis, anticipate disease trends, or develop 
     interventions of relevance and priority for both the United 
     States and the collaborating country.
       Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.--The Committee notes 
     that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the 
     fourth-leading cause of death worldwide, and it encourages 
     the FIC to expand its COPD research and training activities.
       Tuberculosis.--The Committee recognizes the growing value 
     of international research and surveillance programs with 
     respect to infectious diseases such as tuberculosis (TB). The 
     Committee is pleased by the Center's research collaboration 
     with international organizations and governments on multi-
     drug-resistant TB, and it encourages the Center to continue 
     these important studies. The Committee is aware that the FIC 
     offers TB supplemental training grants to recipients of AIDS 
     International Training and Research Program (AITRP) or 
     International Training and Research Program in Emerging 
     Infectious Diseases (ERID) grants. The Committee encourages 
     the FIC to develop a specific, freestanding TB training 
     program.


                      National Library of Medicine

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$277,273,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................310,299,000
Committee recommendation....................................310,299,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $310,299,000 
     for the National Library of Medicine [NLM]. This is equal to 
     the budget request and $33,026,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation. Included is $4,000,000 for improvement of 
     information systems. The recommendation includes $8,200,000 
     in transfers available under section 241 of the Public Health 
     Service Act. The comparable amounts for the budget estimate 
     include funds to be transferred from the Office of AIDS 
     Research.
       Mission.--The National Library of Medicine is the Federal 
     institution that for more than 150 years has collected, 
     organized, preserved, and disseminated the world's output of 
     biomedical literature in all forms. As a result of this 
     activity NLM is the world's largest library of the health 
     sciences, its holdings numbering more than 5 million items. 
     The NLM has pioneered innovative methods to disseminate 
     bibliographic information. Basic to the mission of the NLM is 
     a wide-ranging research program to improve how medical 
     information is communicated. This responsibility is aided by 
     a grants program and by specialized services in toxicology, 
     environmental health, and biotechnology.
       Home medical consultations.--The Committee continues to 
     support demonstration projects to test the use of state-of-
     the-art telemedicine technology for home medical 
     consultations. This innovative approach holds great promise 
     for improving the care and lowering health care costs for 
     home-bound individuals who require frequent monitoring.
       Internet connection grant program.--The Committee continues 
     to be concerned about limitations on access to health 
     information in rural and other medically underserved areas. 
     It supports the NLM's efforts to address this issue through 
     the Library's Internet Connection Grant program, which 
     partners with regional libraries to provide hardware, set-up, 
     training and access to the Internet at locations in medically 
     underserved areas.
       Minority health professions.--The Committee encourages the 
     NLM to strengthen information technology infrastructure at 
     minority health professions schools that focus their research 
     activities on health disparities and the education of health 
     professionals who serve in medically underserved communities.
       New facility.--Many of the most serious diseases have a 
     molecular basis. The NLM's National Center for Biotechnology 
     Information is an integral player in this research process, 
     for it organizes and analyzes the vast volume of genomic 
     information uncovered in the last decade. The Congress 
     believes that if this Center is to make its maximum 
     contribution to our fight against disease, it must very soon 
     have expanded facilities to meet the growing demands being 
     placed on it. The Committee provided funds necessary for the 
     design of such facilities, and it desires that such design, 
     when completed, be rapidly moved into the construction phase. 
     The Committee, therefore, requests a report from the NIH by 
     April 1, 2003, that delineates the features of this new 
     facility, its size and its expected cost, based upon a fast-
     track schedule.
       Outreach.--The Committee continues to note the success of 
     the NLM's MEDLINE and MEDLINEplus databases. The Committee 
     encourages NLM to continue its outreach activities aimed at 
     educating health care professionals and the general public 
     about the Library's products and services, in coordination 
     with medical librarians and other health information 
     specialists.
       Public mandate.--The NLM has legislatively mandated 
     outreach activities to publicize its information services to 
     health professionals and the public. Because the Library has 
     developed an extensive set of authoritative and easily 
     accessible (electronic and print) health information services 
     for the public, the Committee encourages the NLM to continue 
     these efforts and also to target specifically certain 
     underserved parts of the U.S. population, particularly ethnic 
     minorities, the elderly, non-English-speaking individuals, 
     and Americans living in rural areas.
       PubMed Central.--The Committee commends the NLM for its 
     continued management and development of PubMed Central, an 
     electronic online repository for life science articles.
       Senior citizen outreach.--The Committee continues to 
     support the NLM's efforts to provide senior citizens with 
     expanded access to NLM's databases, through such means as 
     including Internet access at senior centers and congregate 
     meal sites.


                         Office of the Director

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$235,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................255,074,000
Committee recommendation....................................257,974,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $257,974,000 
     for the Office of the Director [OD]. This is $2,900,000 more 
     than the budget request and $22,574,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation. The comparable amounts for the 
     budget estimate include funds to be transferred from the 
     Office of AIDS Research.
       Mission.--The Office of the Director provides leadership 
     and direction to the NIH research community, and coordinates 
     and directs initiatives which crosscut the NIH. The Office of 
     the Director is responsible for the development and 
     management of intramural and extramural research and research 
     training policy, the review of program quality and 
     effectiveness, the coordination of selected NIH-wide program 
     activities, and the administration of centralized support 
     activities essential to operation of the NIH.
       The Committee directs the Director of NIH to make a written 
     request to the chairman of the Committee prior to any 
     reprogramming of $1,000,000 or more, between programs, 
     projects, activities, institutes, divisions and centers. The 
     Committee desires to have the requests for reprogramming 
     actions which involve less than the above-mentioned amounts 
     if such actions would have the effect of changing funding 
     requirements in future years, if programs or projects 
     specifically cited in the Committee's reports are affected, 
     or if the action can be considered to be the initiation of a 
     new program.
       Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency.--Alpha-1 antitrypsin 
     deficiency, a genetic disorder often misdiagnosed as asthma 
     or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), is a major 
     cause of lung transplants in adults and liver transplants in 
     children. The Committee encourages the NIH to enhance its 
     clinical research portfolio for alpha-1 and to consider 
     conducting a state-of-the-science conference on the disorder. 
     The NIH is also encouraged to raise public awareness about 
     alpha-1 and provide appropriate information to health 
     professionals.
       Autoimmune diseases.--The Committee awaits the imminent 
     release of the NIH's Autoimmune Diseases Research Plan, which 
     was requested in the Children's Health Act of 2000. More than 
     80 autoimmune diseases affect up to 22 million Americans, 
     mostly women. The Committee believes that the planned 
     research has the potential to generate improved prevention 
     measures, diagnostic tools, and treatment regimens, resulting 
     in reduced treatment costs and a significant alleviation of 
     human suffering.
       Chronic fatigue syndrome.--The Committee is pleased that 
     the NIH released its long-awaited CFS program announcement in 
     December 2001, and it hopes that this initiative will reverse 
     7 years of declining CFS funding at NIH. To foster response 
     to this program announcement, the Committee urges the NIH to 
     put a priority on efforts to understand the cause and 
     progression of CFS, identify diagnostic markers, and better 
     understand pediatric CFS.
       Clinical research.--Research supported by the National 
     Institutes of Health has produced a wealth of knowledge about 
     the fundamentals of human health and disease. But the 
     accumulation of fundamental knowledge for its own sake is of 
     little value unless it finds its way into hospitals and 
     physicians, where it can be put to use in promoting good 
     health or diagnosing, preventing and treating disease. 
     Whether the dividends from basic research are fully realized 
     will depend on the extent to which the clinical research 
     enterprise is encouraged and nurtured, including health 
     services and epidemiological studies. To that end, the 
     Committee encourages the NIH Director to re-institute the 
     advisory panel on clinical research and to consider creating 
     an office of clinical research

[[Page 870]]

     to oversee and coordinate activities across the NIH. In 
     addition, the Committee strongly urges the NIH to accelerate 
     its ongoing clinical research training program. The Committee 
     requests a report by April 1, 2003, outlining the status of 
     clinical research activities currently underway as well as 
     plans for the future.
       Clinical research loan repayment.--In 2000, the Congress 
     authorized a loan repayment program for clinical researchers 
     as part of the Clinical Research Enhancement Act. The 
     Committee is pleased that the NIH initiated the program last 
     year, but was concerned that NIH established an initial 
     policy that excluded clinical investigators who did not have 
     NIH funding. The Committee understands that NIH plans to 
     change this policy in the second year of the program, and it 
     urges the NIH to include as eligible applicants students and 
     trainees enrolled in peer-reviewed clinical research training 
     programs supported by the NIH or private sources. The 
     Committee requests data on the number of applications 
     submitted as well as the number and size of awards made as of 
     April 1, 2003. The Committee also requests demographic 
     information on the applicants and recipients of the awards, 
     including the status of their career development.
       Deafness research.--The Committee encourages the NIH to 
     fund multi-institute projects to expand basic research 
     regarding the causes of deafness.
       Department of Defense transfers.--The Committee has not 
     approved the transfer of $49,000,000 requested in the budget 
     to fund Department of Defense medical free electronic laser 
     research, HIV clinical trial research and radiation exposure 
     research. The Committee recommends that funding for defense-
     related science and technology initiatives should be handled 
     by the Defense Department.
       Distribution of resources.--Following the Institute of 
     Medicine (IOM) study of the organization of the NIH, the 
     Committee encourages NIH to contract with IOM to study the 
     distribution of research resources across the agency's 
     Institutes and Centers. An objective analysis may help inform 
     the committee on the wisest distribution of new funds as they 
     become available.
       Down syndrome.--Down syndrome is the most common genetic 
     cause of mental retardation in humans. About 1 in 800 babies 
     born live in the United States has Down syndrome. People with 
     Down syndrome also have an increased risk of developing 
     Alzheimer's disease, autism, and many neurological and 
     psychiatric disorders. Recent research holds the promise that 
     future clinical interventions could substantially improve 
     cognition, language ability, and behavior for persons with 
     Down syndrome. In addition, research into the connection 
     between Down syndrome and Alzheimer's disease may lead to a 
     better understanding as to the causes of Alzheimer's disease. 
     The Director is urged to coordinate with NICHD, NIA, NINDS 
     and NIMH, to place a high priority on researching the causes 
     and treatment of Down syndrome and to allocate sufficient 
     funds for expanding Down syndrome research into enhancing 
     cognitive development and developing methods to ameliorate 
     early cognitive decline and the onset of Alzheimer's disease.
       Epilepsy.--The Committee recognizes that while the NINDS is 
     the primary Institute for addressing epilepsy, several other 
     Institutes are also involved in related research. As 75 
     percent of epilepsy cases begin in childhood, the NICHD has 
     an important role to play in studying this disease. So, too, 
     does the NHGRI, which is urged to assist the NINDS in the 
     search for a genetic fingerprint diagnostic test aimed at 
     improving drug therapy for epilepsy. The NIMH is encouraged 
     to explore a potential link between epilepsy and mood 
     disorders, both of which are often treated with anti-
     convulsant medications. Finally, the NIA is encouraged to 
     examine epilepsy in patients over age 65. The Committee urges 
     the Director to continue an Interagency Epilepsy Coordinating 
     Committee that includes agency scientists and industry and 
     patient representatives. It requests the Director to provide 
     a report to Congress by April 1, 2003, on the progress made 
     in the coordination of research efforts in epilepsy among 
     these Institutes, and on the progress made to implement the 
     NINDS research benchmarks resulting from the March 2000 
     conference ``Curing Epilepsy: Focus on the Future.''
       Fibromyalgia.--Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder 
     characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, 
     multiple tender points, and other debilitating symptoms. 
     Because the symptoms manifest themselves most notably in the 
     muscles, NIH research in fibromyalgia has been concentrated 
     in the NIAMS. While the Committee commends the NIAMS for its 
     interest in this condition, research increasingly indicates 
     that fibromyalgia is not primarily a disease of the muscles, 
     but rather a condition caused by malfunctions in the brain 
     and central nervous system. Therefore, the Committee strongly 
     urges the NIAMS and the NINDS to work together in addressing 
     the challenge of fibromyalgia, and to expand their research 
     into this disorder. In addition, the Committee notes that 
     there are no FDA-approved drugs for fibromyalgia. While the 
     NIAMS Strategic Plan for 2000-2004 specifically cites the 
     need for NIAMS-supported investigators to test the efficacy 
     of new drugs and biologicals for arthritis and related 
     diseases, the Institute has announced no plans to include 
     fibromyalgia in that effort. The Committee urges the NIAMS to 
     do so.
       Graduate Training in Clinical Investigation Awards.--The 
     Committee understands that the translation of basic research 
     to general medical practice is slowed by a shortage of well-
     trained clinical investigators. The Committee is concerned 
     that the NIH has not moved forward with implementation of the 
     Graduate Training in Clinical Investigation Awards authorized 
     by the Clinical Research Enhancement Act, which was intended 
     to address this shortage. While the Committee is pleased that 
     the NIH has initiated the Clinical Research Curriculum Awards 
     to improve the quality of training in clinical research, a 
     shortcoming of this program is the absence of support for 
     tuition and stipends for the individual students. The 
     Committee believes that the Graduate Training in Clinical 
     Investigation Awards may be necessary to replenish the supply 
     of well-trained clinical investigators.
       Human tissue supply.--The Committee continues to be 
     interested in matching the increased needs of researchers who 
     rely upon human tissues and organs to study human diseases 
     and to search for cures. The Committee is aware that one of 
     the leaders in this competitive field, the National Disease 
     Research Interchange [NDRI], is uniquely positioned to serve 
     NIH grantees, as well as the intramural and university-based 
     researchers who are finding it increasingly difficult to 
     obtain this valuable and effective alternative research 
     resource. More than 500 peer-reviewed research advances made 
     by NDRI-dependent researchers have been published during the 
     past 4 years contributing to the research community's fund of 
     knowledge. The Committee is encouraged by NDRI's role in 
     these research advances and applauds the Director's expanded 
     support for NDRI by bringing NEI, NIDDK, NIAID, NIAMS, and 
     the Office of Rare Diseases into the multi-institute 
     initiative. While this is promising, more needs to be done to 
     match the demand for the use of human tissue in research. The 
     Committee, therefore, expects the Director to advise the 
     Director of NCRR to consider substantially increasing its 
     core support for NDRI, and to continue to encourage the 
     Institute Directors to identify and implement program-
     specific initiatives that might utilize the NDRI. The NIH 
     should submit a written progress report to the Committee no 
     later than April 1, 2003 outlining its plan and action steps 
     to accomplish these goals in fiscal year 2003.
       Laboratory Animals.--The Committee is concerned about 
     allegations that several institutions receiving NIH funding 
     may not be in full compliance with the Public Health Service 
     policy on humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. The 
     Committee encourages NIH to determine the extent and scope of 
     any such allegations and notify the Committee of its 
     findings.
       Lymphatic diseases and lymphedema.--The Committee commends 
     the NIH for co-sponsoring The Lymphatic Continuum conference 
     in May 2002 and for establishing a trans-NIH coordinating 
     committee to focus on the lymphatic system, with particular 
     emphasis on lymphedema and related lymphatic disorders. Since 
     basic and translational research for lymphatic research and 
     diseases of the lymphatic system crosses most Institutes and 
     Centers, broad committee representation is strongly 
     encouraged. Research and medical care for lymphatic diseases 
     has long been neglected; therefore, the Committee strongly 
     urges the NIH to stimulate and support intramural and 
     extramural programs for basic and translational research 
     relating to lymphatic diseases, including but not limited to: 
     insufficiency of lymphatic circulatory function (to include 
     all forms of lymphedema, both primary and secondary); 
     lymphatic vascular valvular insufficiencies; complex 
     congenital vascular proliferative diseases of the lymphatic 
     vasculature, including but not limited to, so-called 
     lymphangioma, cystic hygroma, lymphangiosarcoma, 
     lymphangioleio-myomatosis; and developmental disorders of the 
     lymphatic system, including but not limited to 
     lymphangiectasia, chylous reflux and complex vascular 
     malformations, such as Klippel-Trenauny Syndrome.
       The Committee requests the Director to provide a report by 
     April 1, 2003, outlining both short- and long-term plans to 
     stimulate and support basic and translational research for 
     lymphatic diseases. Furthermore, the Committee urges the NIH 
     to examine whether experts on lymphatic research are 
     adequately represented on CSR peer review panels and relevant 
     Institute study sections.
       Microbicides.--There is an urgent need to expand the range 
     of preventive interventions for HIV transmission. 
     Microbicides, which are antimicrobial products that can be 
     applied topically for the prevention of sexually transmitted 
     diseases, may offer one of the most promising approaches to 
     preventing HIV. The Committee commends the NIH for increasing 
     the funds available for microbicide research and development, 
     and it supports additional increases in funding for this area 
     through OAR, NIAID, NICHD, NIMH, NIDA, and ORWH. The 
     Committee remains concerned, however, that microbicide

[[Page 871]]

     research at the NIH is currently conducted with no single 
     line of administrative accountability or specific funding 
     coordination. The Committee also notes that the Centers for 
     Disease Control and the U.S. Agency for International 
     Development have recently expanded their microbicide 
     portfolios, which means that without overall Federal 
     coordination, costly inefficiencies may result. Therefore, 
     the Committee urges the NIH both to continue implementation 
     of its strategic plan for microbicide research and 
     development, and to accelerate and strengthen efforts to 
     coordinate research among Institutes and with other Federal 
     agencies. The Committee requests a report by March 31, 2003, 
     on the status of its microbicide program, including research 
     efforts, funding, and implementation of the strategic plan.
       Minority health professions infrastructure.--The Committee 
     continues to be pleased with the NIH Director's 
     implementation of various programs focused on developing 
     research infrastructure at minority health professions 
     institutions, including Research Centers at Minority 
     Institutions, Extramural Biomedical Research Facilities, and 
     the National Center for Minority Health and Health 
     Disparities. Because there are a number of new competitive 
     mechanisms for the NIH to work with these research 
     institutions, the Committee recommends that the NIH Director 
     work closely with the Director of the National Center on 
     Minority Health and Health Disparities to coordinate these 
     various mechanisms.
       National Institutes of Health/Department of Energy Medical 
     Technology Partnership.--The Committee expects the NIH to 
     continue to collaborate with the Department of Energy (DOE) 
     to evaluate the technologies developed within the nuclear 
     weapons program and other DOE programs in terms of their 
     potential to enhance health sciences, with the goal of 
     achieving clinical applications and improved national health 
     care.
       Neurofibromatosis (NF).--The Committee has included 
     specific report language on NF under the NCI and NINDS, but 
     it recognizes that NF research involves many other Institutes 
     and Centers as well, including the NHLBI, NEI, NIDCD, NICHD, 
     and NIAMS. The Committee urges the Director to identify new 
     research opportunities regarding NF that cuts across all 
     these Institutes and Centers.
       Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research.--The 
     Committee encourages the OBSSR to foster the NIH's behavioral 
     research portfolio by planning and sponsoring 
     interdisciplinary initiatives that further the public health 
     missions of multiple Institutes and Centers. In particular, 
     the OBSSR's efforts to encourage research on new 
     methodologies in the behavioral and social sciences are 
     appreciated. The Office is urged to follow up on its 
     conferences on sociocultural research and health disparities 
     by developing initiatives with the National Center for 
     Minority Health and Health Disparities and the NIH Institutes 
     and Centers. The Committee encourages the OBSSR to push 
     forward on planned initiatives to increase scientific 
     understanding of the elements of education and the workplace 
     that most affect health, and to follow up on its successful 
     program of grants on behavior change by focusing on the 
     challenge of maintaining behavior change.
       Office of Dietary Supplements.--The use of dietary 
     supplements has increased significantly among Americans who 
     want to improve their health and prevent disease, and there 
     is a great need for additional research to better inform 
     consumers of the benefits of these supplements. The Committee 
     expects the ODS to allocate sufficient funds to continue an 
     initiative--begun at the Committee's urging in last year's 
     bill--to speed up ongoing collaborative efforts to develop, 
     validate, and disseminate analytical methods and reference 
     materials for the most commonly used botanicals and other 
     dietary supplements.
       The Committee is pleased that the ODS has followed through 
     on its recommendation to begin a major research initiative on 
     the safety and efficacy of products containing ephedra, and 
     it urges the Office to assure that the work is reviewed in an 
     unbiased manner before it is finalized. The results of this 
     research should be evaluated by the FDA to assure that any 
     regulatory action taken on products containing ephedrine 
     alkaloids is based on sound science.
       The Committee is also pleased that the ODS has begun an 
     evidence-based review of the research concerning the health 
     benefits of omega-3 fatty acids. Given the significant human 
     and financial costs associated with heart disease, the 
     Committee expects the Office to provide sufficient funds to 
     promptly complete this initial review and provide 
     recommendations for further major clinical trials.
       Office of Research on Women's Health.--The Office of 
     Research on Women's Health (ORWH) works in collaboration with 
     the Institutes and Centers (ICs) of the NIH to promote and 
     foster efforts to address gaps in knowledge related to 
     women's health through the enhancement and expansion of 
     funded research and the initiation of new investigative 
     studies. The ORWH is responsible for ensuring the inclusion 
     of women in clinical research funded by the NIH, including 
     the development and implementation of a computerized tracking 
     system and the implementation of guidelines on such 
     inclusion. The Office is also involved in promoting programs 
     to increase the number of women in biomedical science 
     careers, and in developing women's health and sex and gender 
     factors in biology as a focus of medical/scientific research.
       The Committee recognizes the critical role played by the 
     specialized centers of research on sex and gender factors 
     affecting women's health, and it encourages the Office to 
     continue programmatic initiatives to further this work. The 
     Committee also continues to support the Building 
     Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health 
     programs.
       Parkinson's disease.--The Committee is aware that the 
     Parkinson's Disease Research Agenda developed by the NIH in 
     2000 included professional judgment funding projections that 
     totaled an additional $1,000,000,000 over 5 years. It is the 
     clear intent of the Committee that the NIH, which has 
     received substantial funding increases in recent years, come 
     as close as possible to fulfilling that Agenda while 
     maintaining the standards of peer review.
       The Committee was extremely disappointed, therefore, to 
     learn that during fiscal years 2001 and 2002--the first 2 
     years of the Parkinson's Disease Research Agenda--NIH funding 
     increases for Parkinson's failed to keep pace with funding 
     increases for NIH overall. In addition, the NIH's projected 
     Parkinson's budget for fiscal year 2003 falls $138,200,000 
     short of the $353,300,000 professional judgment budget 
     estimate cited by the Agenda for that year. As a consequence, 
     the NIH would fall even further behind on implementing the 
     Agenda, and this highly promising field of research would not 
     move ahead as speedily as the Congress intended.
       The Committee strongly urges the NIH to devote additional 
     resources to Parkinson's research using all available 
     mechanisms, including RFAs and further support of NIEHS 
     initiatives.
       The Committee expects the NIH to report to Congress by 
     April 1, 2003, on the steps it is taking to fulfill the 
     Parkinson's Disease Research Agenda.
       Pediatric drug studies.--The Committee is aware that many 
     generic drugs have not been studied for use in pediatric 
     patients. Therefore, the Committee encourages the NIH to take 
     actions necessary to fully implement the new section 409I of 
     the Public Health Service Act to study the safety and 
     efficacy of off-patent/off-exclusivity drugs in pediatric 
     patients. The Committee requests a report by February 1, 
     2004, which includes information on the number of pediatric 
     drug studies supported; the estimated cost of each study 
     undertaken; the nature and type of studies undertaken; the 
     number of label changes that occurred due to the studies 
     completed; the patent status of the drugs studied; and the 
     number of drugs remaining on the priority list established 
     through section 409I of the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children 
     Act.
       Pediatric research initiative.--The Committee is pleased 
     that the Office of the Director is implementing its Pediatric 
     Research Initiative, as authorized by the Child Health Act of 
     2000. The Committee strongly supports the intent of the 
     initiative, to provide additional funds to encourage the 
     growth of support for pediatric research across Institutes 
     and to stimulate new and promising areas of pediatric 
     research.
       Pediatric research loan repayment.--The Children's Health 
     Act of 2000 established the Pediatric Research Loan Repayment 
     Program to ensure the future supply of researchers dedicated 
     to the care and research needs of children. The Committee is 
     pleased with the expeditious initial implementation of this 
     program, and it urges the NIH to expand it, particularly in 
     the areas of Duchenne muscular dystrophy and Fragile X. The 
     Committee requests that the Director prepare a report by 
     April 1, 2003, detailing the progress of this program.
       Physical inactivity.--Physical inactivity, as a 
     contributing factor to disease, represents the third leading 
     cause of death in the United States and is a major 
     contributor to obesity, the second leading cause of death. 
     The Committee encourages the NIH to conduct public outreach 
     efforts with the goal of encouraging researchers to bring 
     their research expertise and skills to bear on this field.
       Postpartum depression.--Each year, over 400,000 women 
     suffer from postpartum mood changes, with ``baby blues'' 
     afflicting up to 80 percent of new mothers; postpartum mood 
     and anxiety disorders impairing around 10-20 percent of new 
     mothers; and postpartum psychosis striking 1 in 1,000 new 
     mothers. However, little systematic research has been done to 
     uncover the underlying causes and to develop effective 
     treatments. Therefore, the Committee encourages the 
     Institutes to expand, intensify and coordinate research on 
     postpartum depression and psychosis. In addition, the 
     Committee encourages the NIH to convene a national research 
     conference to develop a national research plan for postpartum 
     depression and psychosis.
       Racial and ethnic disparities.--The Committee was disturbed 
     by the conclusions of the Institute of Medicine's March 2002 
     report

[[Page 872]]

     titled ``Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic 
     Disparities in Health Care.'' The Committee strongly urges 
     the NIH to take all steps necessary to reduce and eventually 
     eliminate racial and ethnic health disparities. On a related 
     matter, the Committee is pleased with the leadership that NIH 
     has shown, through its Projecto Ciencia initiative, to 
     provide state-of-the-art health material to Hispanic 
     consumers and information to Hispanic health professionals on 
     NIH research opportunities. The NIH is encouraged to increase 
     funding for this initiative with expanded emphasis on 
     outreach to Hispanic consumers, Hispanic participation in 
     clinical trials, and NIH training and research opportunities, 
     especially as principal investigators.
       Scleroderma.--The Committee has included specific report 
     language on scleroderma under NIAMS and the NHLBI, but it 
     recognizes that scleroderma research involves many other 
     Institutes and Centers as well. The NIDDK is encouraged to 
     support such research because of scleroderma's links to 
     gastrointestinal involvement and renal crisis; the NIDCR, 
     because scleroderma may be associated with a number of 
     potential dental and craniofacial complications; and the 
     Office of Research on Women's Health, because scleroderma 
     mainly strikes young women.
       Sjogren's syndrome.--Sjogren's syndrome is one of the most 
     prevalent autoimmune diseases, yet little is known about the 
     cause or effective treatments. The Committee is pleased by 
     the research that the NIDCR has conducted on Sjogren's, but 
     recognizes that because this disease may affect all organs, 
     it falls within the mission of many Institutes. For this 
     reason, the Committee urges the NIH Autoimmune Diseases 
     Coordinating Committee, as it implements the NIH Autoimmune 
     Diseases Research Plan, to emphasize increased research on 
     Sjogren's syndrome across the Institutes. In particular, the 
     Committee encourages the NIAMS and NIAID to expand their 
     research on musculoskeletal and immunological manifestations 
     of the disease. The Committee also notes that Sjogren's 
     syndrome is an excellent model for lymphoproliferation and 
     transformation to malignancies; therefore, the NCI is 
     encouraged to explore the increased progression in Sjogren's 
     from a benign autoimmune process to malignancy.
       Social work research.--The Committee commends the NIMH, 
     NIDA, NCI, and the Office of Behavioral and Social Science 
     Research for their recognition of social work research's 
     important contribution to our Nation's health. The Committee 
     urges the NIH to develop a social work research plan that 
     outlines research priorities, as well as a research agenda, 
     across NIH Institutes and Centers to be reported to the 
     Committee by April 1, 2003.
       Stem cell research.--The Committee is encouraged by the 
     promise of both adult and embryonic stem cell research to 
     improve the lives of individuals suffering from devastating 
     diseases and conditions. However, the Committee also 
     recognizes that basic stem cell research must be accomplished 
     before therapies can be produced. In last year's report, the 
     Committee encouraged NIH to move forward expeditiously to 
     implement the President's policy concerning support of 
     scientifically meritorious stem cell research. The Committee 
     also commended NIH for moving quickly to negotiate material 
     transfer agreements with holders of existing embryonic cell 
     lines. However, since then, the Committee has learned that 
     very few stem cell lines are being shared with researchers. 
     The Committee is also concerned that few grant applications 
     have been funded in this area. The Committee requests that 
     the Department of Health and Human Services send the 
     subcommittee a report explaining how it plans to encourage 
     more grant applications and what specific steps it plans to 
     take to make more stem cell lines available.
       The Committee also commends NIH for the development of the 
     online human embryonic stem cell registry and encourages NIH 
     to expand the registry to make it more useful to researchers 
     by providing additional documentation regarding the stem cell 
     lines, such as conditions of derivation, characteristics of 
     the cell lines (i.e. cell-surface markers present or absent, 
     growth conditions, and requirements for maintenance in long-
     term culture), and publications that reference the cell 
     lines. Furthermore, the Committee encourages NIH to seriously 
     consider developing a stem cell repository.
       In addition, the Committee is aware of the exciting new 
     developments in the field of umbilical cord stem cells. But 
     more research needs to be undertaken to explore these issues, 
     including the possible use of these cells to treat cancers, 
     genetic diseases, muscular dystrophy, neurological disorders, 
     and diabetes. The Committee urges the NCI, NHLBI, NIAMS, 
     NIDDK, and the NINDS to actively pursue research in these 
     areas in a manner consistent with the NIH tradition of strong 
     peer reviewed science.
       Stroke in women.--As the second-leading cause of death 
     among women worldwide, stroke in women is a major health 
     problem. The Committee believes that special attention should 
     be focused on better understanding the gender differences in 
     stroke and cerebrovascular disease, as well as in the medical 
     care of stroke patients. Some aspects of the disease unique 
     to women include strokes related to pregnancy and the use of 
     oral contraceptives; stroke in younger women therefore should 
     not be underestimated. Stroke is additionally a leading cause 
     of serious disability among women and may contribute to late-
     life cognitive decline. The Committee supports the funding of 
     new and continuing NIH studies that investigate the impact of 
     postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy on stroke risk. 
     The Committee urges the NIH to increase research in stroke 
     among women of all ages, with a focus on stroke prevention, 
     acute stroke management, post-stroke recovery, long-term 
     outcomes, and quality of life.
       In addition, the Committee supports the NIH's initiatives 
     toward advancing the organization of stroke care and the 
     identification of stroke treatment and research centers that 
     would provide rapid, early, continuous 24-hour treatment to 
     stroke victims, including the use of the clot-buster t-PA 
     when appropriate. The Committee believes that designated 
     areas in medical facilities equipped with the resources and 
     personnel for treating stroke would also promote the early 
     evaluation of innovative stroke treatments.
       Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJ).--The Committee 
     recognizes that the problems associated with 
     temporomandibular diseases and disorders involve many 
     Institutes and Centers, including the NIDCR, NIAMS, NIAID, 
     and NIBIB. The Committee calls on the Office of the Director 
     to coordinate cross-cutting research by the various 
     Institutes and Centers and provide a report directly to the 
     Committee by April 1, 2003, on TMJ initiatives begun in 
     fiscal year 2002 or scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2003. 
     The Committee commends the Office of Research on Women's 
     Health for its consistent support of workshops and other 
     activities to further TMJ research, in recognition that women 
     in the child-bearing years appear to be more susceptible than 
     men to TMJ problems. The Office is urged to continue its 
     support of TMJ initiatives.
       Training award stipends.--The Committee concurs with the 
     policy adopted by the NIH in March 2001 which provides for 10 
     percent increases in research training award stipends until 
     appropriate stipend levels are achieved. The Committee 
     strongly encourages the NIH to apply this policy to the 
     fiscal year 2003 appropriation, just as it did with the 
     training stipends funded by the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.


                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$296,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................632,800,000
Committee recommendation....................................607,800,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $607,800,000 
     for buildings and facilities [B&F]. The amount recommended is 
     $25,000,000 below the budget request and $311,800,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       Mission.--The buildings and facilities appropriation 
     provides for the NIH construction programs including design, 
     construction, and repair and improvement of the clinical and 
     laboratory buildings and supporting facilities necessary to 
     the mission of the NIH. This program maintains physical 
     plants at Bethesda, Poolesville, Baltimore, and Frederick, 
     MD; Research Triangle Park, NC; Hamilton, MT; Perrine, FL; 
     New Iberia, LA; and Sabana Seca, PR.
       Neuroscience Research Center and Clinical Research 
     Center.--The Committee recommendation provides sufficient 
     amounts for the NIH to continue support for high-priority 
     construction projects previously approved and endorsed by the 
     Congress. The Congress provided full-scope contract authority 
     in the fiscal year 2002 appropriation for both phases of the 
     John Edward Porter Neuroscience Research Center; that 
     authority is continued for fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
     expects the NIH to keep to the original schedule for 
     completing this project. However, the Committee is extremely 
     concerned about the cost of completing the Mark O. Hatfield 
     Clinical Research Center. The Committee understands that 
     small cost overruns are expected in most large construction 
     projects. However, in this situation, $144,500,000 in 
     unanticipated costs is totally unacceptable. Therefore, the 
     Committee directs the NIH, prior to requesting any further 
     construction dollars, to do a thorough investigation of why 
     the cost overrun occurred, and what steps the NIH intends to 
     take to ensure that future projects are better managed.
       The Committee has included full-scope bill language within 
     this appropriation to give flexibility to the NIH to address 
     the cost overrun situation. The Committee has taken this 
     action to ensure that the new clinical center will be 
     completed as soon as possible because of the critical role 
     the center will play in the advancement of medical science. 
     The Committee directs the NIH to report within 30 days of the 
     enactment of this bill on how it will use the full-scope 
     authority to maintain progress on these two projects. This 
     report should also identify how other projects, if any, have 
     been affected to maintain this progress.


                        OFFICE OF AIDS RESEARCH

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................

[[Page 873]]

Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee recommendation does not include a direct 
     appropriation for the Office of AIDS Research [OAR]. Instead, 
     funding for AIDS research is included within the 
     appropriation for each Institute, Center, and Division of the 
     NIH. The recommendation also includes a general provision 
     which directs that the funding for AIDS research, as 
     determined by the Director of the National Institutes of 
     Health and the OAR, be allocated directly to the OAR for 
     distribution to the Institutes consistent with the AIDS 
     research plan. The recommendation also includes a general 
     provision permitting the Director of the NIH and the OAR to 
     shift up to 3 percent of AIDS research funding among 
     Institutes and Centers throughout the year if needs change or 
     unanticipated opportunities arise. These modifications to the 
     budget recommendation are consistent with the manner in which 
     funding for AIDS research was provided in fiscal year 2001. 
     The Committee requests that the Director report on the fiscal 
     year 2001 allocation plans for AIDS research within 60 days 
     of enactment and provide notification to the Committee in the 
     event the Directors exercise the 3 percent transfer 
     authority.
       The NIH Office of AIDS Research [OAR] coordinates the 
     scientific, budgetary, legislative, and policy elements of 
     the NIH AIDS research program. Congress provided new 
     authorities to the OAR to fulfill these responsibilities in 
     the NIH Revitalization Act Amendments of 1993. The law 
     mandates the OAR to develop an annual comprehensive plan and 
     budget for all NIH AIDS research and to prepare a 
     Presidential bypass budget.

       Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,137,690,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,193,086,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,203,917,000

       The Committee recommends $3,203,917,000 for the Substance 
     Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA] for 
     fiscal year 2003, an increase of $66,227,000 more than the 
     comparable fiscal year 2002 level and $10,831,000 more than 
     the administration request. The recommendation includes 
     $74,200,000 in transfers available under section 241 of the 
     Public Health Service Act. SAMHSA is responsible for 
     supporting mental health programs and alcohol and other drug 
     abuse prevention and treatment services throughout the 
     country, primarily through categorical grants and block 
     grants to States.
       The Committee has provided funding for programs of regional 
     and national significance under each of the three SAMHSA 
     centers: mental health services, substance abuse treatment 
     and substance abuse prevention. Separate funding is available 
     for the children's mental health services program, projects 
     for assistance in transition from homelessness, the 
     protection and advocacy program, data collection activities 
     undertaken by the Office of Applied Studies and the two block 
     grant programs: the community mental health services block 
     grant and the substance abuse prevention and treatment block 
     grant.
       The Committee commends SAMHSA for proposing additional 
     funding to address the treatment gap, but is concerned that 
     these resources are based on reductions in substance abuse 
     prevention activities as well as best practice programs 
     authorized under CMHS, CSAP and CSAT. The Committee notes 
     that the Public Health Service Act authorizes SAMHSA to: 
     ``conduct programs, and assure the coordination of such 
     programs with activities of the National Institutes of Health 
     and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, as 
     appropriate, to evaluate the process, outcomes and community 
     impact of treatment and prevention services and systems of 
     care in order to identify the manner in which such services 
     can most effectively be provided.'' The Committee believes 
     that it is important for SAMHSA to continue to have 
     sufficient resources to fund best practices service research 
     activities that support the development of the most effective 
     prevention and treatment programs to address substance abuse 
     and mental health issues.
       The Committee strongly supports SAMHSA's Federal leadership 
     role to improve the quality and availability of empirically 
     based prevention and treatment services in the areas of 
     mental health and substance abuse. To further the translation 
     of research knowledge into practice, the Committee encourages 
     ongoing collaboration between SAMHSA and the National 
     Institutes of Health (specifically with the National 
     Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Drug 
     Abuse, and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and 
     Alcoholism.) The Committee believes concerted efforts should 
     be undertaken to reduce the current 15- to 20-year lag 
     between the discovery of an effective treatment or 
     intervention and its availability at the community level.
       The Committee remains concerned by the disproportionate 
     presence of substance abuse in rural and native communities, 
     particularly for American Indian, Alaska Native and Native 
     Hawaiian communities. The Committee reiterates its belief 
     that funds for prevention and treatment programs should be 
     targeted to those persons and communities most in need of 
     service. Therefore, the Committee has provided sufficient 
     funds within CSAP and CSAT to continue supporting projects 
     that increase knowledge about effective ways to deliver 
     services to rural and native communities. The Committee 
     believes that Community Health Centers should be utilized in 
     this effort.


                   CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$831,904,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................822,116,000
Committee recommendation....................................838,116,000

       The Committee recommends $838,116,000 for mental health 
     services, $6,212,000 more than last year's level and 
     $16,000,000 more than the budget request. Included in this 
     amount is funding for programs of regional and national 
     significance, the mental health performance partnership block 
     grant to the States, children's mental health services, 
     projects for assistance in transition from homelessness, and 
     protection and advocacy services for individuals with mental 
     illnesses.
       The Committee believes that CMHS should promote the model 
     of permanent supportive housing for people who have been 
     homeless for long periods of time. The Committee directs CMHS 
     to work with providers and States to collect information on 
     the amount of block grant funding being used by States for 
     treatment in permanent supportive housing for people who have 
     been homeless for long periods of time. This information 
     should be included in future budget submissions beginning 
     with fiscal year 2005. The Committee also encourages CMHS to 
     monitor the extent to which homeless people assisted with 
     PATH funds enter permanent housing. The Committee intends 
     that funding for PATH help meet the goal of ending chronic 
     homelessness.
     Programs of regional and national significance
       The Committee recommends $226,067,000 for programs of 
     regional and national significance, $3,851,000 less than the 
     fiscal year 2002 amount and $13,000,000 more than the 
     administration's request. Programs of regional and national 
     significance address priority mental health needs through 
     developing and applying best practices, offering training and 
     technical assistance, providing targeted capacity expansion 
     grants, and changing the delivery system through family, 
     client-oriented and consumer-run activities.
       The Committee continues to support funding for mental 
     health counselors for school-age children, as part of an 
     effort to reduce the incidence of youth violence. The 
     Committee intends that $95,000,000 be used for counseling 
     services for school-age youth. Among other things, the 
     Committee believes that mental health counseling for troubled 
     youth can help prevent violent acts, and therefore is 
     providing continued funding to help schools in that effort. 
     It is again expected that SAMHSA will collaborate with the 
     Departments of Education and Justice to continue a 
     coordinated approach.
       The Committee notes that suicide continues to claim almost 
     30,000 lives each year, making it one of the top 15 causes of 
     death in the United States. For 15- to 24-year-olds and 
     children ages 10-14, suicide is the third leading cause of 
     death. The Committee continues to support State and local 
     efforts to reduce the occurrence of this premature and 
     unfortunate loss of life. The Committee has included 
     $3,000,000 to continue supporting the National Suicide 
     Prevention Resource Center. This important initiative 
     supports technical assistance in developing, implementing and 
     evaluating effective suicide prevention programs. The 
     Resource Center serves as a training and field support and 
     acts as a clearinghouse for all pertinent best practices 
     information regarding suicide prevention, and it promotes 
     evaluation of suicide prevention programs to ensure that 
     effective techniques, strategies, and recommended best 
     practices are made available to users. The Committee also 
     continues support for the Suicide Prevention Hotline program.
       The Committee appreciates CMHS's commitment to improving 
     the quality, effectiveness and availability of therapeutic 
     services delivered to traumatized children and adolescents; 
     furthering the understanding of the individual, familial, and 
     community impact of child and adolescent traumatic stress and 
     the methods used to prevent its consequences; and reducing 
     the frequency and consequences of traumatic events on 
     children and adolescents. The Committee recommendation 
     includes $30,000,000 to continue and build on the National 
     Child Traumatic Stress Initiative. Of the amount provided, 
     $10,000,000 is available in the Public Health and Social 
     Services Emergency Fund.
       The Committee remains concerned about the ongoing problems 
     of post-traumatic stress disorder present in the refugee 
     immigrant population in Hawaii. Because these immigrants 
     represent diverse cultures and often have limited mastery of 
     English, the Committee urges vigorous attention to the mental 
     health problems of these future citizens.

[[Page 874]]

       The Committee recommendation includes funding for the Safe 
     Schools/Healthy Students Program, which supports the 
     Departments of Health and Human Services, Justice, and 
     Education, working together to develop empirically supported 
     programs to prevent youth violence and to intervene with 
     families, schools, and communities where violence has already 
     occurred. The Committee urges the use of community health 
     centers as part of this effort. The Committee is disappointed 
     by the lack of comprehensive evaluation information from wave 
     one grantees under the Safe Schools/Healthy Students Program. 
     The Committee urges CMHS to accelerate their national 
     evaluation of this important program.
       The Surgeon General's report, ``Mental Health: Culture, 
     Race, Ethnicity,'' clearly identifies the existence of racial 
     and ethnic disparities in the mental health system. A major 
     recommendation in the Surgeon General's earlier report 
     ``Report on Mental Health'' is to increase funding for 
     training minority mental health professionals. Although 
     minorities currently represent 30 percent of our Nation's 
     population and are projected to account for 40 percent in 
     2025, only 7.2 percent of doctorates awarded in psychology 
     since 1978 have been to people of color. The Committee 
     recognizes the urgency of training additional minority mental 
     health professionals, to include Native Hawaiians, and 
     encourages SAMHSA to provide additional resources to the 
     Minority Fellowship Program.
       The Committee continues to recognize the importance of 
     consumer/peer-run programs that help people with mental 
     illnesses live successfully in the community. These low-cost 
     services have an impressive record of assisting people with 
     mental disorders to decrease their dependence on expensive 
     social services and avoid psychiatric hospitalization. Having 
     proved effective, they have been replicated in numerous 
     communities with State and local funding. The Center for 
     Mental Health Services has funded five consumer and consumer-
     supporter national technical assistance centers that provide 
     training and information to help these groups grow. The 
     Committee has included $2,000,000 above the budget request to 
     continue the current level of funding for the consumer and 
     consumer-supporter national technical assistance centers. The 
     Committee directs CMHS to support grants to fund five such 
     national technical assistance centers for a period of no less 
     than 5 years.
       The Committee is concerned about the prevalence of 
     pregnancy related mental health conditions suffered by women 
     today. The Committee is concerned specifically about the high 
     prevalence of postpartum depression and psychosis suffered by 
     pregnant women today in the United States. Each year, over 
     400,000 women suffer from postpartum mood changes, with 
     ``baby blues'' afflicting up to 80 percent of new mothers; 
     postpartum mood and anxiety disorders impairing around 10-20 
     percent of new mothers; and postpartum psychosis striking 1 
     in 1,000 new mothers. Therefore, the Committee recommends 
     that resources be expended for the treatment of women and 
     their families suffering from such pregnancy-related mental 
     health conditions.
       The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 to 
     continue the elderly treatment and outreach program. 
     Demographic projections show that by the year 2010, there 
     will be approximately 40 million Americans over the age of 
     65. The Committee notes that more than one in five will 
     experience mental disorders. This grant program will help 
     local communities establish the infrastructure necessary to 
     better serve the mental health needs of older adults.
       The Committee supports $5,000,000 for the jail diversion 
     grant program, an increase of $1,000,000 over last year. The 
     Committee recognizes that up to 1 million individuals with 
     mental illnesses will either spend time in jail or prison 
     during the current year. This is a most unfortunate 
     statistic, when individuals could be more appropriately 
     treated in a community health setting. Therefore, the 
     Committee urges SAMHSA to work with the Department of 
     Justice, the law enforcement community, the court system and 
     other appropriate agencies and associations to ensure that 
     funding is utilized to divert inappropriate incarcerations 
     and link individuals with mental illnesses with the support 
     they need to avoid future contact with the criminal justice 
     system.
       The Committee recommendation includes $1,000,000 to 
     continue support for new awards under the community action 
     grant program. This program helps communities implement 
     evidence-based exemplary practices that serve adults with 
     serious mental illness and children and adolescents with 
     serious emotional disorders. The Committee notes that this 
     program has met or exceeded performance measures in fiscal 
     year 2000 and fiscal year 2001.
     Mental health performance partnership block grant
       The Committee recommends $433,000,000 for the mental health 
     performance partnership block grant, the same amount as the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget request. States 
     use these funds to support the development and implementation 
     of innovative community-based services and maintain 
     continuity of community programs. Funds are allocated to 
     States and territories by formula.
       The Children's Health Act of 2000 made several changes to 
     the authority for the mental health block grant, including 
     the development of a performance partnership framework in 
     which States are granted program flexibility for achieving a 
     common set of performance measures. The Committee expects 
     SAMHSA to provide detailed information in its fiscal year 
     2004 congressional justification about the transition to the 
     performance partnership grant framework and funding requested 
     to support this transition.
       The Committee recognizes the vital importance of services 
     supported by mental health block grant funds. From fiscal 
     year 1999 to 2002, the Committee has increased the 
     appropriation by 50 percent to help move care for adults with 
     serious mental illness and children with serious emotional 
     disturbance from inpatient care settings to treatment and 
     supports available in the community. Unfortunately, due to 
     tight budget constraints this year, the Committee must concur 
     with the President's budget request for the mental health 
     block grant.
     Children's mental health services
       The Committee recommends $96,694,000 for the children's 
     mental health services program, an increase of $63,000 more 
     than the comparable fiscal year 2002 level and the same as 
     the administration's request. This program provides grants 
     and technical assistance to support community-based services 
     for children and adolescents with serious emotional, 
     behavioral or mental disorders. Grantees must provide 
     matching funds, and services must involve the educational, 
     juvenile justice, and health systems.
       The Committee notes the positive findings that program 
     evaluations have generated to date. For example, cross-agency 
     treatment planning has increased from 40 percent in 1997 to 
     more than 62 percent in 2001, which illustrates the extent to 
     which this program helps local program providers--from 
     education and juvenile justice to child welfare--collaborate 
     to support access to quality mental health treatment and 
     services. Further, GPRA outcome measures indicate that 
     targets were exceeded or met for sustained improvements in 
     clinical outcomes, stability of living arrangements and 
     decreases in contacts with law enforcement. The Committee 
     expects that SAMHSA will disseminate widely information about 
     the ways in which local communities can develop comprehensive 
     systems of care that meet the needs of children with serious 
     emotional disorders and their families, as well as support 
     technical assistance for grantees to continue to improve 
     local collaboration.
     Projects for assistance in transition from homelessness 
         [PATH]
       The Committee recommends $46,855,000 for the PATH Program, 
     an increase of $7,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     amount and the same amount as the administration's request.
       PATH is a critical program which provides outreach, mental 
     health, and case management services and other community 
     support services to individuals with serious mental illness 
     who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. The PATH 
     Program makes a significant difference in the lives of 
     homeless persons with mental illnesses. PATH services 
     eliminate the revolving door of episodic inpatient and 
     outpatient hospital care. Multidisciplinary teams address 
     client needs within a continuum of services, providing needed 
     stabilization so that mental illnesses and co-occurring 
     substance abuse and medical issues can be addressed. 
     Assistance is provided to enhance access to housing, 
     rehabilitation and training, and other needed supports, 
     assisting homeless people in returning to secure and stable 
     lives.
       The Committee is aware that approximately 600,000 Americans 
     are homeless on any given night. Of that number, an estimated 
     one-third have serious mental illnesses, and more than one-
     half also have an alcohol and/or drug problem. A recent 
     evaluation of the PATH program found that increasing outreach 
     activities was an effective means of linking homeless persons 
     to the services they need, which helps to stabilize their 
     living situations and secure the additional support they need 
     to live a healthy and self-sufficient life. Therefore, the 
     Committee intends to continue supporting this important and 
     effective program.
     Protection and advocacy
       The Committee recommends $35,500,000 for the protection and 
     advocacy program, an increase of $3,000,000 over the fiscal 
     year 2002 amount and the administration's request. This 
     program helps ensure that the rights of mentally ill 
     individuals are protected while they are patients in 
     treatment facilities, or while they are living in the 
     community, including their own homes. Funds are allocated to 
     States according to a formula based on population and 
     relative per capita income.
       The Committee has provided additional resources to support 
     the efforts of the protection and advocacy system. Additional 
     funding has enabled State P&A programs to increase the number 
     of clients served, the amount of public awareness and 
     education

[[Page 875]]

     conducted and the number of training activities delivered. 
     The Committee notes that the P&A programs have exceeded their 
     GPRA performance targets in all of these areas. The Committee 
     recognizes that additional investments are needed to support 
     State P&A programs as they seek to meet their growing 
     responsibilities. State P&A programs continue to support the 
     needs of individuals with mental illness through advocacy and 
     investigation related to incidents involving restraints and 
     seclusion in care or treatment facilities and employment, 
     housing and other supports provided in the community.


                  CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,016,383,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,142,994,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,095,000,000

       The Committee recommends $2,095,000,000 for substance abuse 
     treatment programs, an increase of $78,617,000 over last 
     year's funding and $47,994,000 less than the budget request. 
     The recommendation includes $62,200,000 in transfers 
     available under section 241 of the Public Health Service Act. 
     This amount funds substance abuse treatment programs of 
     regional and national significance and the substance abuse 
     prevention and treatment block grant to the States.
       The Committee remains concerned about the treatment gap 
     that continues to exist for those Americans in need of 
     substance abuse treatment services. The Committee commends 
     SAMHSA for proposing additional funding to address the 
     treatment gap, but is concerned that these new resources are 
     the result of reductions in substance abuse prevention 
     activities as well as best practice programs authorized under 
     CMHS, CSAP and CSAT. The latest estimates indicate that 
     millions of Americans with serious substance abuse treatment 
     go untreated each year, adding billions in monetary costs to 
     our society and immeasurable emotional pain and suffering for 
     millions of families. Studies have shown that substance abuse 
     treatment is effective at reducing primary drug use by nearly 
     50 percent, criminal activity by 80 percent and alcohol- and 
     drug-related medical visits by 50 percent while increasing 
     individual financial self-sufficiency. Further, the Committee 
     is aware that research has shown that addiction treatment is 
     as effective as the treatment for other chronic medical 
     conditions. The Committee commends CSAT for initiating its 
     National Treatment Plan Initiative (NTP), and believes that 
     additional resources need to be devoted to the NTP and to 
     reducing, and eventually eliminating, the treatment gap.
       The Committee believes that CSAT should promote permanent 
     supportive housing as a highly effective model for ending 
     chronic homelessness. The Committee directs CSAT to collect 
     information about the amount of block grant funds devoted to 
     treatment for people who have been homeless for long periods 
     of time and have moved into permanent supportive housing. 
     This information should be included in future budget 
     submissions beginning with fiscal year 2005.
       The Committee requests that CSAT provide it with a report 
     of fiscal year 2003 funding available for treatment services 
     for Native Americans.
     Programs of regional and national significance
       The Committee recommends $310,000,000 for programs of 
     regional and national significance [PRNS]. This amount is 
     $18,617,000 above the fiscal year 2002 amount and $47,994,000 
     less than the budget request.
       Programs of regional and national significance include 
     three primary activities: best practice programs are used to 
     develop more information on how best to serve those most in 
     need; training and technical assistance supports 
     dissemination of information through knowledge development; 
     and targeted capacity expansion programs enable the agency to 
     respond to service needs in local communities.
       The Committee supports CSAT's proposed expansion of 
     clinically based treatment and related services for adult, 
     juvenile and family drug courts and individuals returning 
     from the community who are on probation, parole, or 
     unsupervised release. The Committee is aware of the rapid 
     increases in the use of drug courts throughout the country as 
     an alternative to the traditional court system. These courts 
     make substance abuse treatment available, when appropriate, 
     as an alternative to incarceration, and are considered a 
     cost-effective approach to helping drug users regain control 
     of their lives.
       The Committee continues its strong support of the grants 
     for homeless individuals program, a collaboration between 
     CSAT and CMHS addressing the substance abuse and mental 
     health treatment needs of homeless individuals. The Committee 
     notes that as many as half of homeless adults have histories 
     of alcohol abuse or dependence, one-third have histories of 
     drug abuse and one-quarter have lifetime histories of serious 
     mental illness. The Committee encourages these Centers to 
     devote as much additional funding as possible for new awards.
       Programs of regional and national significance include 
     critical support for substance abuse treatment services for 
     the Nation's homeless population. The homeless have unique 
     needs and life circumstances that have received inadequate 
     attention in terms of substance abuse treatment. Therefore, 
     the Committee continues to advocate coordinated and seamless 
     service delivery for the homeless that includes mental 
     health, primary care, and other social services that will 
     support positive treatment outcomes. The Committee 
     recommendation includes additional resources to continue to 
     make progress in this area.
       The Committee understands that methamphetamine abuse 
     continues to be a major problem in many areas of the country, 
     in particular the South and the Midwest. The State of Iowa is 
     experiencing a particularly high incidence of methamphetamine 
     abuse, as well as other emerging drug issues. The Committee 
     recommendation includes sufficient funding to support 
     prevention and treatment demonstration projects in Iowa and 
     other parts of the Midwest and South. School-based prevention 
     demonstration projects would teach the dangers of 
     methamphetamine abuse and addiction as well as other emerging 
     drug issues, using methods that are effective and evidence-
     based and include initiatives that give students the 
     responsibility to create their own anti-drug abuse education 
     programs for their schools. Treatment demonstrations would 
     carry out planning, establishing, or administering evidence-
     based treatment programs that are designed to assist 
     individuals to quit their use of methamphetamine or other 
     emerging drugs and remain drug-free.
       The Committee encourages CSAT to continue to focus new 
     resources on targeting specific treatment approaches for 
     adolescents. The Committee is aware of the lack of available 
     treatment programs specifically designed to address the needs 
     of adolescents. The Committee believes that adolescents would 
     respond more favorably to treatment services offered in such 
     a manner.
       The Committee remains concerned about the incidence of drug 
     addiction among pregnant women and has provided funding 
     within the Committee recommendation for the Residential 
     Treatment Program for Pregnant and Postpartum Women (PPW), 
     authorized under section 508 of the Public Health Service 
     Act. Within the funds appropriated for CSAT, $3,000,000 shall 
     be used for the PPW program. The Committee is particularly 
     concerned about the increased incidence of methamphetamine 
     use and urges the Secretary to fund a certain number of PPW 
     programs in areas of high methamphetamine use.
     Substance abuse prevention and treatment block grant
       The Committee recommends $1,785,000,000 for the substance 
     abuse prevention and treatment block grant, $60,000,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level and the same amount as the 
     administration's request. The recommendation includes 
     $62,200,000 in transfers available under section 241 of the 
     Public Health Service Act.
       The block grant provides funds to States to support alcohol 
     and drug abuse prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation 
     services. Funds are allocated to the States according to 
     formula. State plans must be submitted and approved annually.
       The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
     $60,000,000 for the block grant to reduce the treatment gap.
       The Children's Health Act of 2000 made several changes to 
     the authority for the substance abuse prevention and 
     treatment block grant, including the development of a 
     performance partnership framework in which States are granted 
     program flexibility for achieving a common set of performance 
     measures. The Committee expects SAMHSA to provide detailed 
     information in its fiscal year 2004 congressional 
     justification about the transition to the performance 
     partnership grant framework and proposed funding that will 
     support this transition.


                 CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$198,011,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................152,815,000
Committee recommendation....................................183,379,000

       The Committee recommends $183,379,000 for programs to 
     prevent substance abuse, a decrease of $14,632,000 less than 
     last year's level and $30,564,000 more than the budget 
     request. This amount funds substance abuse prevention 
     programs of regional and national significance.
       The Committee is very concerned about the administration's 
     request to significantly reduce funding for prevention 
     activities. The Committee notes that prevention is a key 
     partner in the effort to reduce the treatment gap. The 
     Committee is aware that the National Drug Control Strategy 
     has established 2-year goals of reducing current use by 10 
     percent for 12- to 17-year-olds and individuals 18 years and 
     older. States and communities will be challenged to develop 
     the capacity to deliver effective substance abuse prevention 
     programs without additional resources, especially given the 
     demographic surge in youth aged 15-20 expected during the 
     current decade. The Committee recognizes that this cohort 
     exhibits the highest rates of substance abuse initiation. If 
     current rates hold steady during the current decade, this 
     cohort of individuals would cause a significant increase in 
     the treatment gap.
       The Committee is aware that CSAP's science-based model 
     programs show that prevention investments have the potential 
     to

[[Page 876]]

     reduce substance abuse rates by 25 percent. Further, delaying 
     the age of first use can slow the progression of abuse, 
     dependency and the need for treatment. The Committee also 
     notes that prevention programs reduce the risk factors that 
     are associated with later use and increase the protective 
     factors that help individuals avoid use, thus producing a 
     downward pressure on the treatment gap over the long term.
       The Committee also recognizes that prevention programs are 
     cost-effective. The Office of National Drug Control Policy 
     has shown a direct correlation between increases in drug 
     prevention investments and decreases in the prevalence of 
     drug use. Prevention programs show cost-benefit ratios in the 
     range of 8:1 to 15:1 for reduced costs in crime, school and 
     work absenteeism, as well as reduced need for and costs of 
     substance abuse treatment. Therefore, the Committee has 
     provided $30,564,000 over the budget request to continue 
     investments in the Nation's substance use prevention 
     infrastructure including the following programs: Starting 
     Early, Starting Smart, Community-Initiated Prevention 
     Intervention, FAS/FAE, Ecstasy and National Clearinghouse for 
     Alcohol and Drug Information.
     Programs of regional and national significance
       The Committee has provided $183,379,000 for programs of 
     regional and national significance [PRNS], $14,632,000 less 
     than the fiscal year 2002 amount and $30,564,000 more than 
     the administration's request. The Center for Substance Abuse 
     Prevention is the sole Federal organization with 
     responsibility for improving accessibility and quality of 
     substance abuse prevention services. Through the programs of 
     regional and national significance activity, CSAP supports: 
     development of new practice knowledge on substance abuse 
     prevention; identification of proven effective models; 
     dissemination of science-based intervention information; 
     State and community capacity-building for implementation of 
     proven effective substance abuse prevention programs; and 
     programs addressing new needs in the prevention system.
       The Committee notes the alarming increase in use and 
     availability of ecstasy and other club drugs among our 
     Nation's youth. For 2 consecutive years, ecstasy use reported 
     by 10th and 12th grade students has increased. According to 
     SAMHSA's Drug Abuse Warning Network, ecstasy-related 
     emergency room admissions in the United States increased 
     significantly from 253 in 1994 to 4,511 in 2000. The 
     Committee urges SAMHSA to pay close attention to this and 
     other emerging drug use issues and has included $5,000,000 to 
     continue and expand on the program funded last year.
       The Committee is aware of the need to strengthen fetal 
     alcohol syndrome (FAS) prevention efforts and improve service 
     delivery by ensuring that professionals in key fields are 
     knowledgeable about FAS and related birth defects, 
     particularly in high-prevalence regions. The Committee has 
     therefore included sufficient funding to support training on 
     FAS and related birth defects for professionals and students 
     in health care, education, social work, foster care, criminal 
     justice, and other relevant fields.
       The Committee notes the insufficient number of effective 
     fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effects (FAS/FAE) 
     programs in communities affected by this problem. The 
     Committee has provided sufficient funding to expand efforts 
     to identify, disseminate and implement effective FAS/FAE 
     prevention and treatment programs.
       The Committee is troubled by the recent findings of the 
     NIAAA Task Force on College Drinking. The study reveals that 
     drinking by college students age 18-24 contributes to an 
     estimated 1,400 student deaths, 500,000 injuries, and 70,000 
     cases of sexual assault or date rape each year. It also 
     estimates that more than one-fourth of college students that 
     age have driven in the past year while under the influence of 
     alcohol. The Committee commends CSAP for funding programs 
     designed to prevent alcohol problems among college students. 
     The Committee encourages CSAP to continue to enhance its work 
     in this area and to disseminate information about 
     scientifically based prevention programs that can be utilized 
     in appropriate settings. The Committee notes that two related 
     programs were added this year to the National Registry of 
     Effective Prevention Programs.
       The Committee is aware that alcohol abuse, though common on 
     many campuses, does not run rampant among all college and 
     university students, and also notes that one of the 
     challenges to reducing alcohol abuse among this population is 
     the perceived norm that everyone is doing it. Previous 
     studies have shown that most students drink moderately or 
     abstain. The Committee recognizes that the proportion of 
     nondrinkers on college campuses increased from 15 to 19 
     percent between 1993 and 1999.
       The Committee strongly supports the information 
     dissemination activities of the National Clearinghouse for 
     Alcohol and Drug Information (NCADI). Last year, the NCADI 
     website received more than 86 million hits; its radio 
     messages reached almost 52 million listeners; and it provided 
     critical support to individuals in the prevention and 
     treatment field. The Committee understands that NCADI 
     exceeded its GPRA performance targets for both the number of 
     information requests received, as well as the level of 
     customer satisfaction achieved. Therefore, the Committee 
     continues to support NCADI at no less than last year's level 
     of funding, so it can continue to serve as a one-stop source 
     for comprehensive, customer-oriented information regarding 
     substance use prevention, intervention and treatment.


                           PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

       The Committee recommends $86,467,000 for program management 
     activities of the agency, $4,925,000 less than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and $11,306,000 more than the President's 
     request. The recommendation includes $12,000,000 in transfers 
     available under section 241 of the Public Health Service Act.
       The program management activity includes resources for 
     coordinating, directing, and managing the agency's programs. 
     Program management funds support salaries, benefits, space, 
     supplies, equipment, travel, and departmental overhead 
     required to plan, supervise, and administer SAMHSA's 
     programs.
       Last year, the Committee provided $9,000,000 requested in 
     the SAMHSA budget for data collection initiatives. These 
     additional resources were requested and provided to make 
     much-needed improvements in the Drug Abuse Warning Network 
     (DAWN) and the Drug and Alcohol Services Information System 
     (DASIS.) The Committee notes that the DAWN captures 
     information from hospital emergency departments as a means of 
     tracking current trends in illicit and licit drug abuse. The 
     DASIS is the only source of national data on services 
     available for substance abuse treatment and the 
     characteristics of individuals admitted for treatment. The 
     Committee is disappointed that funds required to sustain 
     these improvements were eliminated from the SAMHSA budget.
       The Committee notes that only 36 percent of targets for 
     fiscal year 2001 had reported data upon release of the Final 
     Fiscal Year 2003 GPRA Annual Performance Plan and fiscal year 
     2001 Annual Performance Report. The Committee expects that 
     SAMHSA will continue to improve the quality and timeliness of 
     data required for compliance with GPRA.
       The Committee has recommended additional resources for the 
     program management account above the budget request, to 
     continue support for critical investments in data collection 
     activities, to support technical assistance to States as the 
     block grants are transitioned to performance partnerships and 
     to restore excessive reductions proposed in staff and 
     associated expenses.
       The Committee also recommends $955,000 for Federally owned 
     facilities at St. Elizabeths Hospital. The budget request did 
     not include funds for this purpose. The funds will pay for 
     day-to-day protection and maintenance, environmental 
     remediation, historic and archaeological studies, and 
     cemetery clock tower maintenance. These activities are 
     necessary to prepare the facilities for transfer to the 
     General Services Administration as excess property.

               Agency For Healthcare Research and Quality

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$298,745,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................250,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................308,645,000

       The Committee recommends $308,645,000 for the Agency for 
     Healthcare Research and Quality [AHRQ]. This is $58,645,000 
     more than the administration request and $9,900,000 more than 
     the fiscal year 2002 level. The administration proposed to 
     fund AHRQ through transfers available under section 241 of 
     the Public Health Service Act. The Committee did not approve 
     this request.
       The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality was 
     established in 1990 to promote improvements in clinical 
     practice and patient outcomes, promote improvements in the 
     financing, organization, and delivery of health care 
     services, and increase access to quality care. AHRQ is the 
     Federal agency charged to produce and disseminate scientific 
     and policy-relevant information about the cost, quality, 
     access, and medical effectiveness of health care. AHRQ 
     provides policymakers, health care professionals, and the 
     public with the information necessary to improve cost 
     effectiveness and appropriateness of health care and to 
     reduce the costs of health care.


                  HEALTH COSTS, QUALITY, AND OUTCOMES

       The Committee provides $252,645,000 for research on health 
     costs, quality and outcomes [HCQO], which is $58,645,000 more 
     than the administration request and $5,000,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 level. HCQO research activity is focused 
     upon improving clinical practice, improving the health care 
     system's capacity to deliver quality care, and tracking 
     progress toward health goals through monitoring and 
     evaluation.
       The Committee is disappointed that the administration's 
     request for AHRQ reflected a cut of 16 percent, or almost 
     $49,000,000. This proposed cut would prevent the agency from 
     issuing any new grants or contracts, and would require 
     current, non-patient safety grants to be cut in half. AHRQ's 
     research provides crucial information to policymakers 
     regarding key health issues, such as how to improve the 
     quality of care, reduce costs, eliminate health disparities, 
     and translate the medical discoveries made at

[[Page 877]]

     the National Institutes of Health into improved health care 
     services for all Americans. Examples of research supported by 
     the Agency include studies showing that patients who take 
     beta blockers prior to bypass surgery have improved survival 
     rates, that newer antidepressants are equally as effective as 
     older medication in the treatment of depression, and that 
     African-American Medicare beneficiaries are far less likely 
     than white beneficiaries to receive flu shots. The Committee 
     believes that the health systems research sponsored by AHRQ 
     is an important complement to the biomedical research 
     performed at NIH, and is committed to ensuring that 
     sufficient funding exists for this type of research.
       The Committee is also concerned that the administration has 
     proposed transferring $10,000,000 from AHRQ to the Department 
     of Commerce for the Current Population Survey. While the 
     Committee supports improvements to the CPS, it is displeased 
     that the administration has chosen to fund this activity from 
     an agency with such a small budget. The Committee does not 
     approve the administration's proposal to shift funds to the 
     Department of Commerce, and directs that none of AHRQ's funds 
     be used or transferred for this purpose.
       The Committee notes that, as a result of funds it provided 
     3 years ago, the Agency has funded valuable research relating 
     to bioterrorism. The Committee is aware that AHRQ has 
     sponsored a web site to help primary care physicians learn 
     how to diagnose and treat bioterrorist agents such as 
     smallpox and anthrax. AHRQ also funded a ``real time'' early 
     warning system for infectious disease outbreaks developed at 
     Carnegie Mellon University, which was highlighted by 
     President Bush in February. The Committee believes that this 
     research is an integral part of efforts to ensure that our 
     health care system is prepared for a bioterrorism attack. For 
     this reason the Committee has provided AHRQ with an 
     additional $5,000,000 for bioterrorism research within the 
     Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund.
       The Committee continues to be very concerned about the 
     enormous personal and economic cost of medical errors. More 
     people die annually from medical errors than from automobile 
     accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS. During the past 2 years 
     the Committee has provided funding for initiating research 
     into the causes of medical errors in the hope of dramatically 
     improving the safety of health care services in this country. 
     For fiscal year 2003, the Committee directs AHRQ to devote 
     $60,000,000 of the total amount provided for HCQO to 
     determining ways to reduce medical errors. This represents an 
     increase of $5,000,000 over the amount provided last year. 
     The Committee understands that these funds will be used to 
     provide challenge grants to health facilities to implement 
     local safety interventions, and to develop a program to train 
     patient safety experts.
       Childhood birth defects and developmental disorders.--The 
     Committee recognizes the importance of helping children 
     suffering from birth defects and developmental disorders. 
     These include cleft lip, cleft palate, missing limbs and 
     other facial deformities from hemanjiomas, hemifacial and 
     microsomia to microtia, aural atresia, and craniosynostosis. 
     The Committee, therefore, urges the Agency to identify 
     surgical procedures and treatment protocols for congenital 
     deformities that would clearly differentiate reconstructive 
     surgery from cosmetic surgery. Also, the Committee urges the 
     Agency to commission one of its Centers for Evidence-based 
     Practice to conduct research for the development of standards 
     for the treatment of congenital deformities.
       Health disparities.--The Committee encourages the Agency to 
     carefully evaluate the analysis, findings, and 
     recommendations of the March 2002 Institute of Medicine 
     report regarding the disparities of medical care delivery to 
     minorities. In particular, the Agency should pursue creative 
     ways to address this serious finding and improve health care 
     delivery for African-Americans, those of Hispanic and Asian 
     origin, Native-Americans, Alaskans and Hawaiians.
       Mental Illness and Older Americans.--The Committee is 
     seriously concerned about the prevalence of undiagnosed and 
     untreated mental illness among older Americans. Affective 
     disorders, including depression, anxiety, dementia, and 
     substance abuse and dependence, are often misdiagnosed or not 
     recognized by primary and specialty care physicians in their 
     elderly patients. While effective treatments for these 
     conditions are available, there is an urgent need to 
     translate advancements from biomedical and behavioral 
     research to clinical practice. The Committee urges AHRQ to 
     support evidence-based research projects focused on the 
     diagnosis and treatment of mental illnesses in the geriatric 
     population, and to disseminate evidence-based reports to 
     physicians and other health care professionals.


                   MEDICAL EXPENDITURES PANEL SURVEYS

       The Committee provides $53,300,000 for health insurance and 
     medical expenditures panel surveys [MEPS], which is the same 
     as the administration request and $4,800,000 above the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. MEPS is intended to obtain timely national 
     estimates of health care use and expenditures, private and 
     public health insurance coverage, and the availability, costs 
     and scope of private health insurance benefits. It also 
     develops cost and savings estimates of proposed changes in 
     policy and identifies impact of policy changes on payers, 
     providers, and patients.
     Program support
       The Committee recommends $2,700,000 for program support. 
     This amount is the same as the administration request and is 
     $100,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level. This activity 
     supports the overall management of the Agency.

               Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services


                     Grants to States for Medicaid

Appropriations, 2002...................................$107,119,398,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................112,090,218,000
Committee recommendation................................112,090,218,000

       The Committee recommends $112,090,218,000 for Grants to 
     States for Medicaid. This amount is $4,970,820,000 more than 
     the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the same as the 
     administration's request. This amount excludes 
     $46,601,937,000 in fiscal year 2002 advance appropriations 
     for fiscal year 2003. In addition, $51,861,386,000 is 
     provided for the first quarter of fiscal year 2004, as 
     requested by the administration.
       The Medicaid program provides medical care for eligible 
     low-income individuals and families. It is administered by 
     each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, 
     and the territories. Federal funds for medical assistance are 
     made available to the States according to a formula, which 
     determines the appropriate Federal matching rate for State 
     program costs. This matching rate is based upon the State's 
     average per capita income relative to the national average, 
     and shall be no less than 50 percent and no more than 83 
     percent.


                  PAYMENTS TO HEALTH CARE TRUST FUNDS

Appropriations, 2002....................................$81,979,200,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................81,462,700,000
Committee recommendation.................................81,462,700,000

       The Committee recommends $81,462,700,000 for Federal 
     payments to health care trust funds. This amount is the same 
     as the administration's request and is a decrease of 
     $516,500,000 from the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       This entitlement account includes the general fund subsidy 
     to the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund (Medicare 
     Part B), plus other reimbursements to the Hospital Insurance 
     Trust Fund (Medicare Part A), for benefits and related 
     administrative costs that have not been financed by payroll 
     taxes or premium contributions.
       The Committee has provided $80,905,000,000 for the Federal 
     payment to the Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. 
     This payment provides matching funds for premiums paid by 
     Medicare Part B enrollees. This amount is the same as the 
     administration's request and $427,000,000 less than the 
     fiscal year 2002 amount.
       The recommendation also includes $225,000,000 for hospital 
     insurance for the uninsured. This amount is the same as the 
     administration's request and is $67,000,000 less than the 
     2002 amount.
       The Committee also recommends $168,000,000 for Federal 
     uninsured benefit payment. This payment reimburses the 
     Hospital Insurance Trust Fund for the cost of benefits 
     provided to Federal annuitants who are eligible for Medicare. 
     This amount is the same as the administration's request and 
     is $18,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       The Committee recommendation includes $164,700,000 to be 
     transferred to the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund as the 
     general fund share of CMS's program management administrative 
     expenses.


                           PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,437,083,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,507,914,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,559,664,000

       The Committee recommends $2,559,664,000 for CMS program 
     management. This is $51,750,000 more than the 
     administration's request and $122,581,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
     Research, demonstrations, and evaluations
       The Committee recommends $68,400,000 for research, 
     demonstration, and evaluation activities. This amount is 
     $48,801,000 less than the amount provided in fiscal year 2002 
     and $40,000,000 more than the administration request.
       CMS research and demonstration activities facilitate 
     informed, rational Medicare and Medicaid policy choices and 
     decision making. These studies and evaluations include 
     projects to measure the impact of Medicare and Medicaid 
     policy analysis and decision making, to measure the impact of 
     Medicare and Medicaid on health care costs, to measure 
     patient outcomes in a variety of treatment settings, and to 
     develop alternative strategies for reimbursement, coverage, 
     and program management.
       The Committee has included $40,000,000 for Real Choice 
     Systems Change Grants to States to fund initiatives that 
     establish specific actions steps and timetables to achieve

[[Page 878]]

     enduring system improvements and to provide long term 
     services and supports, including community-based attendant 
     care, to eligible individuals in the most integrated setting 
     appropriate. Grant applications should be developed jointly 
     by the State and Consumer Task Force. The Task Force should 
     be composed of individuals with disabilities, consumers of 
     long-term care services and supports, and those who advocate 
     on behalf of such individuals. Grant funded activities should 
     focus on the following areas of need as determined by the 
     States and the Task Force: community-integrated personal 
     assistance services, building quality infrastructures for 
     community-based long term care systems, enabling integrated 
     long term support services to follow the individual across 
     settings in a manner that permits as much participant 
     direction as possible, developing innovative methods to 
     address direct service worker shortages such as affordable 
     health coverage and providing respite for caregivers of 
     adults or children. These Real Choice Systems Change grants 
     funds shall remain available until expended. To assure the 
     sufficient time to promote enduring systems change, grantees 
     will be allowed to utilize the funds over a 3-year period.
       The recommended funding level for the research and 
     demonstration program will provide for continuation of 
     current activities. Priority areas for CMS research include 
     access to high-quality health care, health service delivery 
     systems, and provider payment systems. The Committee 
     encourages CMS to consider a demonstration project to extend 
     and expand islet cell transplantation clinical trials.
     Medicare operations
       The Committee recommends $1,680,084,000 for Medicare 
     operations (formerly known as Medicare contractors), which is 
     $5,000,000 more than the budget request and $146,084,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. In addition, 
     $720,000,000 is available for the Medicare Integrity Program 
     within the mandatory budget as part of the health insurance 
     reform legislation.
       The Medicare operations line item covers a broad range of 
     activities including claims processing and program safeguard 
     activities performed by Medicare contractors. These 
     contractors also provide information, guidance, and technical 
     support to both providers and beneficiaries. In addition, 
     this line item includes a variety of projects that extend 
     beyond the traditional fee-for-service arena.
       The Committee recommends no less than $12,500,000 to 
     support grants for State Health Insurance Counseling and 
     Assistance programs (SHIPs). SHIPS provide information, 
     counseling and decision support to people with Medicare.
       Medicare contractors partner with the Federal Government to 
     administer the Medicare fee-for-service program. Contractors 
     pay claims, provide beneficiary and provider customer service 
     and education, and combat Medicare waste, fraud and abuse. 
     The Committee believes that it is critical for Medicare 
     contractors to be adequately funded. It is for this reason 
     that the Committee has continued to increase Medicare 
     contractor funding over the years. However, the Committee is 
     concerned that the funding appropriated for Medicare 
     contractor activities is not being appropriately distributed 
     by CMS to its Medicare contractors. The Committee expects CMS 
     to manage these resources so that Medicare contractors have 
     the funding needed to handle total workloads, which are 
     steadily increasing. The Committee also expects funding to be 
     provided to Medicare contractors in a timely manner. Further, 
     the Committee strongly recommends CMS eliminate the 5 percent 
     cap on transferring funds among functions so that contractors 
     have greater flexibility to manage their resources in a 
     manner that best matches programmatic needs. The Committee 
     expects CMS to include, within its fiscal year 2004 
     congressional justification, a report on how fiscal year 2003 
     resources were allocated to Medicare contractors.
     State survey and certification
       Survey and certification activities ensure that 
     institutions and agencies providing care to Medicare and 
     Medicaid beneficiaries meet Federal health, safety, and 
     program standards. On-site surveys are conducted by State 
     survey agencies, with a pool of Federal surveyors performing 
     random monitoring surveys.
       The Committee recommends $254,397,000 for Medicare State 
     survey and certification activities, an increase of 
     $6,750,000 over the budget request and the same as the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. The Committee understands that this level of 
     effort will be supplemented by support contracts funded by 
     the Quality Improvement Organization (formerly the Peer 
     Review Organization) activity; this will bring the program 
     level for survey and certification activities to $271,297,000 
     for fiscal year 2003, a real increase of $16,900,000 over the 
     fiscal year 2002 level.
     Federal administration
       The Committee recommends $556,783,000 for Federal 
     administration costs, the same as the administration's 
     request. The Committee recommendation is $25,298,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       This funding level will support 4,476 full-time equivalent 
     positions, a decrease of 93 from the fiscal year 2002 
     adjusted level. Most of the increase is for fixed expenses of 
     personnel compensation and benefits.
       The Committee has been very pleased with the efforts of CMS 
     under its demonstration authority to address the 
     extraordinary adverse health status of Native Hawaiians in 
     Waimanalo, Hawaii. The Committee urges an additional focus 
     upon American Samoan residents in that geographical area 
     utilizing the expertise of the Waimanalo Health Center and 
     its Mauli Ola program.
       The Committee continues to support and invest in the 
     enhanced quality of care for seniors. The Committee strongly 
     urges the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement 
     the MedPAC's recommendation to assess contemporary models for 
     pharmacists' services to ensure that seniors have access to 
     this important patient care. The Committee urges the 
     Secretary to consult with various national organizations 
     representing pharmacists and pharmacies and to report back to 
     Congress within this fiscal year.
       The Committee remains extremely concerned over CMS' 
     continuing failure to articulate clear guidelines and to set 
     expeditious timetables for consideration of new technologies, 
     procedures and products for Medicare coverage. A particularly 
     troubling example is CMS' lengthy delays and failure to 
     articulate clear standards regarding Medicare coverage of 
     positron emission tomography (PET). The effect of these 
     delays in instituting Medicare coverage is to continue to 
     deny the benefits to these technologies and procedures to 
     Medicare patients. The Committee also remains concerned that 
     CMS appears to be requiring some new technologies to repeat 
     clinical trials and testing that have already gained FDA 
     approval. The Committee is also concerned that CMS appears to 
     be requiring substantially different levels of evidence to 
     approve various new products for Medicare coverage. For 
     example, very little documentation is required for approval 
     of magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), while voluminous 
     amounts of data are required to make a coverage decision on 
     PET. The Committee remains concerned that the 120-person 
     Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee may be further delaying 
     coverage decisions and creating unnecessary costs for the 
     Medicare program. These include the commissioning of studies 
     that are not based on sound, established scientific 
     principles. Because of the possible duplication of efforts 
     among HHS agencies and related unnecessary costs to the 
     Medicare program and the Department, the Committee again asks 
     that the Secretary take a leadership role in resolving this 
     matter expeditiously.
       The Committee is aware of the joint activities of CMS and 
     HRSA to improve access to medical and dental care for mothers 
     and children in underserved populations. CMS and the Maternal 
     and Child Health program at HRSA, have worked together to 
     assist States to reduce barriers to care for Medicaid and 
     SCHIP populations for maternal and child health care 
     including oral health care. The Committee urges these 
     agencies to continue their partnership and expand support for 
     State oral health systems grants and innovative demonstration 
     projects for the prevention and early intervention of dental 
     diseases in young children, State dental access summit 
     meetings, and the National Maternal and Child Oral Health 
     Resource Center. The Committee recognizes that such agency 
     collaborations are instrumental for providing coordinated 
     services that do not duplicate limited resources.
       The Committee is concerned that CMS has not updated its 
     state guidance document on dental care for Medicaid-eligible 
     children in over 20 years. The Committee is aware that CMS 
     has commissioned and received an update of The Early and 
     Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment (EPSDT) guide 
     from the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. This 
     document is vital to ensuring that the states correctly 
     implement EPSDT dental requirements and provide full coverage 
     for all eligible children. Furthermore, the guidance will 
     help states improve access to dental care by providing a 
     better understanding of the dental workforce and financing 
     system. The Committee strongly urges CMS to release a revised 
     state guidance manual on dental care under the Medicaid/EPSDT 
     program before February 28, 2003.
       The Committee expects the Secretary to issue ``L'' Codes 
     based on fair and reasonable reimbursement levels to cover 
     Total Body Orthotic Management for Non-Ambulatory severely 
     disabled nursing home residents. Such treatment will be a 
     medically prescribed device consisting of custom fitted 
     individual braces with adjustable joints designed to improve 
     function, retard progression of musculoskeletal deformity, or 
     to restrict, eliminate or assist in the functioning of lower 
     and upper extremities, pelvic, spinal, and cervical regions 
     of the body. Such device will consist of individually 
     adjustable braces that are attached to a frame which is an 
     integral component of the device, and for which the 
     individual braces cannot function or be used apart from the 
     frame. This responds to a long-standing Committee concern 
     about an unintended consequence of HCFA Ruling 96-1. While 
     designed to crack down on fraud and abuse in the DME market

[[Page 879]]

     on Part B Medicare reimbursement, this ruling also denied a 
     highly specialized whole body orthotic treatment that 
     dramatically improves the medical condition and quality of 
     life for some severely disabled Medicare beneficiaries under 
     full time care in nursing facilities. The Committee notes the 
     May 2002, congressionally authorized GAO report entitled 
     ``Orthotics Ruling Has Implications for Beneficiary Access 
     and Federal and State Costs'' that identifies a substantial 
     nursing home population that has been denied this care as a 
     result of 96-1, but recommends that a restoration of such 
     care be accompanied by appropriate controls, consistent with 
     those established for existing ``L'' codes, that protect the 
     integrity of the Medicare Program. The committee recognizes 
     the need for these controls, but at the same time notes that 
     beneficiaries have been without this treatment for over 5 
     years and urges CMS to expeditiously re-establish 
     reimbursement measures for these services.
       The Committee directs the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services to review the Medicare Geographic Classification 
     Review Board's criteria for reclassification determinations 
     with respect to making payments to hospitals. The Committee 
     requests the review to include a detailed analysis of 
     disparities among hospital's reimbursement rates for 
     hospitals in metropolitan statistical areas that border on 
     areas that have a higher wage indices; the difficulty 
     hospitals face in losing skilled medical personnel to 
     neighboring areas with urban classifications and higher wage 
     and salary structures; geographic and environmental 
     impediments to traditional community routes; the base costs 
     on which the wage index is applied; and the affect lower wage 
     indices have on the quality of care. The Committee directs 
     the Secretary to report to the Committee no later than 
     February 28, 2003.
       The Committee requests that the Secretary conduct a 
     comprehensive study of current literature and best practices 
     to determine the cost-effectiveness and impact on medical 
     outcomes of behavioral-based weight loss services in 
     conjunction with the nutritional therapy benefit. The 
     Committee directs the study to include assessment of group-
     based weight loss management services and the proper 
     qualifications of individuals to conduct such programs, 
     including those trained to provide such programs that have 
     completed clinical trials and have demonstrated their 
     efficacy through publications in peer-reviewed scientific 
     journals, to produce and maintain weight loss.
       The Committee understands that concerns have been raised 
     about Medicare reimbursement rules for certain anemia drugs 
     under the Outpatient Prospective Payment program. The 
     Committee therefore directs the Administrator of the Centers 
     for Medicare and Medicaid Services to conduct a study 
     examining claims data from hospitals and physicians to 
     determine comparable dosage of biologicals used for the 
     treatment of anemia in cancer patients. This study shall be 
     completed and submitted to the Secretary of the Department of 
     Health and Human Services and the Committee on Appropriations 
     no later than April 1, 2003.

                Administration for Children and Families


  PAYMENTS TO STATES FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AND FAMILY SUPPORT 
                                PROGRAMS

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,536,313,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,416,800,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,475,800,000

       The Committee recommends that $2,475,800,000 be made 
     available in fiscal year 2003 for payments to States for 
     child support enforcement and family support programs. The 
     Committee recommendation provides the full amount requested 
     under current law. The budget request includes savings of 
     $59,000,000 based on proposed legislation.
       These payments support the States' efforts to promote the 
     self-sufficiency and economic security of low-income 
     families. These funds also support efforts to locate 
     noncustodial parents, determine paternity when necessary, and 
     establish and enforce orders of support. The appropriation, 
     when combined with the $1,100,000,000 in advance funding 
     provided in last year's bill and an estimated $461,000,000 
     from offsetting collections, supports a program level of 
     $4,036,800,000.
       The Committee also has provided $1,100,000,000 in advance 
     funding for the first quarter of fiscal year 2004 for the 
     child support enforcement program, the same as the budget 
     request.


               low-income home energy assistance program

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,000,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,700,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,700,000,000

       The Committee recommendation for LIHEAP is $1,700,000,000. 
     LIHEAP is made up of two components: the State grant program 
     and the contingency fund. The recommended amount for the 
     State grant program is $300,000,000 more than the 
     administration request and the same amount as last year. 
     However, due to tight budget constraints and the current 
     availability of $300,000,000 in the contingency fund, the 
     Committee does not recommend any additional funds for this 
     purpose. The administration requested $300,000,000.
       LIHEAP grants are awarded to States, territories, Indian 
     tribes and tribal organizations to assist low-income 
     households in meeting the costs of home energy. States 
     receive great flexibility in how they provide assistance, 
     including direct payments to individuals and vendors and 
     direct provision of fuel.
       The Committee recommendation includes $1,700,000,000 for 
     the State grant program, the same amount as last year's 
     funding level and $300,000,000 more than the amount requested 
     by the administration. These resources are distributed by 
     formula to States, territories, Indian tribes and tribal 
     organizations defined by statute, based in part on each 
     State's share of home energy expenditures by low-income 
     households nationwide.
       The Committee recommendation does not include $300,000,000 
     in additional resources for the contingency fund as requested 
     by the administration. The contingency fund may be used to 
     provide assistance to one or more States adversely affected 
     by extreme heat or cold, significant price increases or other 
     causes of energy-related emergencies. The Committee notes 
     that $300,000,000 in no-year funding is available currently 
     in the contingency fund. The Committee is committed to 
     ensuring that sufficient resources are available in the fund, 
     to provide additional assistance to households with energy 
     burdens not met by the regular program and meet the 
     objectives of the authorizing statute. The Committee intends 
     to monitor the availability of resources in the contingency 
     fund and will consider future action, as needed, in 
     subsequent appropriations bills.
       The Committee is disappointed by the unwillingness of the 
     administration to release any or all of the $300,000,000 in 
     contingency funding currently available. The Committee notes 
     that in the Statement of the Managers accompanying the 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 107-20) the 
     conferees encouraged the administration to release 
     contingency funds provided by this Act due to the pressing 
     additional energy assistance needs of millions of eligible 
     families. The Committee again notes that the authorizing 
     statute states that the contingency fund was authorized to 
     meet the additional home energy assistance needs of one or 
     more States arising from a natural disaster or other 
     emergency, as defined in section 2603(1)(A-G), which includes 
     six other factors not related to weather or natural 
     disasters.
       The Committee is aware of data that has been reported over 
     the past 4 months that show the definition of emergency has 
     been met in many States. The Committee directs the Department 
     to provide a report within 60 days after the enactment of 
     this bill identifying the sources of data used for 
     considering release of contingency funds for each of the 
     parts of the emergency definition.
       The Committee encourages the Department to work with 
     appropriate agencies and associations to make sure data is 
     available to administer this program, and in particular, make 
     decisions about release of contingency funding.
       The Committee intends that up to $27,500,000 of the amount 
     recommended for LIHEAP for fiscal year 2003 be used for the 
     leveraging incentive fund. The fund will provide a percentage 
     match to States for private or non-Federal public resources 
     allocated to low-income home energy benefits.


                     refugee and entrant assistance

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$460,195,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................452,724,000
Committee recommendation....................................442,724,000

       The Committee recommends $442,724,000 for refugee and 
     entrant assistance, $17,471,000 less than the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $10,000,000 less than the budget request.
       Based on an estimated refugee admission ceiling of 75,000, 
     this appropriation, together with prior-year funds available 
     for fiscal year 2003 expenses, will enable States to continue 
     to provide at least 8 months of cash and medical assistance 
     to eligible refugees and entrants, a variety of social and 
     educational services, as well as foster care for refugee and 
     entrant unaccompanied minors.
       The Committee is committed to ensuring that the American 
     public is safe and not exposed to potential security risks. 
     However, the Committee also is concerned about the additional 
     hardships imposed on individuals fleeing their homes from 
     civil strife, persecution, and torture as they await 
     additional security procedures in potentially dangerous 
     temporary locations and refugee camps. As a result of these 
     delays, almost 40,000 refugees under the admissions ceiling 
     for fiscal year 2002 were not allowed to resettle in the 
     United States. These unused slots resulted in fewer 
     transitional, medical and support services provided than 
     estimated under the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, so some 
     savings exist in these programs. Given the tremendous 
     budgetary pressure on the Committee this year, the Committee 
     recommends a small reduction of $10,000,000 in these programs 
     for fiscal year 2003. The Committee recommendation will not 
     affect the ability of programs to meet fully the demand for 
     services under the fiscal year 2003 admissions ceiling, as 
     sufficient carryover funds are available to offset the 
     proposed reduction. The Committee intends to closely monitor 
     the situation to ensure that sufficient funding is available 
     to meet the critical needs of

[[Page 880]]

     individuals fleeing persecution throughout the world.
       The Refugee and Entrant Assistance Program is designed to 
     assist States in their efforts to assimilate refugees, 
     asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants, and adults and minors 
     who are trafficking victims, into American society as quickly 
     and effectively as possible. The program funds State-
     administered transitional and medical assistance, the 
     voluntary agency matching grant program, programs for victims 
     of trafficking and torture, employment and social services, 
     targeted assistance, and preventive health.
       In order to carry out the refugee and entrant assistance 
     program, the Committee recommends $221,291,000 for 
     transitional and medical assistance, including State 
     administration and the voluntary agency program; $10,000,000 
     for victims of trafficking; $147,121,000 for social services; 
     $4,835,000 for preventive health; and $49,477,000 for 
     targeted assistance.
       Section 412(a)(7) of title IV of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act authorizes the use of funds appropriated 
     under this account to be used to carry out monitoring, 
     evaluation, and data collection activities to determine the 
     effectiveness of funded programs and to monitor the 
     performance of States and other grantees.
       The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to treat and assist 
     victims of torture. These funds may also be used to provide 
     training to healthcare providers to enable them to treat the 
     physical and psychological effects of torture. The Committee 
     acknowledges that well-established treatment centers, such as 
     the Center for Victims of Torture, have developed the 
     knowledge base that has fostered growth of treatment 
     facilities around the country and strengthened treatment 
     services generally. This positive trend may continue if 
     leading centers are able to expand their staffs to create 
     more trainers and improve evaluation and research needed to 
     guide and develop new programs.


                 child care and development block grant

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,099,976,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,099,994,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,099,994,000

       The Committee recommendation provides $2,099,994,000 for 
     the child care and development block grant, $18,000 more than 
     last year and the same as the budget request.
       The child care and development block grant supports grants 
     to States to provide low-income families with financial 
     assistance for child care; for improving the quality and 
     availability of child care; and for establishing or expanding 
     child development programs. The funds are used to both expand 
     the services provided to individuals who need child care in 
     order to work or attend job training or education and allow 
     States to continue funding the activities previously provided 
     under the consolidated programs.
       The Committee is aware that the authorization for the child 
     care and development block grant program expired on September 
     30, 2002. The block grant was last reauthorized in 1996 as 
     part of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
     Reconciliation Act. The Act established the child care and 
     development fund, which consists of mandatory funding 
     provided under the Social Security Act and discretionary 
     funding supported by annual appropriations under the child 
     care and development block grant program.
       The Committee believes that significant increases in 
     mandatory funding for child care should be supported by the 
     reauthorization of the Welfare Reform law to pay for 
     additional work requirements and to respond to the needs of 
     low income, working poor families. The Welfare Reform law 
     established policies that have resulted in a significant 
     increase in the working Americans. Work requirements have 
     decreased the welfare casesload by 1.8 million families from 
     1996-1999, many of whom are not earning a living wage and are 
     in need of assistance. The share of families working or 
     participating in work-related activities while receiving TANF 
     also grew significantly; by fiscal year 1999, nearly 900,000 
     TANF parents were employed or engaged in work activities. 
     Also, there has been a large increase in labor force 
     participation by low income single parents, which includes 
     many families not previously connected to the labor force; 
     between 1996 and 1999, the number of employed single mothers 
     grew from 1.8 million to 2.7 million.
       The Committee recommendation continues specific earmarks in 
     appropriations language, also included in the budget request, 
     that provide targeted resources to specific policy priorities 
     including $19,120,000 for the purposes of supporting resource 
     and referral programs and before and afterschool services. 
     This represents the Federal commitment to the activities 
     previously funded under the dependent care block grant. The 
     Committee expects that these funds will not supplant current 
     funding dedicated to resource and referral and school age 
     activities provided by the child care and development block 
     grant. The Committee strongly encourages States to address 
     the matters of before and afterschool care and the 
     establishment of resource and referral programs with the 
     funds provided in this program.
       The Committee recommendation includes an additional 
     $272,672,000 for child care quality activities, and sets 
     aside $100,000,000 specifically for an infant care quality 
     initiative. These funds are recommended in addition to the 4 
     percent quality earmark established in the authorizing 
     legislation. The Committee has provided these additional 
     quality funds because of the considerable research that 
     demonstrates the importance of serving children in high 
     quality child care settings which include nurturing providers 
     who are educated in child development and adequately 
     compensated. While considerable progress has been made, the 
     Committee believes States should continue to invest in 
     education and training linked to compensation of the child 
     care workforce in order to improve the overall quality of 
     child care.
       The Committee recommendation also provides $10,000,000 for 
     child care research, demonstration and evaluation activities.
       The Committee recommendation for resource and referral 
     activities also includes $1,000,000 to continue support for 
     the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral 
     Agencies' information service, Child Care Aware, the national 
     toll-free information hotline which links families to local 
     child care services and programs. Funds also were requested 
     in the budget request for this purpose.


                      social services block grant

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,700,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,700,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,700,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,700,000,000 
     for the social services block grant. The recommendation is 
     the same amount as the budget request and 2002 enacted level.
       The Committee has included bill language that allows States 
     to transfer up to 10 percent of their annual allocations 
     under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families to the 
     Social Services Block Grant program. Under the budget 
     request, States would be limited to transfers of up to 4.25 
     percent for fiscal year 2003. The Committee recognizes that 
     the block grant is a vital source of support for many 
     vulnerable children and families, the elderly and single 
     adults and continues to support this important State 
     flexibility.


                children and families services programs

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$8,428,574,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................8,593,364,000
Committee recommendation..................................8,654,884,000

       The Committee recommends a funding level of of 
     $8,654,884,000 for children and families services programs. 
     The recommendation includes $6,000,000 in transfers available 
     under section 241 of the Public Health Service Act. The 
     recommendation is $226,310,000 more than the comparable 
     fiscal year 2002 funding level and $61,520,000 more than the 
     budget request.
       This appropriation provides funding for programs for 
     children, youth, and families, the developmentally disabled, 
     and Native Americans, as well as Federal administrative 
     costs.
     Head Start
       Head Start provides comprehensive development services for 
     low-income children and families, emphasizing cognitive and 
     language development, socioemotional development, physical 
     and mental health, and parent involvement to enable each 
     child to develop and function at his or her highest 
     potential. At least 10 percent of enrollment opportunities in 
     each State are made available to children with disabilities.
       The Committee recommends $6,667,533,000 for the Head Start 
     Program, an increase of $129,893,000 more than the comparable 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the same as the budget request. 
     The Committee recommendations includes $1,400,000,000 in 
     advance funding that will become available on October 1, 
     2003.
       The Committee is aware that the Department's recently-
     released 7-year national evaluation of the Federal Early Head 
     Start program found that 3-year-old children completing the 
     program performed better in cognitive and language 
     development than children not participating in the program. 
     Further, the study found that children completing Early Head 
     Start achieved gains on standardized tests of cognitive and 
     language development, may need fewer special learning 
     interventions later on, and performed better on critical 
     social-emotional tasks, such as relating to their parents, 
     paying attention and behaving appropriately. The study also 
     found that Early Head Start parents were more likely to read 
     to their children, be emotionally supportive, help with 
     language development and show positive parenting behavior. 
     Early Head Start parents also participated more in education 
     and employment-related activities. These findings justify the 
     Committee's efforts to increase funding for the Early Head 
     Start program, to ensure that more eligible children 
     participate in this important and effective program.
       The Committee is impressed by the most recent Family and 
     Child Experience Survey (FACES) data released last month. The 
     Committee notes that the findings reveal that as they had in 
     1997-1998, Head Start children showed significant gains in 
     vocabulary skills in 2000-2001 against national norms; Head 
     Start children showed modestly larger gains

[[Page 881]]

     in letter recognition skills in 2000-2001 than they had in 
     1997-1998; Head Start graduates showed gains in social 
     skills, including improvements in interaction and complex 
     play and Head Start classroom quality remained in the 
     ``Good'' range in the Early Childhood Education Rating Scale 
     and Assessment Profiles in 2000, as they were in 1997. These 
     findings support the significant investments that the 
     Committee has supported for the Head Start program.
       However, the Committee is concerned that the 
     congressionally-mandated National Impact Study of Head Start 
     has not been completed and encourages the ACF to move forward 
     and complete this important study. The National Impact Study 
     was mandated by Congress to be completed by 2003.
       The Committee understands the serious need for additional 
     and expanded Head Start facilities among native American 
     populations and in rural areas. The Committee believes that 
     the Department could help serve these needy communities by 
     providing minor construction funding, as authorized, in 
     remote native American communities.
       The Committee is aware of the unique circumstances rural 
     areas face in designing Early Head Start programs to meet the 
     needs of families. Rural areas experience higher costs per 
     child, either due to the higher cost of transporting infants 
     and children to Early Head Start Centers, or because of 
     higher rents due to the lack of adequate and licensable 
     facilities in rural areas. In selecting new grantees under 
     this program, the Committee believes the Department should 
     give consideration to applicants serving rural areas that 
     meet or exceed all performance criteria even though they may 
     propose a higher cost per child due to these factors.
       The Committee is aware that, in fiscal year 2002, 
     approximately $40,000,000 in quality improvement Head Start 
     funding was available to improve staff salaries and support 
     professional development. This commitment of funding has 
     helped increase both teacher compensation and retention rates 
     among Head Start staff. The Committee expects the Department 
     to continue to focus quality improvement efforts on improving 
     Head Start teacher compensation such that teacher salaries 
     more equitably reflect educational level and experience.
       The Committee strongly supports the effort to strengthen 
     the qualifications of Head Start teachers. At least 50 
     percent of teachers in center-based Head Start programs must 
     have an associate, baccalaureate, or advanced degree in early 
     childhood education or a degree in a related field, with 
     experience in teaching preschool children, by September 30, 
     2003. The Committee expects the Department to focus staff 
     development efforts on increasing the educational level of 
     Head Start teachers in order to meet this goal.
       The Head Start Act contemplates services to low-income 
     children and their families. The law does not, however, 
     prescribe age requirements for Head Start participation, 
     short of limiting enrollment to children ``who have not yet 
     reached the age of compulsory school attendance.'' Despite 
     this fact, Head Start has traditionally served children in 
     their years immediately prior to their entering into 
     kindergarten. With States and localities increasing their 
     investments in preschool services, local Head Start programs 
     have been presented with not only an opportunity, but a need 
     to serve infants and toddlers in their years proven to be the 
     most formative in recently publicized brain research 
     developmental studies.
       Accordingly, the Committee encourages the Department of 
     Health and Human Services to support efforts by local Head 
     Start programs to use grant funds to deliver quality services 
     to the infant and toddler population where a community 
     assessment evidences a need for such services and the local 
     program has the capacity to meet that need. The Committee 
     supports this expansion in response to changing local 
     community needs, separate and apart from the new grant 
     process under the Early Head Start program created as part of 
     the 1994 Head Start reauthorization. When combined with the 
     new grant authority for Early Head Start which flows from 
     increased appropriations annually, expansion of existing 
     preschool programs to serve infants and toddlers is 
     particularly responsive to research emphasizing the 
     developmental needs of our youngest children--needs which can 
     be ably addressed through the Head Start model of 
     comprehensive services.
       The Committee commends the Department for its focus on 
     prevention as a key to improving the overall health and well-
     being of our Nation. The Committee also recognizes the 
     importance of good nutrition and physical activity among 
     young children for developing a fertile atmosphere for 
     cognitive development and school readiness. According to the 
     Nutrition Cognition National Advisory Committee at Tufts 
     University in Massachusetts, children without an adequate 
     diet may have trouble concentrating in school, participating 
     in play, bonding with peers, and performing at their 
     potential.
       Therefore, the Committee urges the Head Start Bureau to 
     review the scope of good nutrition and physical activities 
     which are presently being undertaken in response to the Head 
     Start Performance Standards, as well as the current knowledge 
     base on good nutrition and physical activities for young 
     children. Further, the Committee urges the Head Start Bureau 
     to review the activities presently being undertaken by local 
     programs to promote healthy bodies as a prerequisite for 
     strong minds and to identify best practices currently 
     employed by local programs. As a follow up, the Committee 
     encourages the Head Start Bureau, in collaboration with the 
     National Head Start Association, to devise a plan for 
     implementing a locally-determined but coordinated effort to 
     achieve the goals of a stronger, more vibrant and effective 
     nutritional and physical activity component within Head Start 
     programs. The Committee expects that the Head Start Bureau 
     will enter into a cooperative agreement with the National 
     Head Start Association to carry out these activities.
       The Senate is currently considering the reauthorization of 
     the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Act, in 
     order to assist individuals to secure gainful employment and 
     help families to gain self-sufficiency in the new economy. As 
     a result of the 1996 enactment of welfare reform, families 
     previously eligible for Head Start services based on their 
     low-income status have found themselves marginally exceeding 
     those income limitations and, therefore, losing access to 
     Head Start services for their children. The Committee 
     recognizes that Head Start does not serve all income-eligible 
     children and their families in the country. Nonetheless, 
     while eligibility for other programs is sensitive to regional 
     disparities in income, Head Start eligibility is not. It is 
     clear that an inner-city family's expenses with respect to 
     food, housing and medical needs are different from those of a 
     rural family, while a rural family's transportation needs, 
     for one, may well outpace similar needs for their urban 
     neighbors. Eligibility requirements should reflect this 
     difference. Current law gives the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services authority to permit the enrollment of a 
     ``reasonable number'' of over-income families in Head Start. 
     In a welfare-reformed era, families may find their income 
     marginally exceeding national poverty guidelines, while their 
     need for quality early childhood programming is even more 
     pronounced. The Committee encourages the Secretary to permit 
     local programs to best address local community needs in these 
     changing times, but encourages flexibility which does not 
     deny services to the neediest of the needy. The Committee 
     encourages the Secretary to exercise his authority, as 
     appropriate, to permit the enrollment of over-income children 
     and their families in up to 25 percent of program placements, 
     so long as services are not denied to income-eligible 
     children and families as a result of this flexibility.
       The Committee is aware that the Department's ``Descriptive 
     Study of Seasonal Farmworker Families'' published in 
     September 2001 revealed that just 19 percent of eligible 
     children of migrant and seasonal farmworkers are served by 
     Migrant Head Start programs. The study also concluded ``that 
     Migrant Head Start agencies greatly improve the lives of 
     migrant and seasonal farmworker families, and in doing so, 
     help to strengthen local agricultural economies.'' The 
     Committee urges the Head Start Bureau to provide an increase 
     in funding for Migrant Head Start programs proportionate to 
     the overall increase in the Head Start appropriation.
       The Committee is aware of efforts currently being 
     undertaken to improve pre-literacy skills in Head Start 
     children and lauds the administration for its commitment to 
     this effort. However, the Committee cautions against anything 
     that would detract from the comprehensive nature of the 
     program in delivering early childhood development and family 
     services. While school readiness is front and center in the 
     goals of Head Start, the elements necessary to achieve that 
     readiness range from adequate nutrition and health screening 
     to social and emotional development and family building as 
     well as the cognitive growth of young children.
       The Committee encourages the Department to ensure that in 
     securing pre-literacy training and technical assistance for 
     Head Start grantees, every reasonable effort is made to use 
     competitive procedures in securing private sector service 
     providers to assist in completing the Head Start mission.
       The Committee is aware that the goal of the Head Start 
     program is to ensure the social competence and school 
     readiness of children upon completion of the program. The 
     Committee expects the Department to continue to promote 
     learning and brain development to accelerate and improve the 
     cognitive development of Head Start children. The Committee 
     expects the Department to monitor Head Start programs to 
     ensure that a majority of children participating in Head 
     Start programs meet the minimum educational performance 
     measures and standards upon completion of the program as 
     outlined in the Head Start Act, as amended in 1998.
       The TCU/Head Start partnership has made a lasting 
     investment in our Indian communities by creating associate 
     degree programs in Early Childhood Development and related 
     fields. New graduates of these programs can help meet the 
     Congressional mandate that 50

[[Page 882]]

     percent of all program teachers earn an Associate Degree in 
     Early Childhood Development or a related discipline by 2003. 
     One clear impediment to the on-going success of this 
     partnership program is the decrease in discretionary funding 
     being targeted for the TCU/Head Start partnership. The 
     Committee urges the Head Start Bureau to direct sufficient 
     funding to allow current grantees to extend their programs 
     for two additional years and to ensure that this vital 
     program can continue and be expanded to serve all tribal 
     college communities.
     Consolidated runaway and homeless youth program
       The Committee recommends $93,000,000 for this program, an 
     increase of $4,898,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level 
     and $4,867,000 more than the administration request. The 
     Committee recommends $41,800,000 for transitional living 
     programs and $51,200,000 for basic centers.
       This program addresses the crisis needs of runaway and 
     homeless youth and their families through support to local 
     and State governments and private agencies. Basic centers and 
     transitional living programs help address the needs of some 
     of the estimated 300,000 homeless youth, many of whom are 
     running away from unsafe or unhealthy living environments. 
     These programs have been proven effective at supporting 
     positive youth development, securing stable and safe living 
     arrangements and providing the skills required to engage in 
     positive relationships with caring adults and contribute to 
     society. The Committee looks forward to the release of 
     performance outcome data available through the new management 
     information system.
       The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act requires that not less 
     than 90 percent of the funds be allocated to States for the 
     purpose of establishing and operating community-based runaway 
     and homeless youth centers, as authorized under Parts A and B 
     of the Act. Funds are distributed on the basis of the State 
     youth population under 18 years of age in proportion to the 
     national total. The remaining 10 percent funds networking and 
     research and demonstration activities including the National 
     Toll-Free Communications Center.
       Grants are used to develop or strengthen community-based 
     programs which assist homeless youth in making a smooth 
     transition to productive adulthood and social self-
     sufficiency; and to provide technical assistance to 
     transitional living programs for the acquisition and 
     maintenance of resources and services.
       The basic centers program, authorized under Part A of the 
     Act, supports grants to community-based public and private 
     agencies for the provision of outreach, crisis intervention, 
     temporary shelter, counseling, family unification and 
     aftercare services to runaway and homeless youth and their 
     families.
       The transitional grant program (TLP) provides grants to 
     local public and private organizations to address shelter and 
     service needs of homeless youth, ages 16-21. The program's 
     goals are to have youth safe at home or in appropriate 
     alternative settings and to help them develop into 
     independent, contributing members of society.
       A homeless youth accepted into the program is eligible to 
     receive shelter and services continuously for up to 540 days. 
     The services include counseling; life skills training, such 
     as money management and housekeeping; interpersonal skill 
     building, such as decision-making and priority setting; 
     educational advancement; job preparation attainment; and 
     mental and physical health care.
       The administration has proposed $10,000,000 for a separate 
     maternity group home program. The Committee is aware of the 
     need for and shares the administration's interest in funding 
     residential services for young mothers and their children who 
     are unable to live with their own families because of abuse, 
     neglect, or other circumstances. The Committee notes that 
     pregnant and parenting youth are currently eligible for and 
     served through the TLP. The Committee commends the 
     administration for placing special emphasis on pregnant and 
     parenting youth in its fiscal year 2002 runaway and homeless 
     youth program announcement. The Committee also compliments 
     the administration for its special efforts to make the 
     maternity group home community aware of the fiscal year 2002 
     program announcement.
       The Committee also recognizes the need for and value of 
     expanding transitional living opportunities for all homeless 
     youth. Therefore, the Committee seeks to preserve the 
     flexibility afforded in current law to respond to the needs 
     of the young people who are most at-risk and in greatest need 
     of transitional living opportunities in their communities by 
     providing additional resources to the existing portfolio of 
     consolidated runaway and homeless youth act programs.
       It is the Committee's expectation that current and future 
     TLP grantees will continue to provide transitional living 
     opportunities and supports to pregnant and parenting homeless 
     youth, as is their current practice. To further ensure that 
     pregnant and parenting homeless youth are able to access 
     transitional living opportunities and supports in their 
     communities, the Committee encourages the Secretary, acting 
     through the network of Federally-funded runaway and homeless 
     youth training and technical assistance providers, to offer 
     guidance to grantees and others on the programmatic 
     modifications required to address the unique needs of 
     pregnant and parenting youth and on the various sources of 
     funding available for residential services to this 
     population.
     Maternity group homes
       The Committee recommendation does not include $10,000,000 
     requested in the budget for the maternity group homes 
     program. The Committee has deferred action on this program 
     pending the enactment of authorizing language. Under this 
     proposed program, the ACF would provide targeted funding for 
     community-based, adult-supervised group homes for young 
     mothers and their children. These homes would provide safe, 
     stable, nurturing environments for mothers who cannot live 
     safely with their own families and assist them in moving 
     forward with their lives by providing support so they can 
     finish school, acquire job skills, and learn to be good 
     parents.
       The Committee provided a $19,000,000 increase in funding 
     last year under the transitional living program to strengthen 
     our Nation's support system for all youth in need of stable, 
     safe living accommodations and services. The Committee 
     expects the Family and Youth Services Bureau to continue to 
     provide the technical assistance needed to enable TLP 
     grantees and their community partners to address the unique 
     needs of young mothers and their children, as well as helping 
     interested entities in identifying sources of funding 
     currently available to provide residential services to this 
     population.
     Child abuse prevention programs
       The Committee recommends $48,364,000 for child abuse and 
     neglect prevention and treatment activities. The 
     recommendation includes $22,013,000 for State grants, the 
     same as last year and the budget request. The recommendation 
     also includes $26,351,000 for discretionary activities, an 
     increase of $201,000 more than last year and the same as the 
     budget request. These programs seek to improve and increase 
     activities at all levels of government which identify, 
     prevent, and treat child abuse and neglect through State 
     grants, technical assistance, research, demonstration, and 
     service improvement.
     Abandoned infants assistance
       The Committee recommendation includes $12,205,000 for 
     abandoned infants assistance, an increase of $3,000 more than 
     2002 level and the same amount as the budget request. This 
     program provides financial support to public and private 
     entities to develop, implement, and operate demonstration 
     projects that will prevent the abandonment of infants and 
     young children. Grants provide additional services such as 
     identifying and addressing the needs of abandoned infants, 
     especially those who are drug exposed or HIV positive; 
     providing respite care for families and care givers; and 
     assisting abandoned infants and children to reside with their 
     natural families or in foster care.
     Child welfare services
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $291,986,000 
     for child welfare services, the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     level and the administration request. This program helps 
     State public welfare agencies improve their child welfare 
     services with the goal of keeping families together. State 
     services include: preventive intervention, so that, if 
     possible, children will not have to be removed from their 
     homes; reunification so that children can return home and 
     development of alternative placements like foster care or 
     adoption if children cannot remain at home. These services 
     are provided without regard to income.
     Child welfare training
       The Committee recommends $7,498,000, an increase of $3,000 
     over the comparable fiscal year 2002 level and the same 
     amount as the administration request. Under section 426, 
     title IV-B of the Social Security Act, discretionary grants 
     are awarded to public and private nonprofit institutions of 
     higher learning to develop and improve education/training 
     programs and resources for child welfare service providers. 
     These grants upgrade the skills and qualifications of child 
     welfare workers.
     Adoption opportunities
       The Committee recommends $27,405,000 for adoption 
     opportunities, an increase of $20,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and the same amount as the administration 
     request. This program eliminates barriers to adoption and 
     helps find permanent homes for children who would benefit by 
     adoption, particularly children with special needs. The 
     Committee notes the progress that has been made in increasing 
     adoptions of children within 2 years of their placement in 
     the public foster care system, as well as the increase in 
     family reunification within 1 year of placement.
     Adoption incentives
       The Committee recommends $43,000,000 for adoption 
     incentives, the same amount as the comparable fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation and the budget request. The purpose of 
     this program is to provide incentive funds to States to 
     encourage an increase in the number of adoptions of children 
     from the public foster care system. These funds are used to 
     pay States bonuses for increasing their number of adoptions. 
     The appropriation allows

[[Page 883]]

     incentive payments to be made for adoptions completed in 
     fiscal years 2001 and 2002.
     Adoption awareness
       The Committee recommendation includes $12,906,000 for the 
     adoption awareness program, the same amount as the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and the administration request. This program 
     was authorized in the Children's Health Act of 2000. The 
     program consists of two activities: the Infant Adoption 
     Awareness Training Program and the Special Needs Awareness 
     Campaign. The Infant Adoption Awareness Training Program 
     provides grants to support adoption organizations in the 
     training of designated health staff in eligible health 
     centers that provide health services to pregnant women to 
     inform them about adoption and make referrals on request on 
     an equal basis with all other course of action. Within the 
     Committee recommendation, $9,906,000 is available for this 
     purpose.
       The Special Needs Adoption Campaign supports grants to 
     carry out a national campaign to inform the public about the 
     adoption of children with special needs. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $3,000,000 to continue this important 
     activity.
     Compassion capital fund
       The Committee recommendation includes $45,000,000 for the 
     compassion capital fund, $15,000,000 more than last year and 
     $55,000,000 less than the budget request. Funds available 
     will support grants to charitable organizations to emulate 
     model social service programs and to encourage research on 
     the best practices of social service organizations.
       The Committee expects funds made available through this 
     program to supplement and not supplant private resources and 
     encourages the Secretary to require private resources to 
     match grant funding provided to public/private partnerships.
     Social services research
       The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for social services and 
     income maintenance research, the same amount the 
     administration request for discretionary funding. The 
     Committee has funded the discretionary portion of this 
     program through transfers available under section 241 of the 
     Public Health Service Act. Mandatory funding also is 
     available for this purpose in the Welfare Reform legislation 
     and the administration budget request assures $25,158,000 is 
     available from this source. Last year, $31,158,000 was 
     available for this program. These funds support cutting-edge 
     research and evaluation projects in areas of critical 
     national interest. Research includes determining services 
     that are more cost-effective and alternative ways to increase 
     the economic independence of American families.
       The Committee 4 years ago encouraged ACF to work with the 
     State information technology consortium in an effort to help 
     States with the difficult task of streamlining service 
     delivery, while also meeting TANF record-keeping and 
     reporting requirements. The Committee is pleased to learn 
     that this effort is progressing and that States and ACF are 
     now able to share systems information on TANF, child support 
     enforcement, child welfare and child care activities. The 
     Committee understands that plans are now underway to put in 
     place web-based technology that permits communications and 
     interface within States, across State borders, and between 
     ACF and States. Accordingly, the Committee urges ACF to 
     expand its efforts with the State information technology 
     consortium in fiscal year 2003. Similarly, The Committee is 
     pleased to note that child support collections on behalf of 
     families continue to grow. When combined with other income, 
     child support collections passed through to TANF families can 
     provide the boost needed to help a family attain self-
     sufficiency. To aid in this objective, the Committee urges 
     CSE to implement the next phase of an effort launched last 
     year in conjunction with the State information technology 
     consortium. The Committee remains convinced that States are 
     in a position to best determine how to remove current 
     barriers to child support collections and to improve the flow 
     of information between agencies and the court system.
     Community-based resource centers
       The Committee recommends $33,417,000 for community-based 
     resource centers, an increase of $1,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and the same amount as the administration 
     request. These resources support two purposes: assisting each 
     State in developing, operating, expanding and enhancing a 
     network of community-based, prevention-focused, family 
     resource and support programs and supporting activities that 
     foster an understanding, appreciation, and knowledge of 
     diverse populations in order to be effective in preventing 
     and treating child abuse and neglect.
     Developmental disabilities programs
       The Committee recommends $147,434,000 for developmental 
     disabilities programs, an increase of $6,914,000 more than 
     the comparable fiscal year 2002 amount and $6,900,000 more 
     than the budget request. The Administration on Developmental 
     Disabilities supports community-based delivery of services 
     which promote the rights of persons of all ages with 
     developmental disabilities. Developmental disability is 
     defined as severe, chronic disability attributed to mental or 
     physical impairments manifested before age 22, which causes 
     substantial limitations in major life activities.
     State councils
       For State councils, the Committee recommends $72,200,000. 
     The State Councils on Developmental Disabilities program 
     assists each State in promoting the development of a 
     comprehensive, statewide, consumer and family-centered system 
     which provides a coordinated array of culturally-competent 
     services, and other assistance for individuals with 
     development disabilities. State councils undertake a range of 
     activities including demonstration of new approaches, program 
     and policy analysis, interagency collaboration and 
     coordination, outreach and training.
     Protection and advocacy grants
       For protection and advocacy grants, the Committee 
     recommends $37,000,000. This formula grant program provides 
     funds to States to establish protection and advocacy systems 
     to protect the legal and human rights of persons with 
     developmental disabilities who are receiving treatment, 
     services, or rehabilitation within the State.
     Projects of national significance
       The Committee recommends $12,734,000 for projects of 
     national significance to assist persons with developmental 
     disabilities. This program funds grants and contracts 
     providing nationwide impact by developing new technologies 
     and applying and demonstrating innovative methods to support 
     the independence, productivity, and integration into the 
     community of persons with developmental disabilities.
       The Committee recognizes the potential benefits that 
     assistive technology can have for individuals with 
     developmental disabilities.
       Within the Committee recommendation, $4,000,000 is 
     available to expand activities of the Family Support Program. 
     The increase over the budget request for programs of national 
     significance has been provided for this purpose.
     University-affiliated programs
       For university-affiliated programs, the Committee 
     recommends $25,500,000. This program provides operational and 
     administrative support for a national network of university-
     affiliated programs and satellite centers. Grants are made 
     annually to university-affiliated programs and satellite 
     centers for interdisciplinary training, exemplary services, 
     technical assistance, and information dissemination 
     activities.
     Native American programs
       The Committee recommends $45,912,000 for Native American 
     programs, the same amount as the 2002 level and $716,000 more 
     than the budget request. The Administration for Native 
     Americans [ANA] assists Indian tribes and native American 
     organizations in planning and implementing long-term 
     strategies for social and economic development through the 
     funding of direct grants for individual projects, training 
     and technical assistance, and research and demonstration 
     programs.
       The Committee continues its significant interest in the 
     revitalization of native languages through education. The 
     Committee encourages ANA to allocate additional resources to 
     support the Native American Languages program and urges the 
     ANA to make schools a part of this effort, consistent with 
     the policy expressed in the Native American Languages Act.
     Community services
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $740,477,000 
     for the community services programs. This is $1,692,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level and $100,152,000 higher than 
     the administration request.
       Within the funds provided, the Committee recommends 
     $649,987,000 for the community services block grant [CSBG]. 
     These funds are used to make formula grants to States and 
     Indian tribes to provide a wide range of services and 
     activities to alleviate causes of poverty in communities and 
     to assist low-income individuals in becoming self-sufficient.
       The Committee rejects the administration's recommendation 
     to cut the Community Services Block Grant funding. Although a 
     restrictive Committee allocation prevented CSBG funding from 
     being substantially increased this year, the Committee 
     continues to recognize the importance of CSBG and the 
     Community Action Agencies it funds in helping meet the 
     extraordinary challenges facing low-income communities.
       The Nation's Community Action Agency network relies on CSBG 
     funding to help initiate and administer programs designed to 
     alleviate poverty. The universal characteristic of these 
     CSBG-funded programs is that they provide people with the 
     resources and the tools to become self-sufficient. The 
     Committee understands that the Department of Health and Human 
     Services, and its Office of Community Services in particular, 
     could better use this network in developing future policy 
     initiatives. The Committee notes that in a number of States, 
     including Iowa and Pennsylvania, CAA-initiated family 
     development and self-sufficiency programs are a integral 
     component of welfare reform efforts. The administration is 
     encouraged to look for further nationwide linkages between 
     those

[[Page 884]]

     individuals seeking to leave the welfare system and become 
     self-sufficient and the many family development and self-
     sufficiency strategies operated by Community Action Agencies.
       In addition, the Committee believes that the Office of 
     Community Services should be more agressive in ensuring 
     proper oversight of some State CSBG State expenditure of CSBG 
     allocations that are intended to fund local eligible 
     activities. The Committee expects the Office of Community 
     Services to better evaluate and enforce each State's 
     expenditure of CSBG funds. The Committee is also concerned 
     that some State audits of the previous years' expenditures of 
     CSBG funds are not adequately reviewed and acted upon.
       The Committee expects the Office of Community Services to 
     release funding to the States in the most timely manner. The 
     Committee also expects the States to makes funds available 
     promptly. The Committee is aware that the Office of Community 
     Services and some States have been extraordinarily delinquent 
     in providing funds to local eligible entities.
       In addition, the Committee again expects the Office of 
     Community Services to inform the State CSBG grantees of any 
     policy changes affecting carryover CSBG funds within a 
     reasonable time after the beginning of the Federal fiscal 
     year.
       Several discretionary programs are funded from this 
     account. Funding for these programs is recommended at the 
     following levels for fiscal year 2003: community economic 
     development, $33,000,000; individual development accounts, 
     $24,990,000; rural community facilities, $7,500,000; national 
     youth sports, $17,000,000; and community food and nutrition, 
     $8,000,000.
       Community economic development grants are made to private, 
     nonprofit community development corporations, which in turn 
     provide technical and financial assistance to business and 
     economic development projects that target job and business 
     opportunities for low income citizens. The Committee has 
     included bill language clarifying that Federal funds made 
     available through this program may be used for financing for 
     construction and rehabilitation and loans or investments in 
     private business enterprises owned by Community Development 
     Corporations. Of the total provided, the Committee has 
     included $5,500,000 for the Job Creation Demonstration 
     authorized under the Family Support Act to target community 
     development activities to create jobs for people on public 
     assistance. As in the past, the Committee expects that a 
     priority for grants under this program go to experienced 
     community development corporations.
       The Committee continues to support the Job Creation 
     Demonstration program, authorized by the Family Support Act. 
     This demonstration program provides grants on a competitive 
     basis to non-profit organizations to create new employment 
     and business opportunities for TANF recipients and other low 
     income individuals. Funding also supports technical and 
     financial assistance for private employers that will result 
     in the creation of full-time permanent jobs for eligible 
     individuals. The Committee recognizes that continued funding 
     of the Job Creation Demonstration program would provide 
     opportunities for more low-income individuals.
       Most of the drinking water and waste water systems in the 
     country that are not in compliance with Federal standards are 
     in communities of 3,000 or fewer. Rural Community Assistance 
     Programs [RCAPs] use funds available from the Rural Community 
     Facilities Program to assist a number of communities in 
     gaining access to adequate community facilities, gaining 
     financing for new or improved water and waste water systems 
     and in complying with Federal standards.
       The Committee has included bill language allocating funding 
     to the Office of Community Services for Rural Community 
     Facilities Technical Assistance as authorized under section 
     680(3)(B) of the Community Services Block Grant Act. In 
     providing this funding, the Committee directs that it be used 
     solely for the purpose of improving water and waste water 
     facilities in poor, rural communities. As in the past these 
     funds should be allocated to regional, rural community 
     assistance programs.
       The Committee is concerned that many small and very small 
     community water and wastewater treatment systems might be 
     most vulnerable to terrorist attack, yet least prepared to 
     deal with the issue. The Committee urges OCS to support a 
     RCAP Small Community Infrastructure Safety and Security 
     Training and Technical Assistance project, which will provide 
     State, regional and national infrastructure safety and 
     security training workshops and on-site technical assistance 
     targeted to small and very small community water and 
     wastewater treatment systems. The goal of the project is to 
     improve the capacity of small systems to better prepare for 
     emergencies, develop emergency preparedness training manuals 
     for small water systems, identify appropriate technologies to 
     secure such systems, and provide technical assistance to 
     small communities struggling to deal with these issues.
     Family violence prevention and services
       The Committee recommends $149,000,000 for family violence 
     prevention and services programs, an increase of $7,385,000 
     over the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget 
     request.
       For the runaway youth prevention program, the Committee 
     recommends $16,000,000, which is $1,001,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the administration 
     request. This is a discretionary grant program open to 
     private nonprofit agencies for the provision of services to 
     runaway, homeless, and street youth. Funds may be used for 
     street-based outreach and education, including treatment, 
     counseling, provision of information, and referrals for these 
     youths, many of whom have been subjected to or are at risk of 
     being subjected to sexual abuse. The goal of this program is 
     to help young people leave the streets.
       For the national domestic violence hotline, the Committee 
     recommends $3,000,000, which is $843,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 comparable level and the administration request. 
     This is a cooperative agreement which funds the operation of 
     a national, toll-free, 24-hours-a-day telephone hotline to 
     provide information and assistance to victims of domestic 
     violence. The Committee has recommended additional funding 
     for the hotline because of the 19 percent growth in call 
     volume that occurred last year and the associated increased 
     in the caller abandonment rate of the hotline. The Committee 
     is aware that employees of the parent agency even voluntarily 
     reduced their pay to stay within budget constraints, rather 
     than reduce hotline staff and service to those in need.
       The Committee recommends $130,000,000 for the grants for 
     battered women's shelters program, $5,541,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 program level and the administration 
     request. This is a formula grant program to support 
     community-based projects which operate shelters and provide 
     related assistance for victims of domestic violence and their 
     dependents. Emphasis is given to projects which provide 
     counseling, advocacy, and self-help services to victims and 
     their children.
     Early learning opportunities program
       The Committee recommendation includes $38,000,000 for the 
     early learning opportunities program, an increase of 
     $13,003,000 more than the comparable fiscal year 2002 funding 
     level. The administration proposed eliminating this program. 
     This program supports grants to local community councils 
     comprised of representatives from agencies involved in early 
     learning programs, parent organizations and key community 
     leaders. Funds are used to increase the capacity of local 
     organizations to facilitate development of cognitive skills, 
     language comprehension and learning readiness; enhance 
     childhood literacy; improve the quality of early learning 
     programs through professional development and training; and 
     remove barriers to early learning programs.
     Faith-based center
       The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 to 
     continue staff support for the operation of the Department's 
     Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, the same as 
     the fiscal year 2002 level and the budget request.
     Promotion of responsible fatherhood and healthy marriage
       The Committee recommendation does not include $20,000,000 
     included in the budget request for a new program designed to 
     promote responsible fatherhood and responsible marriage. 
     Legislation has not been enacted that would create this new 
     program. The purpose of this proposed program was to spur 
     State and community level approaches to assist fathers to be 
     more actively and productively involved in the lives of their 
     children.
     Mentoring children of prisoners
       The Committee recommendation includes $12,500,000 for this 
     new program. The administration requested $25,000,000. The 
     mentoring children of prisoners program was authorized last 
     year under section 439 of the Social Security Act. The 
     purpose of this program is to help children while their 
     parents are imprisoned, which includes activities that keep 
     children connected to a parent in prison in order to increase 
     the chances that the family will come together successfully 
     when the parent is released. As a group, children of 
     prisoners are less likely than their peers to succeed in 
     school and more likely to engaged delinquent behavior.
     Independent Living Training Vouchers
       The Committee recommendation includes $60,000,000 for the 
     new independent living program, the same as the budget 
     request. These funds will support vouchers of up to $5,000 
     for college tuition or vocational training for individuals 
     who age out of the foster care system, so they can be better 
     prepared to live independently and contribute productively to 
     society. Studies have shown that 25,000 youth leave foster 
     care each year at age 18 and just 50 percent will have 
     graduated high school, 52 percent will be unemployed and 25 
     percent will be homeless for one or more nights.
     Program administration
       The Committee recommends $171,747,000 for program 
     administration, $45,000 less than the comparable fiscal year 
     2002 level and $1,000,000 above the administration request.

[[Page 885]]

       The Committee urges ACF to continue to make progress in 
     improving its Annual Performance Plan and Annual Performance 
     Report. The Committee notes that many programs proposed for 
     funding do not have solid data for baselines or performance 
     outcome measures. This lack of objective data makes more 
     difficult the Committee's decisions regarding the allocation 
     of limited resources. The Committee believes that the agency 
     should work with program grantees and relevant associations 
     to identify the most objective ways in which to evaluate the 
     effectiveness of ACF programs and establish a timeline for 
     producing meaningful data by which programs can be assessed.
       The Committee continues its interest in the Department's 
     Child and Family Services reviews. These reviews are an 
     effective method for monitoring the progress States are 
     making in assuring the safety, health and permanency for 
     children in child welfare and foster care as required in the 
     Adoption and Safe Families Act. The Committee encourages the 
     Department to make available sufficient resources to ensure 
     full implementation of the new collaborative monitoring 
     system. The Committee understands that the remaining States 
     will be reviewed during fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
     requests that ACF prepare a report on compliance and other 
     implementation issues identified during these reviews and 
     provide it to the Committee not later than 90 days after the 
     last review.
       In establishing its Technical Assistance Centers for 
     Children and Families initiative, the Committee urges the 
     Administration to give consideration to establishing a 
     Pacific Basin focus given the unique needs, geographical 
     isolation, cultural complexities, and Federal 
     responsibilities for the residents of that region.


                   promoting safe and stable families

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$375,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................505,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................505,000,000

       The Committee recommends $505,000,000 for fiscal year 2003, 
     an increase of $130,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     amount and the same as the budget request. Funding available 
     provides grants to States in support of: (1) family 
     preservation services; (2) time-limited family reunification 
     services (3) community-based family support services and (4) 
     adoption promotion and support services. The Committee notes 
     that most of the Federal funding related to child welfare is 
     provided for the removal and placement of children outside of 
     their own homes. Funds available through the Promoting Safe 
     and Stable Families program are focused on supporting those 
     activities that can prevent family crises from emerging that 
     might require the temporary or permanent removal of a child 
     from his or her own home.
       The Promoting Safe and Stable Families program is comprised 
     of $305,000,000 in capped entitlement funds authorized by the 
     Social Security Act and $200,000,000 in discretionary 
     appropriations.


       payments to states for foster care and adoption assistance

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$4,885,600,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,855,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,855,000,000

       The Committee recommends $4,855,000,000 for this account, 
     which is $30,600,000 less than the 2002 comparable level and 
     the same as the budget request. In addition, the Committee 
     recommendation concurs with the administration's request of 
     $1,745,600,000 for an advance appropriation for the first 
     quarter of fiscal year 2004. The Committee also has included 
     bill language, proposed in the budget, that will improve 
     program operations and the flow of funds to States. The 
     Foster Care Program provides Federal reimbursement to States 
     for: maintenance payments to families and institutions caring 
     for eligible foster children, matched at the Federal medical 
     assistance percentage [FMAP] rate for each State; and 
     administration and training costs to pay for the efficient 
     administration of the Foster Care Program, and for training 
     of foster care workers and parents.
       The Adoption Assistance Program provides funds to States 
     for maintenance costs and the nonrecurring costs of adoption 
     for children with special needs. The goal of this program is 
     to facilitate the placement of hard-to-place children in 
     permanent adoptive homes, and thus prevent long, 
     inappropriate stays in foster care. As in the Foster Care 
     Program, State administrative and training costs are 
     reimbursed under this program.
       The Independent Living Program provides services to foster 
     children under 18 and foster youth ages 18-21 to help them 
     make the transition to independent living by engaging in a 
     variety of services including educational assistance, life 
     skills training, health services and room and board. States 
     are awarded grants from the annual appropriation 
     proportionate to their share of the number of children in 
     foster care, subject to a matching requirement.

                        Administration on Aging

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,349,447,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,341,344,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,369,290,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,369,290,000 
     for aging programs, $19,843,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 comparable funding level and $27,946,000 more than the 
     budget request.
     Supportive services and senior centers
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $359,000,000 
     for supportive services and senior centers, $2,006,000 more 
     than the comparable fiscal year 2002 level and $2,000,000 
     more than the administration request. This State formula 
     grant program funds a wide range of social services for the 
     elderly, including multipurpose senior centers, adult day 
     care and ombudsman activities. State agencies on aging award 
     funds to designated area agencies on aging who in turn make 
     awards to local services providers. All individuals age 60 
     and over are eligible for services, although, by law, 
     priority is given to serving those who are in the greatest 
     economic and social need, with particular attention to low-
     income minority older individuals and those residing in rural 
     areas. Under the basic law, States have the option to 
     transfer up to 30 percent of funds appropriated between the 
     senior centers program and the nutrition programs, which 
     allows the State to determine where the resources are most 
     needed.
     Preventive health services
       The Committee recommends $22,562,000 for preventive health 
     services, an increase of $1,439,000 more than the comparable 
     fiscal year 2002 amount and $1,000,000 more than the budget 
     request. Funds appropriated for this activity are part of the 
     comprehensive and coordinated service systems targeted to 
     those elderly most in need. Preventive health services 
     include nutritional counseling and education, exercise 
     programs, health screening and assessments, and prevention of 
     depression.
       Within the appropriation for this program, the Committee 
     recommends that $6,000,000 be provided to expand medication 
     management, screening and education activities to prevent 
     incorrect medication and adverse drug reactions among the 
     elderly. These activities will help older adults learn more 
     about managing medications safely and help reduce unnecessary 
     hospitalizations and illnesses. The Committee notes that 
     individuals aged 65 years and older take the greatest number 
     and quantity of medications, which increases the health risks 
     associated with adverse drug interactions and misuse. Studies 
     have found that up to 28 percent of hospitalizations of older 
     people are due to noncompliance with drug therapy and adverse 
     events. These additional funds will help reduce the incidence 
     of adverse effects of drug interaction and misuse.
     Protection of vulnerable older Americans
       The Committee recommends $19,681,000 for grants to States 
     for protection of vulnerable older Americans. Within the 
     Committee recommendation, $14,449,000 is for the ombudsman 
     services program and $5,232,000 is for the prevention of 
     elder abuse program. The amount recommended for the ombudsman 
     services program is $2,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     level and the administration request. The amount recommended 
     for the elder abuse prevention program is the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and budget request. Both programs 
     provide formula grants to States to prevent the abuse, 
     neglect, and exploitation of older individuals. The ombudsman 
     program focuses on the needs of residents of nursing homes 
     and board and care facilities, while elder abuse prevention 
     targets its message to the elderly community at large.
       The Committee recognizes the importance of the Long-Term 
     Care Ombudsman Program in assisting residents of nursing 
     homes and board and care facilities resolve abuse and neglect 
     complaints. The Committee is aware of the Institute of 
     Medicine's 1995 study which recommended a ratio of 1 
     ombudsman for every 2,000 nursing home beds to meet the needs 
     of long-term care residents, as well as the DHHS Office of 
     Inspector General's 1999 report recommending additional 
     funding for the program. Therefore, the Committee has 
     provided an increase of $2,000,000 for the Long-Term 
     Ombudsman Program, which will allow the program to hire 
     additional ombudsman staff, expand public information and 
     education campaigns, and upgrade technology.
       The Committee supports continued and additional funding for 
     the long-term care ombudsman resource center and its training 
     and clearinghouse functions, which provide information, 
     technical assistance, programmatic, and other support for 
     State and regional long-term care ombudsmen.
     National family caregiver support program
       The Committee recommends $150,000,000 for the national 
     family caregiver support program, an increase of $14,000,000 
     more than the comparable fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     budget request. Funds appropriated for this activity 
     established a multifaceted support system in each State for 
     family caregivers. All States are expected to implement the 
     following five components into their program: individualized 
     referral information services; assistance to caregivers in 
     locating services from a variety of private and voluntary 
     agencies; caregiver counseling, training and

[[Page 886]]

     peer support; respite care provided in the home, an adult day 
     care center or other residential setting located in an 
     assisted living facility; and limited supplemental services 
     that fill remaining service gaps.
       The Committee continues to make investment in our Nation's 
     family caregiver support system, in recognition of the 
     critical role and essential care that millions of informal 
     and family caregivers provide. Research has shown that half 
     of all caregivers of older persons are 65 years of age or 
     older, many of whom are themselves in fair to poor health. 
     Further, one-third of caregivers are employed full-time and 
     have to take unpaid leave or rearrange their work schedules 
     to care for a loved one. The family caregiver support program 
     provides respite care, caregiving training and counseling and 
     other support services that support the efforts of the 
     caregiver.
     Native American Caregiver Support Program
       The Committee recommendation includes $6,500,000 to carry 
     out the Native American Caregiver Support Program, an 
     increase of $1,000,000 more than last year and the budget 
     request. The program will assist Tribes in providing 
     multifaceted systems of support services for family 
     caregivers and for grandparents or older individuals who are 
     relative caregivers. In fiscal year 2002, funds were used to 
     provide both discretionary and formula grants to support the 
     goals of this program.
     Congregate and home-delivered nutrition services
       For congregate nutrition services, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $390,000,000, the same amount as the 
     comparable fiscal year 2002 level and the budget request. For 
     home-delivered meals, the Committee recommends $182,000,000, 
     an increase of $5,500,000 more than the comparable fiscal 
     year 2002 funding level and $3,500,000 more than the 
     administration request. These programs address the 
     nutritional need of older individuals. Projects funded must 
     make home-delivered and congregate meals available at least 
     once a day, 5 days a week, and each meal must meet one-third 
     of the minimum daily dietary requirements. While States 
     receive separate allotments of funds for congregate and home-
     delivered nutrition services and support services, they are 
     permitted to transfer up to 40 percent of funds between these 
     programs.
       The Committee celebrates the 30th anniversary of the Older 
     Americans Act Nutrition Program. Over the past 30 years, the 
     program has supported almost 6 billion meals for older 
     Americans. A national evaluation of the nutrition program 
     found that it successfully reaches older individuals who are 
     older, poorer, more likely to live in rural areas, more 
     functionally impaired and at higher nutritional risk than the 
     population generally. Individuals who were served realized 
     higher nutrient intake, decreased food insecurity, increased 
     social interaction and an improved quality of life. The 
     Committee also recognizes the significant role that the 
     program plays beyond the provision of meals. Nutrition 
     screening, education and counseling services are critical to 
     maintaining good health and independence for older adults.
     Nutrition Services Incentives Program
       The Committee recommendation includes $149,670,000 for the 
     nutrition services incentives program, the same as the 
     comparable fiscal year 2002 funding level and the budget 
     request.
       The Committee agrees with the administration's request to 
     shift funding for the Nutrition Services Incentive Program 
     (NSIP) from the Food and Nutrition Service within USDA to the 
     Administration on Aging within the Department of Health and 
     Human Services (DHHS). It is the Committee's belief, however, 
     that it is critically important for several aspects of NSIP 
     to remain intact, as the program is shifted into DHHS. This 
     includes the allocation of NSIP funds on the basis of the 
     number of meals served in a State in the previous year, as 
     opposed to the number of seniors that reside in that State. 
     Further, NSIP funds are not currently, and should not become, 
     subject to transfer, expenditure for administrative costs, or 
     match requirements, and States should continue to have the 
     option of receiving benefits in the form of cash or 
     commodities. The Committee directs the Under Secretary of the 
     Food and Nutrition Service to work with the Assistant 
     Secretary for Aging within DHHS to ensure this transfer of 
     funding and responsibilities is carried out in a manner that 
     in no way disrupts the delivery of services provided by NSIP. 
     The Committee has maintained access to commodities within 
     USDA because the agency has both the infrastructure and the 
     expertise to conduct this activity that is not available in 
     AoA and HHS.
     Aging grants to Indian tribes and native Hawaiian 
         organizations
       The Committee recommends $27,675,000 for grants to native 
     Americans, $1,946,000 more than the comparable fiscal year 
     2002 amount and the administration request. Under this 
     program awards are made to tribal and Alaskan Native 
     organizations and to public or nonprofit private 
     organizations serving native Hawaiians which represent at 
     least 50 percent Indians or Alaskan Natives 60 years of age 
     or older to provide a broad range of supportive services and 
     assure that nutrition services and information and assistance 
     are available.
     Training, research and discretionary projects
       The Committee recommends $27,837,000 for training, 
     research, and discretionary projects, $10,436,000 less than 
     the fiscal year 2002 comparable level and the same as the 
     budget request. These funds support activities designed to 
     expand public understanding of aging and the aging process, 
     apply social research and analysis to improve access to and 
     delivery of services for older individuals, test innovative 
     ideas and programs to serve older individuals, and provide 
     technical assistance to agencies that administer the Older 
     Americans Act.
       The Committee has provided support at last year's level to 
     continue the pilot project to test the best ways of using the 
     skills of retired nurses, doctors, accountants and other 
     professionals to train other seniors and to serve as expert 
     resources to detect and stop Medicare fraud, waste and abuse. 
     The Committee expects that these funds will be used to make 
     grants and that administrative costs will be minimized. In 
     addition, the Committee expects that an improved system will 
     be developed and implemented in coordination with CMS and the 
     OIG to track cases referred by this initiative.
       The Committee is aware that the Centers for Disease Control 
     and Prevention (CDC) reported that more than 10,000 seniors 
     died in 1999 from fall-related injuries. CDC estimates that 
     the direct costs to Medicare and Medicaid for falls-related 
     care will exceed $32,000,000,000 in 2020. Given the 
     unnecessary and premature loss of life and public expense 
     associated with elder falls, the Committee encourages the 
     Administration on Aging to oversee and support a national 
     education campaign to reduce the risk of elder falls and 
     prevent repeat falls. The campaign should be directed to 
     elders, their families, and health care providers.
       The Committee continues to support funding at no less than 
     last year's level for national programs scheduled to be 
     refunded in fiscal year 2003 that address a variety of 
     issues, including elder abuse, native American issues and 
     legal services.
     Aging network support activities
       The Committee recommends $2,379,000 for aging network 
     support activities, the same as the comparable fiscal year 
     2002 amount and the budget request. The Committee 
     recommendation includes $1,199,000 for Eldercare Locator. The 
     Committee recommendation provides $1,180,000 for the pension 
     information and counseling projects, the same as the 
     comparable fiscal year 2002 level.
       The Eldercare Locator, a toll-free, nationwide directory 
     assistance service for older Americans and their caregivers, 
     is operated by the National Association of Area Agencies on 
     Aging. Since 1991, the service has linked more than 700,000 
     callers to an extensive network of resources for aging 
     Americans and their caregivers. The Committee provided an 
     increase of almost $340,000 to support expansion to the 
     Internet of this information and referral service.
       Pension counseling projects provide information, advice, 
     and assistance to workers and retirees about pension plans, 
     benefits, and how to pursue claims when pension problems 
     arise. The information dissemination and outreach activities 
     of the pension counseling projects have reached nearly 50,000 
     individuals. In addition, individualized counseling to more 
     than 7,000 individuals has helped recoup more than 
     $30,000,000 on behalf of older individuals.
     Alzheimer's Disease Demonstration Grants to States
       As a result of the aging of the baby boom generation, the 
     number of individuals affected by Alzheimer's disease will 
     double in the next 20 years. The Committee recommends a 
     funding level of $14,000,000, an increase of $2,504,000 more 
     than the comparable fiscal year 2002 level and $2,500,000 
     more than the administration's request, for Alzheimer's 
     disease demonstration grants to States.
       Currently, an estimated 70 percent of individuals with 
     Alzheimer's disease live at home, where families provide the 
     preponderance of care. For these families, caregiving comes 
     at enormous physical, emotional and financial sacrifice. The 
     Alzheimer's disease demonstration grant program currently 
     provides matching grants to 32 States to stimulate and better 
     coordinate services for families coping with Alzheimer's. 
     With a relatively small amount of Federal support to provide 
     the stimulus, States have found innovative ways to adapt 
     existing health, long-term care, and community services to 
     reach previously underserved populations, particularly 
     minorities and those living in rural communities. Given the 
     program's proven record of success, the Committee recommends 
     an increase of $1,504,000 more than the comparable 2002 
     appropriation to expand the program to additional States. 
     Given the enormous demands on Alzheimer's family caregivers, 
     the Committee has included $1,000,000 to support an 
     Alzheimer's family contact center for round-the-clock help to 
     Alzheimer's families in crisis.
     Program administration
       The Committee recommends $17,986,000 to support Federal 
     staff that administer the

[[Page 887]]

     programs in the Administration on Aging, $116,000 less than 
     the comparable 2002 level and the same amount as the budget 
     request. These funds provide administrative and management 
     support for programs administered by the agency.

                        Office of the Secretary


                    GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$347,052,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................384,395,000
Committee recommendation....................................374,386,000

       The Committee recommends $374,386,000 for general 
     departmental management [GDM]. This is $10,009,000 below the 
     administration request and $27,334,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 level. The Committee does not agree to the proposed 
     consolidation of Public Affairs and Legislative Affairs 
     functions in the Office of the Secretary. For this reason the 
     Committee's recommendation does not include the $27,793,000 
     requested to transfer staff from the operating divisions to 
     the Office of the Secretary. In addition, the Committee has 
     denied the fiscal year 2003 bill language request, proposed 
     in the budget, to transfer funds from accounts of the 
     National Institutes of Health and the Agency for Healthcare 
     Research and Quality within the Department for the purpose of 
     consolidating all of HHS legislative and public affairs 
     activities within the Office of the Secretary. The Committee 
     has taken this action because of the concern that information 
     necessary to make timely decisions by the Congress and 
     requests for information by the public may be delayed by this 
     consolidation.
       The Committee recommendation includes $21,552,000 in 
     appropriated funds which in previous years were provided 
     through program evaluation funds. On a comparable basis, the 
     Committee's recommendation reflects a decrease of $3,768,000 
     below the administration request. The Committee 
     recommendation includes the transfer of $5,851,000 from 
     Medicare trust funds, which is the same as the administration 
     request and the fiscal year 2002 level.
       The Committee directs that specific information requests 
     from the chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
     Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related 
     Agencies, on scientific research or any other matter, shall 
     be transmitted to the Committee on Appropriations in a prompt 
     professional manner and within the time frame specified in 
     the request. The Committee further directs that scientific 
     information requested by the Committees on Appropriations and 
     prepared by Government researchers and scientists be 
     transmitted to the Committee on Appropriations, uncensored 
     and without delay.
       This appropriation supports those activities that are 
     associated with the Secretary's role as policy officer and 
     general manager of the Department. It supports certain health 
     activities performed by the Office of Public Health and 
     Science, including the Office of the Surgeon General. GDM 
     funds also support the Department's centralized services 
     carried out by several Office of the Secretary staff 
     divisions, including personnel management, administrative and 
     management services, information resources management, 
     intergovernmental relations, legal services, planning and 
     evaluation, finance and accounting, and external affairs.
       The Office of the Surgeon General, in addition to its other 
     responsibilities, provides leadership and management 
     oversight for the PHS Commissioned Corps, including the 
     involvement of the Corps in departmental emergency 
     preparedness and response activities.
       The Committee has provided $4,000,000 to support the 
     activities of the United States- Mexico Border Health 
     Commission as authorized by Public Law 103-400. The 
     Commission is authorized to assess and resolve current and 
     potential health problems that affect the general population 
     of the United States-Mexico border area.
       Chronic Fatigue.--The Committee is disappointed that the 
     establishment of the Department's Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 
     advisory committee, announced in January 2001, has been 
     delayed and that the advisory committee's predecessor, the 
     Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Coordinating Committee has not met 
     since January 2001. These delays have jeopardized momentum 
     and important partnerships between the member agencies and 
     the CFS community. It is this Committee's expectation that 
     the new advisory committee will not diminish the full 
     partnership of involved agencies or the collaborative 
     relationships among Federal agencies, scientists, and CFS 
     advocates that have developed over recent years through the 
     CFS Coordinating Committee. The Committee anticipates that 
     the new advisory committee will further advance the efforts 
     of the Department and the public health service agencies to 
     address the scientific questions about CFS and the social 
     service needs of persons with CFS.
       Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy.--The 
     Committee is pleased with the strong work and final report of 
     the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative 
     Medicine Policy. The Committee expects the Secretary to 
     provide sufficient funds to establish an interagency 
     coordinating unit to assist with the implementation of the 
     Commission's recommendations and expects to receive a 
     briefing on the Department's progress in this area by March 
     30, 2003.
       Data Collection.--The Committee urges the Secretary to 
     strengthen the Department's collection and reporting of data 
     on health care enrollment, access and utilization by 
     patients' race, ethnicity, primary language and socioeconomic 
     status by all agencies engaged in, or receiving Federal funds 
     for health-related activities. It is expected that all 
     Federal, State, and other entities receiving Federal funds 
     shall collect and report disaggregated data; that racial and 
     ethnic data shall be reported by federally-defined 
     categories, and by subpopulation groups. Measures of racial 
     and ethnic disparities should be used in performance 
     measurement and in monitoring the progress of federally-
     funded activities for the elimination of health disparities. 
     As the Nation's leading health enterprise, the Department is 
     expected to play a leadership role in assuring the collection 
     and reporting of racial, ethnic and primary health-related 
     data through written policy and sustained action and 
     resources. The Secretary is urged to designate a central 
     authority within the Department to oversee its policies in 
     this area, as well as dissemination, implementation and 
     compliance activities.
       The Secretary must ensure that Federal datasets meet at 
     least the minimum standards set by the Office of Management 
     and Budget in 1997 and subsequent standards for maintaining, 
     collecting, and presenting Federal data on race and 
     ethnicity. Also, the Committee reminds the Secretary of OMB's 
     requirement that the standards be adopted as soon as 
     possible, but not later than January 1, 2003, for use in 
     household surveys, administrative forms and records, and 
     other data collections purposes.
       Homelessness.--The Committee supports the administration's 
     goal of ending chronic homelessness. The Committee encourages 
     the various agencies within the Department to re-examine 
     their program delivery mechanisms to ensure that resources, 
     both targeted and mainstream, are reaching people who have 
     been homeless for long periods of time.
       The Committee also supports efforts to address chronic 
     homelessness more effectively through better coordination of 
     housing and support services at both the national policy and 
     local service delivery levels. The Committee encourages the 
     Department to seek opportunities to partner with the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development in providing 
     service enriched supportive housing. The development of 
     permanent supportive housing, that is, housing coupled with 
     mental health, substance abuse and primary care supportive 
     services, has been shown to be a highly effective model for 
     addressing the needs of the chronically homeless. The 
     Committee encourages Departmental program offices, including 
     the Community Health Centers Program in HRSA, and the Centers 
     for Mental Health Services, Substance Abuse Treatment, and 
     Substance Abuse Prevention in SAMHSA to work with their 
     grantees to identify opportunities for collaborating with 
     local housing providers to develop permanent supportive 
     housing.
       The Committee urges the Department to study whether 
     additional policies and protocols may be needed to ensure 
     that persons being discharged from systems of care including 
     mental health and substance abuse treatment programs and 
     foster care have housing options to prevent such discharge 
     from immediately resulting in homelessness.
       Racial and Ethnic Disparities.--The Committee is deeply 
     concerned about the results of a study released in March 2002 
     from the Institute of Medicine: Unequal Treatment: 
     Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. The 
     Committee is committed to ensuring the overall improved 
     health of the American people, and strongly urges the 
     Secretary to take the steps necessary to implement the 
     study's recommendations, which offer significant guidelines 
     and opportunities for eliminating health disparities and 
     improving health. Specifically, all institutes and agencies 
     are strongly encouraged to increase the representation of 
     racial and ethnic minorities among health professionals, 
     advance equity of care through the use of evidence-based 
     guidelines, and promote the concept of multi-disciplinary 
     treatment teams and community health workers who can help 
     patients navigate through the health care system. The 
     Committee expects the Secretary to report on the progress of 
     this action during next year's appropriations hearings, and 
     to include a progress update in the Department's Budget 
     Justification.
       Tick-Borne Disease.--The Committee urges the Secretary to 
     consult with the biomedical community, community-based 
     clinicians, voluntary organizations, patients and appropriate 
     governmental agency officials to ensure coordination and 
     communication regarding tick-borne diseases. These 
     consultations may provide knowledge and support to the 
     Secretary on matters of program oversight, performance, and 
     priority setting for agencies that impact tick borne 
     diseases.
     Adolescent family life
       The Committee has provided $31,124,000 for the Adolescent 
     Family Life Program [AFL]. This is $2,198,000 more than the 
     fiscal year

[[Page 888]]

     2002 appropriation and same as the administration request.
       AFL is the only Federal program focused directly on the 
     issue of adolescent sexuality, pregnancy, and parenting. 
     Through demonstration grants and contracts, AFL focuses on a 
     comprehensive range of health, educational, and social 
     services needed to improve the health of adolescents, 
     including the complex issues of early adolescent sexuality, 
     pregnancy, and parenting.
       Within the total provided, the Committee continues the 
     prevention projects begun in fiscal year 1998, as well as new 
     prevention projects. The Committee again expects the 
     Department to fund new prevention projects which enable 
     smaller communities to begin the organization and 
     implementation of coalitions to implement abstinence-based 
     education programs. The Committee again expects the 
     Department, when announcing grant competitions, to provide a 
     reasonable length of time for applicants to complete 
     application packages, provide extensive technical assistance 
     to applicants, with special assistance given to new 
     applicants, and revise the terminology and instructions in 
     grant applications to assure that the information being 
     requested is as clear as possible.
     Physical fitness and sports
       The Committee recommends $1,223,000 for the Federal staff 
     which supports the President's Council on Physical Fitness 
     and Sports. This is the same as the budget request and 
     $86,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       The President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports 
     serves as a catalyst for promoting increased physical 
     activity/fitness and sports participation for Americans of 
     all ages and abilities, in accordance with Executive Order 
     13265, as amended. The programs sponsored by PCPFS are 
     supported largely through private sector partnerships.
       The Committee has provided additional resources in this 
     bill for a physical activity and nutrition initiative. The 
     President's Council is urged to take a look at the 
     Committee's recommendations and offer suggestions regarding 
     how to coordinate between programs receiving funds for this 
     purpose and how to build upon this initiative next year.
     Minority health
       The Committee recommends $46,329,000 for the Office of 
     Minority Health. This is the same as the budget request and 
     $3,228,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       The Office of Minority Health [OMH] focuses on strategies 
     designed to decrease the disparities and to improve the 
     health status of racial and ethnic minority populations in 
     the United States. OMH establishes goals, and coordinates all 
     departmental activity related to improving health outcomes 
     for disadvantaged and minority individuals. OMH supports 
     several demonstration projects, including the Minority 
     Community Health Coalition, the Bilingual/Bicultural Service, 
     the Center for Linguistic and Cultural Competency in Health 
     Care, and the Family and Community Violence Prevention 
     Program.
       The Committee continues to recognize the need to recruit 
     and train more minorities in the health professions. The 
     Committee encourages the Office of Minority Health to support 
     established programs that have a proven record of increasing 
     the number of under-represented minorities entering the 
     health professions.
       Health Disparities.--The Committee commends the Secretary 
     for designating the elimination of health disparities as a 
     major priority for the Department, and is encouraged that the 
     agencies within the Department are moving forward in this 
     area as they develop, implement, and evaluate strategic plans 
     for eliminating health disparities. The Committee expects the 
     Office of Minority Health, along with the National Center for 
     Minority Health and Health Disparities at the National 
     Institutes of Health, to coordinate and monitor the 
     implementation of the Department's elimination of health 
     disparities strategic plans. The Committee expects the 
     Secretary to report to Congress on the progress and 
     implementation of the strategic plans during next year's 
     appropriations hearings, and to include a progress update in 
     the Department's Budget Justification.
       National Minority Male Health Project.--The Committee 
     continues to support this effort and urges the Office of 
     Minority Health to fund a consortium of historically black 
     colleges and universities (HBCUs) to plan for the 
     implementation of this project. The Committee understands 
     that Bowie State University, Lincoln University, Morehouse 
     College, Morgan State University, and Wilberforce will all be 
     part of the initial group of demonstration institutions. The 
     Committee urges that OMH dedicate adequate funds to expand 
     this effort to include at least five additional HBCUs as 
     demonstration institutions.
       Provider education.--The Committee encourages the Secretary 
     to provide funding for HIPAA provider education geared 
     specifically to home care and hospice providers. These funds 
     should be used to assist providers in complying with HIPAA 
     privacy and administrative simplification requirements.
     Office on Women's Health
       The Committee recommends $28,795,000 for the Office on 
     Women's Health. This is the same as the administration 
     request and $2,034,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.
       The PHS Office on Women's Health [OWH] develops, 
     stimulates, and coordinates women's health research, health 
     care services, and public and health professional education 
     and training across HHS agencies. It advances important 
     crosscutting initiatives and develops public-private 
     partnerships, providing leadership and policy direction, and 
     initiating and synthesizing program activities to redress the 
     disparities in women's health.
       The Committee remains strongly supportive of the work done 
     by the Office on Women's Health in the Office of the 
     Secretary. In addition to its own work advancing women's 
     health, it provides critical coordinating services with 
     offices located in NIH, CDC, HRSA, FDA, SAMHSA, AHRQ, and 
     CMS. In totality, these offices assure that issues related to 
     research, treatment, services, training, and education 
     efforts by HHS reflect the distinct needs of women. The 
     Secretary should notify the Committee in advance of any 
     changes planned for the status, location, or reporting 
     structure of this office or any of the offices enumerated 
     above.
     Office of Emergency Preparedness
       The Committee has provided $15,247,000, which is the same 
     as the budget request and $1,076,000 more than last year, for 
     activities to counter the adverse health and medical 
     consequences from major terrorist events. Within this amount, 
     sufficient funds are provided for the Office of Emergency 
     Preparedness to staff and administer this program, as well as 
     the other OEP activities specified in the administration's 
     request.
       The Department has lead responsibility for health, medical, 
     and health-related support under the Federal response plan to 
     catastrophic disasters. On behalf of the Department, the 
     Office of Emergency Preparedness assesses the potential 
     health and medical consequences of a terrorist incident and 
     to formulate necessary responses. The funds provided would 
     support activities to build local, State, and Federal 
     capacity to respond to terrorist acts with public health 
     implications. Such activities would include assisting local 
     emergency managers through the MMST system to build an 
     enhanced capability to detect and identify biologic and 
     chemical agents.
     HIV/AIDS in minority communities
       To address high-priority HIV prevention and treatment needs 
     of minority communities heavily impacted by HIV/AIDS, the 
     Committee recommends $50,000,000. These funds are available 
     to key operating divisions of the Department with capability 
     and expertise in HIV/AIDS services to assist minority 
     communities with education, community linkages, and technical 
     assistance.


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2002........................................$35,727,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................39,747,000
Committee recommendation.....................................39,747,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $39,747,000 
     for the Office of Inspector General. This is the same as the 
     administration request and $4,020,000 higher than the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. In addition to discretionary funds, the 
     Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 
     provides $160,000,000 in mandatory funds for the Office of 
     the Inspector General in fiscal year 2003; the total funds 
     provided to the Office by this bill and the authorizing bill 
     would be $199,747,000 in fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Inspector General conducts audits, 
     investigations, inspections, and evaluations of the operating 
     divisions within the Department of Health and Human Services. 
     The OIG functions with the goal of reducing the incidence of 
     waste, abuse, and fraud. It also pursues examples of 
     mismanagement toward the goal of promoting economy and 
     efficiency throughout the Department.
       The Committee commends the Office of Inspector General for 
     their continued good work to reduce waste, fraud and abuse in 
     Department programs. The Committee expects efforts to reduce 
     Medicare mispayments will be continued and expanded. The 
     Committee also wants to assure that seniors calling into the 
     toll-free telephone line to report Medicare mispayments get a 
     prompt and complete response.


                        OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS

Appropriations, 2002........................................$31,955,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................33,642,000
Committee recommendation.....................................33,642,000

       The Committee recommends $33,642,000 for the Office for 
     Civil Rights. This is the same as the administration request 
     and $1,687,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       This recommendation includes the transfer of $3,314,000 
     from the Medicare trust funds, which is the same as the 
     administration request and the fiscal year 2002 level.
       The Office for Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing 
     civil rights-related statutes in health care and human 
     services programs. To enforce these statutes, OCR 
     investigates complaints of discrimination, conducts program 
     reviews to correct discriminatory practices, and implements 
     programs to generate

[[Page 889]]

     voluntary compliance among providers and constituency groups 
     of health and human services.


                            POLICY RESEARCH

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,499,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,499,000

       The Committee recommends $2,499,000 for policy research, 
     which is the same as the administration request and $1,000 
     less than the fiscal year 2002 amount. The Committee also 
     provides $18,000,000 in program evaluation funds, which will 
     yield a program level of $20,499,000 in fiscal year 2003.
       Funds appropriated under this title provide resources for 
     research programs that examine broad issues which cut across 
     agency and subject lines, as well as new policy approaches 
     outside the context of existing programs. This research can 
     be categorized into three major areas: health policy, human 
     services policy, and disability, aging and long-term care 
     policy.


     RETIREMENT PAY AND MEDICAL BENEFITS FOR COMMISSIONED OFFICERS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$262,075,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................251,039,000
Committee recommendation....................................251,039,000

       The Committee provides an estimated $251,039,000 for 
     retirement pay and medical benefits for commissioned officers 
     of the U.S. Public Health Service. This is the same as the 
     administration request and is $11,036,000 below the estimated 
     payments for fiscal year 2002.
       This account provides for: retirement payments to U.S. 
     Public Health Service officers who are retired for age, 
     disability, or length of service; payments to survivors of 
     deceased officers; medical care to active duty and retired 
     members and dependents and beneficiaries; and for payments to 
     the Social Security Administration for military service 
     credits.
       The Committee notes that, according to the budget request, 
     the various agencies and operating divisions across the 
     Department are expected to absorb $27,702,000 in retirement 
     medical cost payments for Commissioned Corps Officers. 
     Medical cost payments have traditionally been funded by this 
     account. While the Committee understands that the transfer of 
     responsibility is mandated in the Department of Defense 
     Reauthorization Act of fiscal year 2002, the Committee is 
     disturbed that the corresponding funds were not transferred 
     to the operating divisions to cover these costs. Therefore, 
     the Committee has included bill language mandating that the 
     Retirement Pay and Medical Benefits for Commissioned Officers 
     account continue to cover these costs in fiscal year 2003 as 
     it has done in the past. The Committee expects that any 
     future proposals by the administration for the operating 
     divisions to pay these costs will include the funding 
     required to do so.


           HEALTH FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT FUND

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003......................................$184,000,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The Committee recommendation does not include funding for 
     this account. The administration proposed consolidating into 
     this account the management of buildings and construction 
     across the Department. Instead the Committee has included 
     $270,000,000 for buildings and facilities in the CDC 
     appropriation and $20,000,000 for CDC security in the PHSSEF 
     appropriation.


            PUBLIC HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES EMERGENCY FUND

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,707,263,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,295,184,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,255,980,000

       The Committee recommends $2,255,980,000 for the Public 
     Health and Social Services Emergency Fund. This is 
     $39,204,000 below the administration request and $451,283,000 
     below the fiscal year 2002 level. The Committee has provided 
     funding for Poison Control and Emergency Medical Services for 
     Children in HRSA instead of in this account as proposed by 
     the administration. The Committee has fully funded the 
     administration request when these amounts are included.
       The Committee provides $940,000,000 to CDC for upgrading 
     State and local capacity. This amount maintains funding at 
     the level provided last year. The Committee has included 
     $40,000,000 for the Health Alert Network. The Health Alert 
     Network was established to provide ongoing communications, 
     technology, information systems support and education and 
     training to local public health agencies. The Committee 
     recognizes the important role that HAN played during and 
     after the events of September 11. The Committee is also aware 
     that the broad public health infrastructure required is the 
     same for bioterrorism preparedness as for other public health 
     threats. The Committee also recognizes that ongoing support 
     for communications, technology and information systems is 
     necessary to ensure that broad-based public health capacity 
     is improved and maintained. Given the investment made in the 
     development of HAN, the Committee expects that CDC will move 
     forward with the next logical phase of the network, which is 
     to provide workforce training and education, support for 
     organizational capacity building in local public health 
     agencies and the creation of knowledge management systems 
     required by public health practitioners.
       The Committee directs CDC and the Department to assure that 
     State HAN grantees spend no less than 85 percent of these 
     funds at the local level for local public health improvement. 
     Further, CDC and the Department are directed to ensure that 
     any funds provided for training, communications and 
     technology for bioterrorism be coordinated and used in 
     collaboration with HAN where appropriate.
       Of the total amount, the Committee recommends $158,700,000 
     for upgrading CDC capacity, which is an increase of 
     $21,995,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level. The Committee 
     recommends an additional $5,000,000 to CDC for public health 
     preparedness centers in order to provide public health 
     preparedness training to contiguous States. The Committee has 
     also provided the following amounts for CDC: $300,000,000 for 
     the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile, $100,000,0000 for the 
     smallpox vaccine, $18,040,000 for evaluation and research of 
     the anthrax vaccine, and $20,000,000 for security at CDC's 
     facilities in Atlanta, including information technology 
     security.
       The Committee notes that these funds provided to CDC can be 
     used to give assistance to States who want to use technology 
     which allows for more rapid administration of vaccines on a 
     massive scale in case of bioterrorism attack.
       The Committee's recommendation includes $152,240,000 for 
     the Office of the Secretary, an increase of $35,396,000 over 
     fiscal year 2002. The Committee has provided $2,000,000 
     within this amount to the Office of Public Health and Science 
     for activities related to the transformation and 
     modernization of the Public Health Service (PHS) Commissioned 
     Corps. Such a transformation will entail the following: (1) 
     establishment of an integrated command and control structure, 
     to provide the Secretary with the capacity to field 
     proportional responses to emergencies while simultaneously 
     strengthening the nation's public health infrastructure; and 
     (2) modernization of the Corps to ensure that it is rapidly 
     deployable and adaptable, capable of responding effectively 
     to emergencies of varying intensities, able to integrate 
     resources from various partner agencies into a unified 
     response system, and directed via an integrated management 
     and administration structure in the Department. These funds 
     will allow an increase in recruitment for Corps health 
     professionals, expand and enhance the Commissioned Corps 
     Readiness Force, provide medical readiness education and 
     training to Corps personnel, and establish a PHS Auxiliary 
     system to provide locally-grouped professionals who can be 
     deployed along with Corps teams.
       The Committee also provides $547,000,000 to HRSA for 
     bioterrorism activities. Of this amount, $492,000,000 is for 
     hospital preparedness and infrastructure improvements related 
     to bioterrorism. This is an increase of $357,000,000 over 
     last year's level. The Committee provides $55,000,000 for 
     curriculum development and training on the detection and 
     treatment of diseases caused by bioterrorism. The Committee 
     recommendation also includes $10,000,000 for SAMHSA and 
     $5,000,000 for bioterrorism research at AHRQ.
       The Committee directs the Secretary to use the $10,000,000 
     for SAMHSA to supplement the $20,000,000 available for the 
     National Child Traumatic Stress Initiative within Programs of 
     Regional and National Significance under the Center for 
     Mental Health Services. With a total program level of 
     $30,000,000 ($10,000,000 more than last year, excluding 
     $10,000,000 in grants supported by Public Law 107-38), the 
     Committee expects that SAMHSA will be able to increase the 
     number of children and families served through the direct 
     services provided by this program. In addition, the 
     additional funding will promote improvements in treatment, 
     training opportunities and public information efforts.
       In addition to the funds provided in the PHSSEF, the 
     Committee has provided $1,485,100,000 to NIH for 
     bioterrorism-related activities. The aggregate amount 
     provided in this bill for bioterrorism is $3,741,080,000.
       The Committee notes that a bioterrorism event will occur at 
     the local level and will require local capacity, preparedness 
     and initial response. For this reason it was the intent of 
     Congress that a significant amount of the funding provided in 
     the Emergency Supplemental Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-117) 
     be used to improve local public health capacity and meet the 
     needs determined by local public health agencies. The 
     Committee believes it is essential that local public health 
     agencies are full partners in developing State plans and that 
     a significant level of funding be made available to build 
     local capacity and meet the needs as determined by local 
     public health officials.
       Therefore, the Committee directs the Department to report 
     on steps it is taking to ensure that: (1) substantial funding 
     reaches local public health agencies, and such funds are used 
     to build local public health capacity

[[Page 890]]

     in ways with which local public health officials concur; and 
     (2) local public health agencies are fully participating 
     partners in developing State preparedness plans. The 
     Department is directed to report to the Committee on the 
     amounts of fiscal year 2002 funding that each State has spent 
     or plans to spend to directly benefit or improve local public 
     health capacity, and the amount each State has directly 
     granted to local public health agencies. The Committee 
     expects this report to be submitted 90 days after the 
     enactment of this bill.

      General Provisions, Department of Health and Human Services

       The Committee recommendation includes language placing a 
     $50,000 ceiling on official representation expenses, which is 
     $13,000 more than existing law (sec. 201).
       The Committee recommendation includes language carried in 
     fiscal year 2002 which limits the assignment of certain 
     public health personnel (sec. 202).
       The Committee recommendation retains language regarding 
     set-asides in the authorizing statute of the National 
     Institutes of Health (sec. 203).
       The Committee recommendation retains a provision carried in 
     fiscal year 2002 to limit the use of grant funds to pay 
     individuals no more than an annual rate of Executive Level I 
     (sec. 204).
       The Committee recommendation retains language carried in 
     fiscal year 2002 restricting the Secretary's use of taps for 
     program evaluation activities unless he submits a report to 
     the Appropriations Committees on the proposed use of funds 
     (sec. 205).
       The Committee recommendation includes language authorizing 
     the transfer of up to 1.25 percent of Public Health Service 
     funds for evaluation activities (sec. 206).
       The Committee recommendation retains language restricting 
     transfers of appropriated funds among accounts and requiring 
     15 day notification to both the House and Senate 
     Appropriations Committees (sec. 207).
       The Committee recommendation retains language carried in 
     fiscal year 2002 permitting the transfer of up to 3 percent 
     of AIDS funds among Institutes and Centers by the Director of 
     NIH and the Director of the Office of AIDS Research at NIH 
     (sec. 208).
       The Committee recommendation retains language which 
     requires that the use of AIDS research funds be determined 
     jointly by the Director of the National Institutes of Health 
     and the Director of the Office of AIDS Research and that 
     those funds be allocated directly to the Office of AIDS 
     Research for distribution to the Institutes and Centers 
     consistent with the AIDS research plan (sec. 209).
       The Committee recommendation retains language carried in 
     fiscal year 2002 regarding requirements for family planning 
     applicants (sec. 210).
       The Committee recommendation retains language which 
     restricts the use of funds to carry out the Medicare+Choice 
     Program if the Secretary denies participation to an otherwise 
     eligible entity (sec. 211).
       The Committee recommendation retains language which States 
     that no provider services under Title X of the PHS Act may be 
     exempt from State laws regarding child abuse (sec. 212).
       The Committee recommendation retains language carried in 
     fiscal year 2002 extending the refugee status of persecuted 
     religious groups (sec. 213).
       The Committee recommendation retains language which 
     prohibits the Secretary from withholding substance abuse 
     treatment funds (sec. 214).
       The Committee recommendation retains language carried in 
     fiscal year 2002 which facilitates the expenditure of funds 
     for international AIDS activities (sec. 215).
       The Committee recommendation includes a new provision 
     allowing the Division of Federal Occupational Health to use 
     personal services contracting to employ professional, 
     administrative, and occupational health professionals (sec. 
     216).
       The Committee recommendation includes bill language which 
     permits transfer of the Nutrition Services Incentives Program 
     from USDA to AOA (sec. 217).
       The Committee recommendation includes bill language that 
     allows the NIH to expand the number of Morris K. Udall 
     Parkinson's Disease Centers (sec. 218).

                   TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


                    education for the disadvantaged

Appropriations, 2002....................................$12,346,900,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................13,385,400,000
Committee recommendation.................................13,178,400,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $13,178,400,000 for education for the disadvantaged. This 
     amount is $831,500,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and $207,000,000 below the budget request.
       The programs in the Education for the Disadvantaged account 
     help ensure that poor and low-achieving children are not left 
     behind in the Nation's effort to raise the academic 
     performance of all children and youth. That goal is more 
     pressing than ever since the passage of the No Child Left 
     Behind Act, which incorporates numerous accountability 
     measures into Title I programs, especially part A grants to 
     local educational agencies--the largest Federal elementary 
     and secondary education program.
       In particular, the new law strengthens Title I 
     accountability by requiring States to implement statewide 
     accountability systems covering all public schools and 
     students. These systems must be based on challenging State 
     standards in reading and mathematics, annual statewide 
     progress objectives ensuring that all groups of students 
     reach proficiency in reading and math within 12 years, and 
     annual testing for all students in grades 3-8. State progress 
     objectives and assessment results must be broken out by 
     poverty, race and ethnicity, disability, and limited English 
     proficiency. States, school districts, and schools must 
     report annually on their progress toward statewide 
     proficiency goals. Districts and schools that fail to make 
     adequate yearly progress (AYP) toward these goals will, over 
     time, be subject to increasingly rigorous improvement, 
     corrective action, and restructuring measures aimed at 
     getting them back on course to meet State standards. Students 
     attending schools that fail to meet annual State AYP 
     objectives for 2 consecutive years will be permitted to 
     transfer to a better public school or, if the school 
     continues to fail to meet AYP for 3 years or more, to use 
     Title I funds to obtain educational services from a public- 
     or private-sector provider selected by their parents.
     Grants to local educational agencies
       Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) provide 
     supplemental education funding, especially in high-poverty 
     areas, for local programs that provide extra academic support 
     to help raise the achievement of eligible students or, in the 
     case of schoolwide programs, help all students in high-
     poverty schools to meet challenging State academic standards. 
     The program serves more than 15 million students in nearly 
     all school districts and more than half of all public 
     schools--including two-thirds of the Nation's elementary 
     schools.
       Title I schools help students reach challenging State 
     standards through one of two models: ``targeted assistance'' 
     that supplements the regular education program of individual 
     children deemed most in need of special assistance, or a 
     ``schoolwide'' approach that allows schools to use Title I 
     funds--in combination with other Federal, State, and local 
     funds--to improve the overall instructional program for all 
     children in a school.
       More than any other Federal program, Title I grants to LEAs 
     are critical to the success of the No Child Left Behind Act. 
     The Committee recommends $11,350,000,000 for this program, an 
     increase of $1,000,000,000 over the 2002 appropriation and 
     the same as the budget request.
       The grants are distributed through four formulas: basic, 
     concentration, targeted, and education finance incentive 
     grant (EFIG).
       For Title I basic grants, including the amount transferred 
     to the Census Bureau for poverty updates, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $7,172,971,000, the same as 
     the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget request. 
     Basic grants are awarded to school districts with at least 10 
     poor children who make up more than 2 percent of enrollment.
       For concentration grants, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $1,365,031,000, the same as the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation and the budget request. Funds under this 
     program are distributed according to the basic grants 
     formula, except that they go only to LEAs where the number of 
     poor children exceeds 6,500 or 15 percent of the total 
     school-aged population.
       Last year, for the first time, Congress appropriated Title 
     I funds through the EFIG and targeted formulas. This year, 
     the Committee recommends allocating all of the increase 
     through those two formulas.
       The EFIG formula delivers a larger share of Title I funds 
     to high-poverty school districts--those with child poverty 
     rates in excess of 30 percent--than any other Title I 
     formula, followed closely by the targeted grants formula. In 
     addition, the EFIG formula uses State-level ``equity'' and 
     ``effort'' factors to make allocations to States that are 
     intended to encourage States to spend more on education and 
     to improve the equity of State funding systems. Once State 
     allocations are determined, suballocations to the LEA level 
     are based on a modified version of the targeted grants 
     formula, described below.
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,405,999,000 
     for education finance incentive grants. This amount is 
     $612,500,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and 
     the budget request.
       The targeted grants formula weights child counts to make 
     higher payments to school districts with high numbers or 
     percentages of poor students. For these grants, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $1,405,999,000, which is 
     $387,500,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and 
     $612,500,000 below the budget request.
     William F. Goodling Even Start Family Literacy Program
       For the Even Start program, the Committee recommends 
     $200,000,000, which is $50,000,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the same as the budget request.
       The Even Start program provides grants for family literacy 
     programs that serve disadvantaged families with children 
     under 8 years of age and adults eligible for services

[[Page 891]]

     under the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act. Programs 
     combine early childhood education, adult literacy, and 
     parenting education.
       States receive funds on the basis of their proportion of 
     Title I LEA grant allocations and make competitive 4-year 
     grants to partnerships of local educational agencies and 
     community-based organizations. Grant funds must be equitably 
     distributed among urban and rural areas. The local share of 
     program costs must increase from 10 percent in the first year 
     to 40 percent in the 4th year, 50 percent in years 5 through 
     8, and 65 percent after 8 years.
     Reading First State Grants
       The Committee recommends $1,000,000,000, the same as the 
     budget request and $100,000,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation, for the Reading First State Grants 
     program.
       Reading First is a comprehensive effort to provide States 
     and LEAs with funds to implement comprehensive reading 
     instruction for children in grades K-3. The purpose of the 
     program is to help ensure that every child can read by third 
     grade. LEAs and schools that receive funds under this program 
     should use the money to provide professional development in 
     reading instruction for teachers and administrators, adopt 
     and use reading diagnostics for students in grades K-3 to 
     determine where they need help, implement reading curricula 
     that are based on scientific research, and provide reading 
     interventions for children who are not reading at grade 
     level.
     Early Reading First
       The Committee recommends $75,000,000, the same as the 
     budget request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for 
     Early Reading First. Early Reading First complements Reading 
     First State Grants by providing competitive grants to school 
     districts and nonprofit groups to support activities in 
     existing preschool programs that are designed to enhance the 
     verbal skills, phonological awareness, letter knowledge, pre-
     reading skills, and early language development of children 
     ages 3 through 5. Funds are to be targeted to communities 
     with high numbers of low-income families.
     Improving Literacy Through School Libraries
       The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the Improving 
     Literacy Through School Libraries program. This amount is 
     $2,500,000 more than the budget request and the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation.
       This program provides funds for urgently needed, up-to-date 
     school library books and training for school library media 
     specialists in order to support the scientifically based 
     reading programs authorized by the Reading First initiative. 
     LEAs with a child-poverty rate of at least 20 percent are 
     eligible for the competitive awards. Funds may be used to 
     acquire school library media resources, including books and 
     advanced technology; facilitate resource-sharing networks 
     among schools and school libraries; provide professional 
     development for school library media specialists; and provide 
     students with access to school libraries during non-school 
     hours.
     Migrant
       For the State agency migrant program, the Committee 
     recommends $400,000,000, which is $4,000,000 more than the 
     budget request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       The Title I migrant program authorizes grants to State 
     educational agencies for programs to meet the special 
     educational needs of the children of migrant agricultural 
     workers and fishermen. Funds are allocated to the States 
     through a statutory formula based on each State's average 
     per-pupil expenditure for education and counts of migratory 
     children ages 3 through 21 residing within the States. Only 
     migratory children who have moved within the last 3 years are 
     generally eligible to be counted and served by the program.
       This appropriation also supports activities to improve 
     interstate and intrastate coordination of migrant education 
     programs.
     Neglected and delinquent
       The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for the Title I 
     neglected and delinquent program. This amount is $2,000,000 
     more than the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.
       This program provides financial assistance to State 
     educational agencies for education services to neglected and 
     delinquent children and youth in State-run institutions and 
     for juveniles in adult correctional institutions.
       Funds are allocated to individual States through a formula 
     based on the number of children in State-operated 
     institutions and per-pupil education expenditures for the 
     State.
       States are authorized to set aside up to 10 percent of 
     their neglected and delinquent funds to help students in 
     State-operated institutions make the transition into locally 
     operated programs. Transition activities are designed to 
     address the high failure and dropout rate of 
     institutionalized students and may include alternative 
     classes, counseling and supervisory services, or educational 
     activities in State-supported group homes.
     Evaluation
       The Committee bill includes $8,900,000, the same as the 
     budget request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for 
     Title I evaluation activities. Evaluation funds are used to 
     support large-scale national surveys that examine how the 
     Title I program is contributing to student performance.
     Comprehensive school reform
       The Committee recommends no funds for this program. The 
     budget included $235,000,000 for this program, the same 
     amount provided in fiscal year 2002.
       This program provides schools with funding to develop or 
     adopt, and implement, comprehensive school reforms that will 
     enable children in participating schools to meet State 
     standards. The Department allocates funds to States based on 
     their relative shares of the previous year's Title I basic 
     grants funds.
     Dropout prevention
       The Committee recommends $13,000,000 to help schools 
     implement effective school dropout prevention and re-entry 
     programs. This amount is $3,000,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation. The administration requested no funds for 
     this purpose.
     Close Up Fellowships
       For Close Up Fellowships, formerly called Ellender 
     Fellowships, the Committee bill includes $1,500,000, the same 
     as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The administration 
     proposed eliminating this program, which is administered by 
     the Close Up Foundation of Washington, D.C. The program 
     provides fellowships to students from low-income families and 
     their teachers to enable them to attend 1 week in Washington 
     attending seminars and meeting with representatives of the 
     three branches of the Federal Government.
     Advanced Placement
       The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for Advanced 
     Placement. This amount is $3,000,000 more than the budget 
     request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The first 
     priority of the program is to subsidize test fees for low-
     income students who are enrolled in an Advanced Placement 
     class and plan to take an Advanced Placement test. The 
     balance of the funds are allocated for Advanced Placement 
     Incentive Program grants, which are used to expand access for 
     low-income individuals to Advanced Placement programs. 
     Eligible activities include teacher training and 
     participation in online Advanced Placement courses, among 
     other related purposes.
     High school equivalency program
       The Committee bill includes $24,000,000 for the high school 
     equivalency program (HEP). This amount is $1,000,000 more 
     than the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.
       This program provides 5-year grants to institutions of 
     higher education and other nonprofit organizations to recruit 
     migrant students ages 16 and over and provide the academic 
     and support services needed to help them obtain a high school 
     equivalency certificate and subsequently gain employment, win 
     admission to a postsecondary institution or a job-training 
     program, or join the military. Projects provide counseling, 
     health services, stipends, and placement assistance. HEP 
     serves about 8,000 migrants.
     College Assistance Migrant Program
       For the College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP), the 
     Committee recommends $16,000,000, which is $1,000,000 more 
     than the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.
       Funds provide 5-year grants to institutions of higher 
     education and nonprofit organizations for projects that 
     provide tutoring, counseling, and financial assistance to 
     migrant students during their first year of postsecondary 
     education. Projects also may use up to 10 percent of their 
     grants for follow-up services after students have completed 
     their first year of college, including assistance in 
     obtaining student financial aid.


                               impact aid

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,143,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,140,500,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,176,500,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,176,500,000 
     for impact aid for the Department of Education. This amount 
     is $36,000,000 more than the budget request and $33,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       Impact aid provides financial assistance to school 
     districts for the costs of educating children when 
     enrollments and the availability of revenues from local 
     sources have been adversely affected by the presence of 
     Federal activities. Children who reside on Federal or Indian 
     lands generally constitute a financial burden on local school 
     systems because these lands do not generate property taxes--a 
     major revenue source for elementary and secondary education 
     in most communities. In addition, realignments of U.S. 
     military forces at bases across the country often lead to 
     influxes of children into school districts without producing 
     the new revenues required to maintain an appropriate level of 
     education.
       Basic support payments.--The Committee recommends 
     $1,012,500,000 for basic support payments. This amount is 
     $30,000,000 more than the budget request and the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation. Under statutory formula, payments are 
     made on behalf of all categories of federally connected 
     children.

[[Page 892]]

       Payments for children with disabilities.--Under this 
     program, additional payments are made for certain federally 
     connected children eligible for services under the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The Committee 
     bill includes $52,000,000 for this purpose. This amount is 
     $2,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     budget request.
       Facilities maintenance.--This activity provides funding for 
     maintaining certain school facilities owned by the Department 
     of Education. The Committee recommends $8,000,000, the same 
     as the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 level, for 
     this purpose.
       Construction.--Payments are made to eligible LEAs to be 
     used for construction and renovation of school facilities, or 
     for debt service related to the construction of school 
     facilities. The Committee recommends $47,000,000 for this 
     program. This amount is $2,000,000 more than the budget 
     request and $1,000,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.
       Payments for Federal property.--These payments compensate 
     local educational agencies in part for revenue lost due to 
     the removal of Federal property from local tax rolls. 
     Payments are made to LEAs that have a loss of tax base of at 
     least 10 percent of assessed value due to the acquisition 
     since 1938 of real property by the U.S. Government. The 
     Committee recommends $57,000,000 for this activity. This 
     amount is $2,000,000 more than the budget request and the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation.


                      school improvement programs

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$7,837,473,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................6,784,484,000
Committee recommendation..................................7,788,329,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,788,329,000 
     for school improvement programs. This is $1,003,845,000 more 
     than the budget request and $49,144,000 less than the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation.
     State grants for improving teacher quality
       The No Child Left Behind Act requires States to ensure that 
     all teachers teaching in core academic subjects are ``highly 
     qualified'' by the end of the 2005-2006 school year. The 
     Committee recommends $2,850,000,000, the same as the budget 
     request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       States and LEAs may use the funds for a range of activities 
     related to the certification, recruitment, professional 
     development and support of teachers. Activities may include 
     reforming teacher certification and licensure requirements, 
     addressing alternative routes to State certification of 
     teachers, recruiting teachers and principals, and 
     implementing teacher mentoring systems, teacher testing, 
     merit pay and merit-based performance systems.
       These funds may also be used by districts to hire teachers 
     to reduce class sizes. The Committee recognizes that smaller 
     classes, particularly in the early grades, can have a 
     positive impact on students by improving classroom 
     discipline, providing students with more individualized 
     attention, and allowing parents and teachers to work more 
     closely together. Funds within the teacher quality State 
     grants program may be used to continue this commitment to our 
     Nation's students, parents and teachers, without taking away 
     from other efforts to invest in professional development.
     Improving teacher quality: National activities
       The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for professional 
     development national activities. This amount is $5,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and $25,000,000 
     more than the budget request. Within those funds, $15,000,000 
     is included for professional development activities for early 
     childhood educators and caregivers in high-poverty 
     communities. This amount is the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the budget request. In addition, 
     $10,000,000, the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, 
     is included for the National Board for Professional Teaching 
     Standards. The administration requested no funds for this 
     purpose. Finally, the Committee recognizes the critical role 
     that principals play in creating an environment that fosters 
     good teaching and high academic achievement. Therefore, the 
     Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the school leadership 
     program, which provides competitive grants to assist high-
     need LEAs to recruit and train principals and assistant 
     principals through activities such as professional 
     development and training programs. This amount is $5,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation; the 
     administration requested no funds for this purpose.
     Mathematics and science partnerships
       For mathematics and science partnerships, the Committee 
     recommends $25,000,000, which is $12,500,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget request. These 
     funds will be used to improve the performance of students in 
     the areas of math and science by bringing math and science 
     teachers in elementary and secondary schools together with 
     scientists, mathematicians, and engineers to increase the 
     teachers' subject-matter knowledge and improve their teaching 
     skills. The Secretary is authorized to award grants, on a 
     competitive basis, to eligible partnerships to enable the 
     entities to pay the Federal share of the costs of developing 
     or redesigning more rigorous mathematics and science 
     curricula that are aligned with State and local standards; 
     creating opportunities for enhanced professional development 
     that improves the subject-matter knowledge of math and 
     science teachers; recruiting math and science majors; and 
     improving and expanding training of math and science 
     teachers, including the effective integration of technology 
     into curricula and instruction.
     Troops-to-Teachers
       This program supports the Defense Department's Troops to 
     Teachers program, which helps prepare retiring military 
     personnel to teach in high-poverty school districts. The 
     Secretary of Education transfers program funds to the 
     Department of Defense for the Defense Activity for Non-
     Traditional Education Support to provide assistance, 
     including stipends of up to $5,000, to eligible members of 
     the armed forces so that they can obtain teacher 
     certification or licensing. In addition, the program helps 
     these individuals find employment in a school. The Committee 
     recommends $20,000,000, the same as the budget request, for 
     this program. This amount is $2,000,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation.
     Transition to teaching
       This program provides grants to help support efforts to 
     recruit, train, and place nontraditional teaching candidates 
     into teaching positions and to support them during their 
     first years in the classroom. In particular, this program is 
     intended to attract mid-career professionals and recent 
     college graduates. Program participants are placed in high-
     need schools in high-need LEAs. The Committee recommends 
     $35,000,000, a decrease of $4,400,000 below the budget 
     request and the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
     Innovative education program strategies State grants
       The Committee recommends $385,000,000 for innovative 
     education program strategies State grants. This amount is the 
     same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget 
     request.
       The innovative education program provides support to States 
     and LEAs in developing education reform initiatives that will 
     improve the performance of students, schools and teachers.
     Educational technology state grants
       The Committee recommends $700,500,000 for educational 
     technology State grants. This amount is the same as the 
     budget request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       This program supports efforts to integrate technology into 
     curricula to improve student learning. Funds flow by formula 
     to States and may be used for the purchase of hardware and 
     software, teacher training on integrating technology into the 
     curriculum, and efforts to use technology to use technology 
     to improve communication with parents, among other related 
     purposes. An LEA must use at least 25 percent of its formula 
     allocation for professional development in the integration of 
     technology into the curricula unless it can demonstrate that 
     it already provides such professional development.
     Ready to Learn Television
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $24,000,000 
     for the Ready to Learn Television program. This amount is 
     $2,000,000 more than the budget request and the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation.
       Ready to Learn Television supports the development and 
     distribution of educational television programming designed 
     to improve the readiness of preschool children to enter 
     kindergarten and elementary school. The program also supports 
     the development, production, and dissemination of educational 
     materials designed to help parents, children, and caregivers 
     obtain the maximum advantage from educational programming.
     Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology
       The Committee recommends $62,500,000, which is the same as 
     the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for the Preparing 
     Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology (PT3) program. The 
     administration requested no funds for this purpose.
       The Committee strongly believes that this program should be 
     preserved. Teacher preparation is critical to ensuring that 
     the Nation's substantial investment in education technology 
     is used effectively. Too often, however, it is mistakenly 
     assumed that just because prospective teachers may know how 
     to use technology in their daily lives, they automatically 
     understand how to integrate it into curricula. Without a 
     program designated specifically to promote high-quality 
     teacher preparation in technology, the Committee fears that 
     States are unlikely to devote adequate funds for this purpose 
     from larger block programs that they rely on to address a 
     myriad of other pressing needs, from recruiting teachers and 
     reducing class sizes to buying new hardware and upgrading 
     distance learning capabilities.
       Funds are used to assist consortia of private and public 
     entities to prepare prospective teachers to use technology 
     effectively in the classroom. Consortia consist of at least 
     one institution of higher education, one State or local 
     educational agency, and one

[[Page 893]]

     other entity. Of the amount appropriated, the Committee urges 
     the Department to allocate all funds that are not used for 
     continuation costs for the purpose of issuing a new, multi-
     year grant competition.
     21st Century Community Learning Centers
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000,000 
     for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program. This 
     amount is the same as the budget request and the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation.
       This program enables communities to establish or expand 
     community learning centers that provide activities offering 
     significant extended learning opportunities, such as before- 
     and after-school programs, for students and related services 
     to their families. Centers must target their services on 
     students who attend schools that are eligible to operate a 
     schoolwide program under Title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act or serve high percentages of students 
     from low-income families.
     Safe and drug-free schools and communities
       The Committee recommends a total of $644,250,000 for 
     activities to promote safe and drug-free schools and 
     communities. This amount is $10,000,000 less than the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget request.
       State grant program.--The Committee bill provides 
     $482,017,000 for the safe and drug-free schools and 
     communities State grant program. This amount is $10,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget 
     request.
       National programs.--The Committee has included $162,233,000 
     for the national programs portion of the safe and drug-free 
     schools program. This amount is $20,000,000 less than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and $10,000,000 less than the 
     budget request. The Committee intends that $5,000,000 shall 
     be used for Project SERV (School Emergency Response to 
     Violence), which provides education-related services to LEAs 
     in which the learning environment has been disrupted due to a 
     violent or traumatic crisis. The budget request included 
     $10,000,000 for Project SERV. However, the Committee will 
     monitor the availability of funding and consider action in 
     subsequent appropriations bills. The funds provided for 
     Project SERV are available until expended.
       The Committee is aware of the increasing problem of alcohol 
     and drug abuse on college campuses. Therefore, it has 
     included $850,000 to continue the National Recognition Awards 
     program under the same guidelines outlined by Section 120(f) 
     of Public Law 105-244. This program identifies and provides 
     models of alcohol and drug abuse prevention and education 
     programs in higher education. The Committee is disappointed 
     that the Department did not fund this program last year, as 
     requested in Senate report language. The Committee strongly 
     urges the Department to resume funding in fiscal year 2003.
       Modifications made to the Safe and Drug Free Schools 
     Program in Section 4114(a)(1) of the No Child Left Behind Act 
     may have created dramatic changes in funding for some LEAs. 
     The Committee understands that no data have been compiled to 
     show the nationwide breakdown of these funding changes at the 
     LEA level. Therefore, the Committee requests that the 
     Department gather this information and report back to 
     Congress no later than May 1, 2004, with its findings.
     Magnet schools assistance
       For the magnet schools assistance program, the Committee 
     bill provides $110,000,000, the same as the budget request 
     and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       This program supports grants to local educational agencies 
     to establish and operate magnet schools that are part of a 
     court-ordered or federally approved voluntary desegregation 
     plan. Magnet schools are designed to attract substantial 
     numbers of students from different social, economic, ethnic, 
     and racial backgrounds. Grantees may use funds for teacher 
     salaries, purchase of computers, and other educational 
     materials and equipment.
     Charter schools
       The Committee recommends $200,000,000 for the support of 
     charter schools. This amount is the same as the budget 
     request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       This program supports the planning, development, and 
     initial implementation of charter schools, which are public 
     schools that receive exemption from many statutory and 
     regulatory requirements in exchange for promising to meet 
     agreed-upon accountability measures. State educational 
     agencies that have the authority under State law to approve 
     charter schools are eligible to compete for grants. If an 
     eligible SEA does not participate, charter schools from the 
     State may apply directly to the Secretary.
     Credit enhancement for charter school facilities
       The Committee recommends no funding for this new program. 
     The budget request included $100,000,000 for this purpose.
     Voluntary public school choice
       The Committee recommends $27,584,000, which is $2,584,000 
     above the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation, for efforts to establish or expand State- or 
     district-wide public school choice programs, especially for 
     parents whose children attend low-performing public schools.
     Choice demonstration fund
       The Committee recommends no funding for this new program. 
     The budget request included $50,000,000 for this purpose.
     State assessments and enhanced assessment instruments
       A key accountability measure in the No Child Left Behind 
     Act requires annual State assessments in reading and 
     mathematics for all students in grades 3-8 beginning in the 
     2005-2006 school year. The new assessments will be used to 
     determine whether States, LEAs, and schools are making 
     adequate yearly progress toward the goal of helping all 
     students attain proficiency within 12 years of the 2001-2002 
     school year.
       This program has two components. The first provides formula 
     grants to States to pay the cost of developing standards and 
     assessments required by the new law. The statute includes 
     funding ``trigger amounts'' for fiscal years 2002-2007; 
     States may defer the new assessments if the appropriation 
     falls below the trigger level. The trigger was $370,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2002 and rises to $380,000,000 in fiscal year 
     2003. Under the second component, appropriations in excess of 
     the trigger level are used for the Grants for Enhanced 
     Assessment Instruments program. This competitive grant 
     program supports efforts by States to improve the quality and 
     fairness of their assessment systems.
       Congress appropriated a total of $387,000,000 for the two 
     programs in fiscal year 2002--$370,000,000 for State 
     assessments and $17,000,000 for enhanced assessment 
     instruments. The administration has requested the same total 
     for fiscal year 2003, with $380,000,000 dedicated to State 
     assessments and $7,000,000 to enhanced assessment 
     instruments. The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $387,000,000, same as the budget request and the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation.
     Education for homeless children and youth
       For carrying out education activities authorized by Title 
     VII, subtitle B of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Act, the Committee recommends $54,000,000, which 
     is $4,000,000 more than the budget request and the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation.
       This program provides assistance to each State to support 
     an office of the coordinator of education for homeless 
     children and youth, to develop and implement State plans for 
     educating homeless children, and to make subgrants to LEAs to 
     support the education of those children. Grants are made to 
     States based on the total that each State receives in Title I 
     grants to LEAs.
     Training and advisory services
       For training and advisory services authorized by Title IV 
     of the Civil Rights Act, the Committee recommends $7,334,000, 
     the same as the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.
       The funds provided will continue operation of the 10 
     regional equity assistance centers (EACs). Each EAC provides 
     services to school districts upon request. Activities include 
     disseminating information on successful practices and legal 
     requirements related to nondiscrimination on the basis of 
     race, color, sex, or national origin in education programs.
     Education for Native Hawaiians
       For programs for the education of Native Hawaiians, the 
     Committee bill includes $32,500,000, which is $14,200,000 
     more than the budget request and $2,000,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The Committee urges the 
     Department to continue its eight programmatic funding level 
     allocations of last year and, further, to provide $2,000,000 
     for early childhood education. The Committee remains 
     supportive of the funding for construction/co-location 
     activities within those public schools heavily impacted by a 
     high proportion of Native Hawaiian students.
       The Committee includes bill language making a minor change 
     in the Native Hawaiian section of the No Child Left Behind 
     Act to reflect a provision included by the Senate in its 
     version of the legislation.
       Prisoner education.--Native Hawaiians continue to represent 
     a major, if not the largest, ethnic group in the State's 
     prison system. The Committee recognizes the importance of 
     reintegrating Native Hawaiian youth into school settings or 
     onto a career path and job placement through comprehensive, 
     culturally sensitive individual and family counseling; 
     educational skills training; and employment training/job 
     placement. Over the past several years, efforts in this area 
     have shown significant progress. Efforts should target Native 
     Hawaiian youth in districts with high percentages of school 
     dropouts and youth offenders.
     Alaska Native educational equity
       The Committee recommends $32,500,000 for the Alaska Native 
     educational equity assistance program. This amount is 
     $18,300,000 more than the budget request and $8,500,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       These funds address the severe educational handicaps of 
     Alaska Native schoolchildren. Funds are used for the 
     development of supplemental educational programs to benefit 
     Alaska Natives.
       The Committee has included bill language making minor 
     corrections in the Alaska Native section of Public Law 107-
     110.

[[Page 894]]


     Rural education
       The Committee recommends $175,000,000, an increase of 
     $12,500,000 over the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for 
     rural education programs. The administration requested no 
     funds for this purpose.
       The Committee strongly supports the continued use of 
     Federal funding specifically for rural education. Rural 
     schools face difficult challenges in meeting the mandates in 
     the No Child Left Behind Act, particularly in the areas of 
     attracting highly qualified teachers and adapting to new 
     assessment requirements and reporting expectations. The rural 
     education programs that were funded for the first time last 
     year are intended to help level the playing field for small 
     and high-poverty rural school systems that typically receive 
     less Federal formula funding than their urban and suburban 
     counterparts, and are frequently unable to compete for 
     competitive grants. In addition to providing more total 
     funding for such districts, the program also allows the 
     districts to combine funds from four categorical programs and 
     use the money to address their highest priorities, such as 
     recruiting teachers, purchasing technology, or upgrading 
     curricula.
       Rural education funding should be equally divided between 
     the Small, Rural Schools Achievement Program, which provides 
     funds to LEAs that serve a small number of students, and the 
     Low-Income and Rural Schools Program, which provides funds to 
     LEAs that serve concentrations of poor students, regardless 
     of the number of students served.
     Mentoring
       The Committee recommends $17,500,000 to support mentoring 
     programs and activities for children who are at risk of 
     failing academically, dropping out of school, or getting 
     involved in criminal or delinquent activities, or who lack 
     strong positive role models. This amount is the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation; the administration requested 
     no funds for this program.
     Fund for the Improvement of Education
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $735,661,000 
     for the Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE). This 
     amount is $97,228,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and $651,661,000 more than the budget request.
       Programs of national significance: Within the amount 
     recommended, the Committee includes $380,416,000 for programs 
     of national significance. This amount is $3,539,000 below the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and $345,416,000 more than the 
     budget request. The recommendation includes no funds for 
     comprehensive school reform demonstrations. The 
     administration requested no funds for this purpose.
       Also within programs of national significance, the 
     Committee has included $1,000,000--as part of its preventing 
     and reversing heart disease initiative--for programs to teach 
     school children and teachers coping skills to help ease the 
     short- and long-term effects of stress. Programs such as 
     these have been scientifically proven to improve students' 
     self-esteem, self-efficacy, control, grade point average, 
     work habits, memory and cooperation.
       Character education: The Committee recommends $25,000,000 
     to provide support for the design and implementation of 
     character education programs. This amount is the same as the 
     budget request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       Reading Is Fundamental/Inexpensive book distribution: The 
     Committee recommends $27,000,000 to award a contract to 
     Reading Is Fundamental, Inc. (RIF) to provide reading-
     motivation activities. This amount is $3,000,000 more than 
     the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. 
     RIF, a private nonprofit organization, encourages reading 
     both inside and outside school by allowing youngsters to 
     select books to keep at home. Federal funds provide up to 75 
     percent of the costs of books.
       Smaller learning communities: The Committee recommends no 
     funding for this purpose, as did the administration. In 
     fiscal year 2002 $142,189,000 was provided for this activity.
       The administration recommended eliminating the 11 programs 
     below. The Committee has rejected that recommendation.
       Elementary school counseling: The Committee includes 
     $32,500,000 to establish or expand counseling programs in 
     elementary schools. This amount is the same as the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation.
       Javits gifted and talented education: The Committee has 
     included $11,250,000 for the Javits Gifted and Talented 
     Students Education Program. This amount is the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation. This program authorizes 
     awards to State and local education agencies, institutions of 
     higher education, and other public and private agencies for 
     research, demonstration, and training activities designed to 
     enhance the capability of elementary and secondary schools to 
     meet the special educational needs of gifted and talented 
     students.
       Star Schools: The Committee recommends $27,520,000 for the 
     Star Schools program. This amount is the same as the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation. The Star Schools program is designed 
     to improve instruction in math, science, foreign languages, 
     and other subjects such as vocational education, to 
     underserved populations by means of telecommunications 
     technologies.
       Ready to Teach: The Committee recommends $17,000,000 for 
     two Ready to Teach programs. This amount is $5,000,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The Committee 
     includes $12,000,000 for Teacherline and one or more other 
     nonprofit entities, for the purpose of developing national 
     telecommunications-based programs to improve teaching in core 
     curricular areas, and $5,000,000 for digital educational 
     programming grants, which allow local public television 
     stations, in partnership with State and local educational 
     agencies, institutions of higher education, nonprofit groups, 
     and businesses to develop digital instructional materials for 
     classroom use.
       Foreign language assistance: The Committee recommends 
     $18,500,000, which is $4,500,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation, for competitive grants to increase the 
     quality and quantity of foreign language instruction. The 
     Committee intends that none of the Foreign Language 
     Assistance program funds should be used for the Foreign 
     Language Incentive program.
       Carol M. White Physical Education for Progress: The 
     Committee recommends $70,000,000 to help LEAs and community-
     based organizations initiate, expand and improve physical 
     education programs for students in grades K-12. This amount 
     is $20,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       Community technology centers: The Committee recommends 
     $32,475,000, the same amount as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation, for community technology centers. Community 
     technology centers provide disadvantaged residents of 
     economically distressed urban and rural communities with 
     access to information technology and related training. They 
     can provide, among other things, preschool and after-school 
     programs, adult education and literacy, and workforce 
     development and training.
       Exchanges with historic whaling and trading partners: The 
     Committee recommends $10,000,000 to provide educational, 
     cultural, apprenticeship, and exchange programs for Alaska 
     Natives, Native Hawaiians and their historical whaling and 
     trading partners in Massachusetts. This amount is $5,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       Arts in education: The Committee has included $36,000,000 
     for arts in education. This amount is $6,000,000 more than 
     the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. Within the total, 
     $6,000,000 is for the John F. Kennedy Center for the 
     Performing Arts; $7,000,000 is for VSA arts; $10,000,000 is 
     for the competitive art education model grant program for the 
     development and model projects that effectively strengthen 
     and integrate the arts and cultural partnerships into the 
     core curriculum; $7,000,000 is for grants for professional 
     development for music, dance, drama and visual arts educators 
     to be administered by the U.S. Department of Education; 
     $2,000,000 is for national evaluation and dissemination of 
     information regarding funded model programs and professional 
     development projects; $1,000,000 is for media literacy 
     projects focused on violence prevention; and $3,000,000 is 
     for cultural partnerships for at-risk youth. When awarding 
     grants for professional development of music educators, the 
     Department is urged to put a priority on preparing and 
     retaining teachers in underserved rural and urban areas, 
     including music teachers who enter the profession through 
     alternative certification.
       Parental assistance: The Committee recommends $45,000,000 
     for Parental Information and Resource Centers, which provide 
     training, information, and support to parents, State and 
     local education agencies, and other organizations that carry 
     out parent education and family involvement programs. This 
     amount is $5,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation.
       Women's educational equity: The Committee includes 
     $3,000,000, the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, 
     for the women's educational equity program. This program 
     supports projects that assist in the local implementation of 
     gender equity policies and practices.
     Community service for expelled or suspended students
       The Committee recommends $50,000,000, the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for formula grants to States 
     to carry out programs under which students who are expelled 
     or suspended from school are required to perform community 
     service. The administration requested no funds for this 
     purpose.
     Alcohol abuse reduction
       The Committee recommends $25,000,000, the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for grants to LEAs to develop 
     and implement programs to reduce underage drinking in 
     secondary schools. The administration requested no funds for 
     this purpose. The Committee directs the Department and the 
     Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 
     (SAMHSA) in the Department of Health and Human Services to 
     work together on this effort.
     Teaching of traditional American history
       The Committee recommends $100,000,000, the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for the instruction of 
     American history

[[Page 895]]

     in elementary and secondary education. This amount is 
     $50,000,000 more than the budget request. Grants are limited 
     to activities that are related to American history, and 
     cannot be used for social studies coursework. Grant awards 
     are designed to augment the quality of American history 
     instruction and to provide professional development 
     activities and teacher education in the area of American 
     history. The Committee directs the Department to continue its 
     current policy of awarding 3-year grants.
     Civic education
       The Committee recommends $30,000,000, which is $3,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for grants to 
     improve the quality of civics and government education, to 
     foster civic competence and responsibility, and to improve 
     the quality of civic and economic education through exchange 
     programs with emerging democracies. The administration 
     requested no funds for this purpose.
       Program funds support the Cooperative Education Exchange 
     and We the People programs. The Committee recommends 
     $12,000,000, which is $1,200,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation, for the Cooperative Education Exchange 
     program, formerly called the International Education Exchange 
     program.
       Of these funds, the Committee has included $4,500,000 for 
     the Center for Civic Education and $4,500,000 for the 
     National Council on Economic Education. The remaining 
     $3,000,000 should be used for a competitive grant program for 
     civics and government education, and for economic education.
       The Committee recommends $18,000,000, which is $1,800,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for the 
     nonprofit Center for Civic Education to support the We the 
     People program. We the People has two components: the Citizen 
     and the Constitution, which provides teacher training and 
     curriculum materials for upper elementary, middle, and high 
     school students; and Project Citizen, a program for middle 
     school that focuses on the role of State and local 
     governments in the American Federal system. Within the amount 
     recommended for the We the People program, the Committee 
     intends that $3,000,000 be used to continue the comprehensive 
     program to improve public knowledge, understanding, and 
     support of American democratic institutions. The Committee 
     also intends that $1,500,000 be used to continue the school 
     violence prevention demonstration program.
     National Writing Project
       The Committee recommends $18,000,000, which is $4,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, for the 
     National Writing Project. The administration recommended 
     eliminating this program.
       These funds are awarded to the National Writing Project, a 
     nonprofit organization that supports and promotes K-16 
     teacher training programs in the effective teaching of 
     writing.


                            Indian Education

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$120,368,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................122,368,000
Committee recommendation....................................122,368,000

       The Committee recommends $122,368,000, the same as the 
     budget request, for Indian education programs. This amount is 
     $2,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
     Grants to local education agencies
       For grants to local education agencies, the Committee 
     recommends $97,133,000, the same as the budget request and 
     the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. These funds provide 
     financial support to reform elementary and secondary school 
     programs that serve Indian students, including preschool 
     children. Funds are awarded on a formula basis to local 
     educational agencies and schools supported and operated by 
     the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
     Special programs for Indian children
       The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for special programs 
     for Indian children. This amount is the same as the budget 
     request and the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. Funds are 
     used for demonstration grants to improve Indian student 
     achievement through early childhood and preschool education 
     programs, and for professional development grants for 
     training Indians who are preparing to begin careers in 
     teaching and school administration.
     National activities
       The Committee recommends $5,235,000, the same as the budget 
     request, for national activities. This amount is $2,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The increased 
     funds will be used to expand efforts to improve research, 
     evaluation, and data collection on the status and 
     effectiveness of Indian education programs.


                      english language acquisition

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$665,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................665,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................690,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $690,000,000 
     for English language acquisition, an increase of $25,000,000 
     more than the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The Department makes formula grants to States 
     based on each State's share of the Nation's limited-English-
     proficient and recent immigrant student population. The 
     program is designed to increase the capacity of States and 
     school districts to address the needs of these students.


                           Special Education

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$8,672,804,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................9,687,804,000
Committee recommendation..................................9,691,424,000

       The Committee strongly supports legislative measures that 
     would fulfill the Federal Government's responsibility for 
     paying its share of special education costs, as described in 
     the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The 
     Committee notes that the Senate Budget Committee included in 
     its budget resolution a measure to pay for increases in 
     special education grants to States using mandatory funding, 
     rather than discretionary funding.
       In the meantime, the Committee recommends $9,691,424,000 
     for special education programs authorized by the IDEA. This 
     amount is $1,018,620,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and $3,620,000 more than the budget request.
     Grants to states
       The Committee recommends $8,528,533,000 for special 
     education grants to States, as authorized under part B of the 
     IDEA. The amount recommended is $1,000,000,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget 
     request. This program provides formula grants to assist 
     States in meeting the costs of providing special education 
     and related services for children with disabilities.
       The Committee's recommended funding level represents 
     approximately 18 percent of the average per-pupil 
     expenditure, compared with 17 percent under the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation.
     Preschool grants
       The Committee recommends $390,000,000 for preschool grants. 
     This amount is the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation 
     and the budget request. The preschool grants program provides 
     formula grants to States to make available special education 
     and related services for children with disabilities aged 3 
     through 5.
     Grants for infants and families
       The Committee bill provides $437,000,000, the same as the 
     budget request, for grants for the infants and families 
     program under part C of the IDEA. This amount is $20,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. This program 
     provides formula grants to States to implement statewide 
     systems of coordinated, comprehensive, multidisciplinary 
     interagency programs to make available early intervention 
     services to all children with disabilities, ages 2 and under, 
     and their families.
     State improvement
       For State improvement grants, the bill provides 
     $51,700,000, the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation 
     and the budget request. This program provides competitive 
     grants to State educational agencies to assist them, in 
     partnership with parents, teachers, institutions of higher 
     education, interest groups, and others, to improve results 
     for children with disabilities by reforming and improving 
     their educational systems.
     Research and innovation
       The Committee has included $70,000,000, which is $8,380,000 
     below the budget request and the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation, for research and innovation. This program 
     supports competitive awards to produce and advance the use of 
     knowledge to improve services and results for children with 
     disabilities.
       The Committee's recommendation does not include any funding 
     for the research agenda of the President's Commission on 
     Excellence in Special Education. The Committee believes that 
     funding for that purpose should be considered following the 
     IDEA reauthorization, along with measures to fully fund the 
     part B State grants program.
     Technical assistance and dissemination
       The Committee recommends $53,481,000, the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the budget request, for technical 
     assistance and dissemination. Awards support institutes, 
     regional resource centers, clearinghouses, and other efforts 
     to build State and local capacity to make systemic changes 
     and improve results for children with disabilities.
     Personnel preparation
       The Committee recommends $95,000,000 for the personnel 
     preparation program. This amount is $5,000,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget request. Funds 
     support competitive awards to help address State-identified 
     needs for qualified personnel to work with children with 
     disabilities, and to ensure that these personnel have the 
     skills and knowledge they need to serve these children.
       The Committee is particularly concerned about the shortage 
     of qualified special education teachers and higher education 
     faculty. Therefore, it has provided sufficient resources in 
     this account to ensure an increase in funding for leadership 
     personnel over the fiscal year 2002 level. The Committee also 
     urges the Department to use a portion of the

[[Page 896]]

     increased appropriation for the preparation of personnel who 
     serve children with low-incidence disabilities, particularly 
     those with sensory disabilities such as low vision, 
     blindness, and deafness.
     Parent information centers
       The Committee bill provides $28,000,000 for parent 
     information centers. This amount is $2,000,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget request. This 
     program makes awards to parent organizations to support 
     parent training and information centers, including community 
     parent resource centers. These centers provide training and 
     information to meet the needs of parents of children with 
     disabilities living in the areas served by the centers, 
     particularly underserved parents, and parents of children who 
     may be inappropriately identified.
     Technology and media services
       The Committee recommends $37,710,000 for technology and 
     media services. This amount is $5,000,000 more than the 
     budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. This program makes competitive awards to 
     support the development, demonstration, and use of 
     technology, and educational media activities of value to 
     children with disabilities.
       The Committee recommendation includes $9,500,000 for 
     Recording for the Blind and Dyslexic, Inc. This is the same 
     amount as the fiscal year 2002 level and $3,500,000 more than 
     the budget request. These funds support the continued 
     production and circulation of recorded textbooks, increased 
     outreach activities to print-disabled students and their 
     teachers, and accelerated use of digital technology.
       The Committee also recommends $1,500,000 for the Readline 
     Program. The amount recommended is the same as the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation for this activity. The administration 
     proposed eliminating this program.
       This activity is authorized by section 687(b)(2)(G) of the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, as amended. The 
     Committee recognizes the progress of the Readline Program, 
     which is developing a wide range of media resources to 
     disseminate research conducted by the National Institutes of 
     Health, as well as other research concerning effective 
     teaching strategies, early diagnosis of, and intervention 
     for, young children with reading disabilities. These 
     resources include an extensive Web site, videos, and 
     programming for television and radio broadcast. The Committee 
     includes funding for the continued development and 
     distribution of media resources to reach the parents and 
     teachers of children with reading disabilities.


            rehabilitation services and disability research

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,945,813,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,001,840,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,959,838,000

       The Committee recommends $2,959,838,000 for rehabilitation 
     services and disability research, $14,025,000 more than the 
     comparable fiscal year 2002 funding level and $42,002,000 
     less than the administration request.
     Vocational rehabilitation State grants
       The Committee provides $2,533,492,000 for vocational 
     rehabilitation grants to States, which is $52,109,000 more 
     than the comparable fiscal year 2002 funding level. The 
     Committee recommendation provides the full amount authorized 
     by the authorizing statute. The budget request proposed to 
     eliminate several categorical programs, redirected 
     $62,573,000 in funding to the State grant program and 
     provided an additional increase of $20,260,000. The Committee 
     rejected this approach and believes changes of this nature 
     should be considered during reauthorization.
       Basic State grant funds assist States in providing a range 
     of services to help persons with physical and mental 
     disabilities prepare for and engage in meaningful employment. 
     Authorizing legislation requires States to give priority to 
     persons with significant disabilities. Funds are allotted to 
     States based on a formula that takes into account population 
     and per capita income. States must provide a 21.3 percent 
     match of Federal funds, except the State's share is 50 
     percent for the cost of construction of a facility for 
     community rehabilitation program purposes.
       The Rehabilitation Act requires that no less than 1 percent 
     and not more than 1.5 percent of the appropriation in fiscal 
     year 2003 for vocational rehabilitation State grants be set 
     aside for grants for Indians. Service grants are awarded to 
     Indian tribes on a competitive basis to help tribes develop 
     the capacity to provide vocational rehabilitation services to 
     American Indians with disabilities living on or near 
     reservations.
     Vocational Rehabilitation Incentive Grants
       The Committee recommendation does not include $30,000,000 
     proposed in the budget request for the new Vocational 
     Rehabilitation Incentive Grants program. This proposed 
     program is not authorized. Under this new program, grants 
     would be awarded to State VR agencies based on their 
     performance in helping individuals with disabilities obtain 
     competitive jobs.
     Client assistance
       The Committee bill recommends $12,397,000 for the client 
     assistance program, an increase of $500,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the administration 
     request.
       The client assistance program funds State formula grants to 
     assist vocational rehabilitation clients or client applicants 
     in understanding the benefits available to them and in their 
     relationships with service providers. Funds are distributed 
     to States according to a population-based formula, except 
     that increases in minimum grants are guaranteed to each of 
     the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, and 
     guaranteed to each of the outlying areas, by a percentage not 
     to exceed the percentage increase in the appropriation. 
     States must operate client assistance programs in order to 
     receive vocational rehabilitation State grant funds.
     Training
       The Committee provides $42,629,000 for training 
     rehabilitation personnel, an increase of $3,000,000 more than 
     the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and same as the 
     administration request.
       The purpose of this program is to ensure that skilled 
     personnel are available to serve the rehabilitation needs of 
     individuals with disabilities. It supports training, 
     traineeships, and related activities designed to increase the 
     numbers of qualified personnel providing rehabilitation 
     services. The program awards grants and contracts to States 
     and public or nonprofit agencies and organizations, including 
     institutions of higher education, to pay all or part of the 
     cost of conducting training programs. Long-term, in-service, 
     short-term, experimental and innovative, and continuing 
     education programs are funded, as well as special training 
     programs and programs to train interpreters for persons who 
     are deaf, hard of hearing and deaf-blind.
       The Committee is concerned over the reduction in funding 
     for rehabilitation long-term training programs, and in 
     particular those that require orthotic and prosthetic care, 
     and urges RSA to fund no fewer than four university O+P 
     programs at $250,000 each.
     Demonstration and training programs
       The Committee bill includes $21,238,000 for demonstration 
     and training programs for persons with disabilities, the same 
     amount as the comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriation and 
     $3,746,000 more than the administration request. This program 
     awards grants to States and nonprofit agencies and 
     organizations to develop innovative methods and comprehensive 
     services to help individuals with disabilities achieve 
     satisfactory vocational outcomes. Demonstration programs 
     support projects for individuals with a wide array of 
     disabilities. Within the Committee recommendation, $1,000,000 
     is for activities designed to establish an applied research 
     agenda, improve the quality of applied orthotic and 
     prosthetic research and help meet the increasing demand for 
     provider services. The Committee expects the Department to 
     award these funds through a grant competition.
     Migrant and seasonal farmworkers
       The Committee recommends $2,350,000 for migrant and 
     seasonal farmworkers, the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The Department proposed eliminating funding 
     for this program.
       This program provide grants limited to 90 percent of the 
     costs of the projects providing comprehensive rehabilitation 
     services to migrant and seasonal farm workers with 
     disabilities and their families. Projects also develop 
     innovative methods for reaching and serving this population. 
     The program emphasizes outreach, specialized bilingual 
     rehabilitation counseling, and coordination of vocational 
     rehabilitation services with services from other sources.
     Recreational programs
       The Committee provides $2,596,000 for recreational 
     programs, the same amount as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The budget request did not include funding for 
     this program.
       Recreational programs help finance activities such as 
     sports, music, dancing, handicrafts, and art to aid in the 
     employment, mobility, and socialization of individuals with 
     disabilities. Grants are awarded to States, public agencies, 
     and nonprofit private organizations, including institutions 
     of higher education. Grants are awarded for a 3-year period 
     with the Federal share at 100 percent for the first year, 75 
     percent for the second year, and 50 percent for the third 
     year. Programs must maintain the same level of services over 
     the 3-year period.
       The Committee notes that the primary purpose of this 
     program is to initiate recreational and related activities 
     for individuals with disabilities. These programs are 
     designed to aid individuals with disabilities in employment, 
     mobility, independence and community integration. The 
     Committee notes that almost three out of four programs whose 
     last year of Federal funding ended in fiscal years 1998 
     through 2000 are still in operation and continue to meet the 
     recreational needs of individuals with disabilities. These 
     results show that this limited investment is having a 
     national impact, as each new grant supports seed money for 
     recreational programs throughout the United States.

[[Page 897]]


     Protection and advocacy of individual rights
       The Committee recommends $17,500,000 for protection and 
     advocacy of individual rights, an increase of $2,300,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget 
     request.
       This program provides grants to agencies to protect and 
     advocate for the legal and human rights of persons with 
     disabilities who are not eligible for protection and advocacy 
     services available through the Developmental Disabilities 
     Assistance and Bill of Rights Act or the Protection and 
     Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Act.
       The Committee notes that a recent evaluation of the PAIR 
     program found that more than 98 percent of cases closed by a 
     sample of PAIR programs were resolved through counseling, 
     negotiation/mediation and supervised referrals. The 
     evaluation also found that many of the programs had 
     considerable difficulties attempting to serve the significant 
     number of persons eligible for the program. Therefore, the 
     Committee has recommended additional resources to continue to 
     expand the availability of PAIR services to eligible 
     individuals.
     Projects with industry
       The Committee bill includes $22,071,000 for projects with 
     industry, the same as the 2002 appropriation. The 
     administration proposed eliminating funding for this program.
       The projects with industry [PWI] program promotes greater 
     participation of business and industry in the rehabilitation 
     process. PWI provides training and experience in realistic 
     work settings to prepare individuals with disabilities for 
     employment in the competitive job market. Postemployment 
     support services are also provided. The program makes grants 
     to a variety of agencies and organizations, including 
     corporations, community rehabilitation programs, labor and 
     trade associations, and foundations.
       The Committee notes that according to the Department's 2001 
     Annual Performance Report, the Projects with Industry program 
     has exceeded performance measures in all three areas by which 
     the program is measured. More than 3 out of 5 PWI clients 
     were placed in competitive employment in 2001; Projects With 
     Industry projects will report that participants placed in 
     competitive employment increase earnings by an average of at 
     least $236 per week; and 67.2 percent of previously 
     unemployed persons were placed in competitive employment. 
     These significant achievements warrant continued funding, 
     especially in light of the new Ticket to Work program and the 
     role that PWI projects can play in assisting Social Security 
     disability beneficiaries and SSI recipients in securing 
     employment and exiting the disability roles.
     Supported employment State grants
       The Committee's bill includes $38,152,000 for the supported 
     employment State grant program, the same as the 2002 
     appropriation. The administration proposed eliminating 
     funding for this program.
       This program assists persons who may have been considered 
     too severely disabled to benefit from vocational 
     rehabilitation services by providing the ongoing support 
     needed to obtain competitive employment. Short-term 
     vocational rehabilitation services are augmented with 
     extended services provided by State and local organizations. 
     Federal funds are distributed on the basis of population.
     Independent living State grants
       The Committee recommends $22,296,000 for independent living 
     State grants, which is the same as the amount appropriated in 
     2002 and the budget request.
       The independent living State formula grants program 
     provides funding to improve independent living services, 
     support the operation of centers for independent living, 
     conduct studies and analysis, and provide training and 
     outreach.
     Independent living centers
       For independent living centers, the Committee recommends 
     $69,500,000, an increase of $7,000,000 over the 2002 
     appropriation and the same amount as the budget request.
       These funds support consumer-controlled, cross-disability, 
     nonresidential, community-based centers that are designed and 
     operated within local communities by individuals with 
     disabilities. These centers provide an array of independent 
     living services.
     Independent living services for older blind individuals
       The Committee provides $28,000,000 for independent living 
     services to older blind individuals, an increase of 
     $3,000,000 more than the 2002 appropriation and the 
     administration request.
       States participating in the program must match every $9 of 
     Federal funds with not less than $1 in non-Federal resources. 
     Assistance is provided to persons aged 55 or older to adjust 
     to their blindness, continue living independently and avoid 
     societal costs associated with dependent care. Services may 
     include the provision of eyeglasses and other visual aids, 
     mobility training, braille instruction and other 
     communication services, community integration, and 
     information and referral. These services help older 
     individuals age with dignity, continue to live independently 
     and avoid significant societal costs associated with 
     dependent care. The services most commonly provided by this 
     program are daily living skills training, counseling, the 
     provision of low-vision devices community integration, 
     information and referral, communication devices, and low-
     vision screening.
       The Committee notes that there are 5,000,000 Americans in 
     this country age 55 and older who are experiencing vision 
     loss and that the number of Americans in this category is 
     expected to double in the next 30 years. The Committee 
     recognizes the very important and cost-effective work carried 
     out through this program. By allowing older individuals to 
     remain in their homes and communities, substantial savings 
     are achieved. The Committee is informed that the yearly 
     savings to society for just 10 percent of the clients now 
     receiving independent living services is $56,000,000.
     Program improvement activities
       For program improvement activities, the Committee provides 
     $900,000, the same amount as the 2002 appropriation and the 
     budget request. In fiscal year 2003, funds for these 
     activities will continue to support technical assistance 
     efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the 
     vocational rehabilitation program and improve accountability 
     efforts. The funds provided are sufficient to support ongoing 
     program improvement activities and to support ongoing 
     dissemination and performance measurement activities.
     Evaluation
       The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for evaluation 
     activities, the same as the 2002 appropriation and the 
     administration request.
       These funds support evaluations of the impact and 
     effectiveness of programs authorized by the Rehabilitation 
     Act. The Department awards competitive contracts for studies 
     to be conducted by persons not directly involved with the 
     administration of Rehabilitation Act programs.
     Helen Keller National Center
       The Committee bill includes $8,717,000 for the Helen Keller 
     National Center for Deaf-Blind Youth and Adults, the same as 
     the 2002 appropriation and the budget request.
       The Helen Keller National Center consists of a national 
     headquarters in Sands Point, NY, with a residential training 
     and rehabilitation facility where deaf-blind persons receive 
     intensive specialized services; a network of 10 regional 
     field offices which provide referral and counseling 
     assistance to deaf-blind persons; and an affiliate network of 
     48 agencies. At the recommended level, the center would serve 
     approximately 102 persons with deaf-blindness at its 
     headquarters facility and provide field services to 
     approximately 1,850 individuals and families.
     National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
       The Committee recommends $110,000,000 for the National 
     Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research [NIDRR], 
     the same as the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2002 and 
     the budget request.
       NIDRR develops and implements a comprehensive and 
     coordinated approach to the conduct of research, 
     demonstration projects, and related activities that enable 
     persons with disabilities to better function at work and in 
     the community, including the training of persons who provide 
     rehabilitation services or who conduct rehabilitation 
     research. The Institute awards competitive grants to support 
     research in Federally designated priority areas, including 
     rehabilitation research and training centers, rehabilitation 
     engineering research centers, research and demonstration 
     projects, and dissemination and utilization projects. NIDRR 
     also supports field-initiated research projects, research 
     training, and fellowships.
       The Committee urges the NIDRR to focus on activities to 
     enhance access to assistive technology for people with 
     disabilities, including technology-based activities, such as 
     technology transfer.
       The Committee strongly encourages NIDDR to give priority in 
     awarding grants to establish new rehabilitation and research 
     engineering centers which will aid in the implementation of 
     the Executive Order related to the Supreme Court Decision in 
     L.C. v. Olmstead.
       The Committee encourages NIDRR to provide increased funding 
     for the Interagency Committee on Disability Research (ICDR) 
     and notes that the primary purpose of the ICDR is to promote 
     cooperation across various government agencies in the 
     development and execution of disability and rehabilitation 
     and research activities. The Committee strongly encourages 
     the ICDR to enter into cooperative agreements with other ICDR 
     members to identify Federally funded technological and 
     scientific research that could be applied to promote the 
     independence of people with disabilities and the elderly. The 
     same Federal agencies shall work in partnership with the 
     private sector to develop a plan to bring the applied 
     technologies to the private marketplace. The Committee 
     commends ICDR for expansion of its website/database for the 
     coordination of research by various agencies.
       The Committee strongly urges NIDRR to use resources 
     appropriated for the Assistive Technology Development Fund to 
     develop new assistive technology, bring technology that has 
     already been developed to market

[[Page 898]]

     and expand the availability of existing assistive technology 
     to people with disabilities. The Committee believes that 
     priority for grants should be given to the development of 
     technology that has a limited number of users, or orphan 
     technology. In addition, a portion of these funds should be 
     used to further the development of assistive technology for 
     children and students and reach the goals of projects that 
     were previously funded through the small business innovation 
     research activity of OSER's technology and media services 
     program.
     Assistive technology
       The Committee bill provides $27,000,000 for assistive 
     technology, a reduction of $33,884,000 from the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation and $3,884,000 less than the budget 
     request.
       The Assistive Technology Program is designed to improve 
     occupational and educational opportunities and the quality of 
     life for people of all ages with disabilities through 
     increased access to assistive technology services and 
     devices. It provides grants to States to develop 
     comprehensive, consumer-responsive statewide programs that 
     increase access to, and the availability of, assistive 
     technology devices and services. The National Institute on 
     Disability and Rehabilitation Research administers the 
     program.
       The Committee recommendation includes $27,000,000 for 
     activities authorized under title I of the Assistive 
     Technology Act (AT Act). The Committee has included bill 
     language which allows all State projects funded currently 
     under title I of the AT Act to receive not less than the 
     amount they received in fiscal year 2002. The bill language 
     also provides minimum grants of $100,000 for State protection 
     and advocacy systems, $30,000 for systems in the outlying 
     areas. In fiscal year 2003, the AT Act would require 23 
     States to lose Federal financial support provided by title I, 
     at a time when States are operating in a new policy landscape 
     that includes the Olmstead decision, final section 508 
     standards and the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives 
     Improvement Act.
       The Committee recommendation does not include additional 
     resources for title III programs, due to tight budget 
     constraints and $36,552,000 in funding available currently 
     for title III programs. In fiscal year 2000, the Committee 
     provided $4,028,000 in first year funding. Last year, the 
     Committee provided $36,552,000, and allowed these funds to be 
     available for 2 years. These funds have yet to be expended. 
     The Committee will review the program funding level in the 
     fiscal year 2004 budget and ensure that sufficient resources 
     are available to continue this important program. Loan 
     programs offer individuals with disabilities attractive 
     options that significantly enhance their ability to purchase 
     assistive technology devices and services.
     Access to telework fund
       As requested by the administration, the Committee does not 
     recommend additional resources for the access to telework 
     fund. The Committee provided $20,000,000 for this new program 
     last year, and notes that the grant competition has not been 
     announced as of yet. Funding provided last year is available 
     to the Department for 2 years. The Committee will review the 
     funding needed in fiscal year 2004 to maintain and expand 
     this program.
       The access to telework fund is designed to increase 
     employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities by 
     providing greater access to computers and other equipment 
     individuals need if they decide to work from home. The fund 
     would provide matching funds to States to enable them to 
     provide loans for individuals with disabilities to purchase 
     computers and other equipment so that they can telework from 
     home.
       The Committee encourages the Department of Education to 
     design the access to telework loan program in a manner which 
     creates the maximum incentives for people with disabilities 
     to participate. The Committee recognizes that the decision to 
     attempt to work involves a high level of risk for a person 
     with a disability, including the potential loss of health 
     care coverage and income subsidies, and that the design of 
     the program should take this fact into account (including the 
     possibility of loan forgiveness should the person's attempt 
     to work fail). Finally, the Committee encourages the 
     Department to allow States flexibility in implementation of 
     the program to encourage participation, including the use of 
     any non-Federal resources to meet the match requirement.

           Special Institutions for Persons With Disabilities


                 American printing house for the blind

Appropriations, 2002........................................$14,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................15,500,000

       The Committee recommends $15,500,000 for the American 
     Printing House for the Blind [APH], $1,500,000 more than the 
     2002 appropriation and the budget request.
       This appropriation helps support the American Printing 
     House for the Blind, which provides educational materials to 
     students who are legally blind and enrolled in programs below 
     the college level. The Federal subsidy provides almost 51 
     percent of APH's total sales income. Materials are 
     distributed free of charge to schools and States through per 
     capita allotments based on the total number of students who 
     are blind. Materials provided include textbooks and other 
     educational aids in braille, large type, and recorded form 
     and microcomputer applications.


               national technical institute for the deaf

Appropriations, 2002........................................$55,376,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................52,014,000
Committee recommendation.....................................54,600,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $54,600,000 
     for the National Technical Institute for the Deaf [NTID], a 
     decrease of $776,000 from the fiscal year 2002 appropriation 
     and $2,586,000 above the budget request.
       The Institute, located on the campus of the Rochester 
     Institute of Technology, was created by Congress in 1965 to 
     provide a residential facility for postsecondary technical 
     training and education for persons who are deaf. NTID also 
     provides support services for students who are deaf, trains 
     professionals in the field of deafness, and conducts applied 
     research. Within the amount provided, $1,600,000 is for 
     construction. At the discretion of the Institute, funds may 
     be used for the Endowment Grant program.


                          gallaudet university

Appropriations, 2002........................................$96,938,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................94,446,000
Committee recommendation.....................................98,438,000

       The Committee recommends $98,438,000 for Gallaudet 
     University, an increase of $1,500,000 above the amount 
     appropriated in 2002 and $3,992,000 more than the budget 
     request.
       Gallaudet University is a private, nonprofit institution 
     offering undergraduate, and continuing education programs for 
     students who are deaf, as well as graduate programs in fields 
     related to deafness for students who are hearing-impaired and 
     who are deaf. The university conducts basic and applied 
     research related to hearing impairments and provides public 
     service programs for the deaf community.
       The Model Secondary School for the Deaf serves as a 
     laboratory for educational experimentation and development, 
     disseminates models of instruction for students who are deaf, 
     and prepares adolescents who are deaf for postsecondary 
     academic or vocational education. The Kendall Demonstration 
     Elementary School develops and provides instruction for 
     children from infancy through age 15.
       The Committee recommendation includes funding to enable 
     Gallaudet University to maintain and enhance its 
     technological base, continue investments in faculty and 
     staff, continue to enhance developmental and honors programs 
     and support improvements in physical facilities, including 
     campus security. Funds also are available, at the discretion 
     of the University, for the Endowment Grant program.


                     Vocational and Adult Education

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,934,060,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,897,560,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,938,060,000

       The Committee recommendation includes a total of 
     $1,938,060,000 for vocational and adult education, consisting 
     of $1,322,000,000 for vocational education and $591,060,000 
     for adult education, and $25,000,000 for State grants for 
     incarcerated youth offenders.


                          Vocational education

       The Committee recommendation of $1,322,000,000 for 
     vocational education is $1,000,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 amount and $15,500,000 more than the administration's 
     request.
       Basic grants.--The Committee has included $1,180,000,000 
     for basic grants, the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the administration request.
       Funds provided under the State grant program assist States, 
     localities, and outlying areas to expand and improve their 
     programs of vocational education and provide equal access to 
     vocational education for populations with special needs. 
     Persons assisted range from secondary students in 
     prevocational courses through adults who need retraining to 
     adapt to changing technological and labor market conditions. 
     Funds are distributed according to a formula based on State 
     population and State per capita income.
       Under the Indian and Hawaiian natives programs, competitive 
     grants are awarded to federally recognized Indian tribes or 
     tribal organizations and to organizations primarily serving 
     and representing Hawaiian natives for services that are in 
     addition to services such groups are eligible to receive 
     under other provisions of the Perkins Act.
       Tech-prep education.--The Committee recommends $108,000,000 
     for tech-prep programs. This is the same as the 2002 
     appropriation and the administration request. This program is 
     designed to link academic and vocational learning and to 
     provide a structured link between secondary schools and 
     postsecondary education institutions. Funds are distributed 
     to the States through the same formula as the basic State 
     grant program. States then make planning and demonstration 
     grants to consortia of local educational

[[Page 899]]

     agencies and postsecondary institutions to develop and 
     operate model 4-year programs that begin in high school and 
     provide students with the mathematical, science, 
     communication, and technological skills needed to earn a 2-
     year associate degree or 2-year certificate in a given 
     occupational field.
       Tribally controlled postsecondary vocational 
     institutions.--The Committee has provided $7,000,000 on a 
     current-funded basis for tribally controlled postsecondary 
     vocational institutions, an increase of $500,000 over the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the budget request. This program 
     provides grants for the operation and improvement of two 
     tribally controlled postsecondary vocational institutions to 
     ensure continued and expanding opportunities for Indian 
     students: United Tribes Technical College in Bismarck, North 
     Dakota, and Crownpoint Institute of Technology in Crownpoint, 
     New Mexico.
       National programs, research.--The Committee recommends 
     $12,000,000 for national research programs and other national 
     activities, the same amount as the 2002 appropriation and the 
     administration request. The National Research Center for 
     Career and Technical Education and the National Dissemination 
     Center for Career and Technical Education are the only 
     federally funded centers charged with the responsibility to 
     conduct research and provide technical assistance to 
     vocational educators. The results of the applied research 
     done by these Centers inform technical assistance to reform 
     and improve vocational education instruction in schools and 
     colleges. Resources made available through this program also 
     are used to support a variety of activities to identify and 
     promote effective research-based programs and practice in 
     vocational education.
       Vocational training tied to real economic opportunities and 
     rooted in endangered traditional crafts is a significant need 
     in rural Hawaiian and part-Hawaiian communities. The 
     Committee urges the Department to fund programs that support 
     the development of mentoring programs pairing secondary 
     students with individuals who have succeeded in commercially 
     developing traditional Hawaiian arts and crafts. These 
     mentoring programs can provide young Hawaiian and Part-
     Hawaiian students with training in important crafts while 
     also teaching them how to successfully turn these skills into 
     economic gain.
       Tech-prep education demonstration program.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $5,000,000 for this program, the same 
     amount as provided in fiscal year 2002. The administration 
     did not request funding for this program. Under this 
     demonstration authority, the Secretary awards grants 
     competitively to consortia that involve a business as a 
     member, locate a secondary school on the site of a community 
     college, and seek voluntary participation of secondary school 
     students enrolled such a high school. The purpose of the 
     demonstration program is to support development of the 
     ``middle college'' model of high school, which promotes 
     higher student achievement and postsecondary enrollment. 
     Funds may be used for curriculum, professional development, 
     equipment, and other start-up and operational costs.
       Occupational and employment information program.--The 
     amount of $10,000,000 has been provided to continue 
     activities authorized by section 118 of the Carl Perkins Act, 
     $500,000 more than last year. The administration proposed the 
     elimination of this program. The Act requires that at least 
     85 percent of the amount be provided directly to State 
     entities to develop and deliver occupational and career 
     information to students, job seekers, employers, education, 
     employment and training programs.


                            Adult Education

       The Committee has included $591,060,000 for adult 
     education, the same amount as the 2002 appropriation and the 
     administration request.
       Adult education State programs.--For adult education State 
     programs, the Committee recommends $575,000,000, the same 
     amount as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the 
     administration request. These funds are used by States for 
     programs to enable economically disadvantaged adults to 
     acquire basic literacy skills, to enable those who so desire 
     to complete a secondary education, and to make available to 
     adults the means to become more employable, productive, and 
     responsible citizens.
       The Committee recommendation continues the English literacy 
     and civics education State grants set aside within the Adult 
     Education State grant appropriation. Within the total, 
     $70,000,000 is available to help States or localities 
     affected significantly by immigration and large limited-
     English populations to implement programs that help 
     immigrants acquire English literacy skills, gain knowledge 
     about the rights and responsibilities of citizenship and 
     develop skills that will enable them to navigate key 
     institutions of American life. The amount recommended is the 
     same as the fiscal year 2002 level and the budget request.
       National activities.--The Committee has included 
     $9,500,000, the same as the 2002 appropriation and the 
     administration request. The Department supports applied 
     research, development, dissemination, evaluation and program 
     improvement activities to assist States in their efforts to 
     improve the quality of adult education programs.
       National Institute for Literacy.--The Committee recommends 
     $6,560,000 for the National Institute for Literacy, 
     authorized under section 242 of the Adult Education and 
     Family Literacy Act, the same amount as available currently 
     and the budget request. The Institute provides leadership and 
     coordination for national literacy efforts by conducting 
     research and demonstrations on literacy, providing technical 
     assistance through a State capacity building grant program, 
     establishing and maintaining a national center for adult 
     literacy and learning disabilities, and awarding fellowships 
     to outstanding individuals in the field to conduct research 
     activities under the auspices of the Institute.
       The Committee recognizes and supports the unique mandate of 
     the National Institute for Literacy to serve as a national 
     resource for adult education and literacy programs. The 
     Committee is aware that the President has nominated 10 new 
     advisory board members to oversee the work of the Institute. 
     The Committee urges this new advisory board to assist the 
     Institute in maintaining its unique focus on adult literacy 
     through its programs, such as the Bridges to Practice 
     initiative that informs and trains adult educators on proper 
     assessments and interventions for low literate adults who 
     have learning disabilities, and the Equipped for the Future 
     initiative that works to improve the quality and results of 
     adult learning programs by focusing instruction and 
     assessment on the skills and knowledge adults need to 
     accomplish their goals as citizens, parents, and workers.


             State grants for incarcerated youth offenders

       The Committee has included $25,000,000 for a program 
     authorized by part D of title VIII of the Higher Education 
     Act, an increase of $3,000,000 more than the amount 
     appropriated in fiscal year 2002. The Department proposed 
     eliminating this program. This program provides grants to 
     State correctional education agencies to assist and encourage 
     incarcerated youth to acquire functional literacy, life and 
     job skills, through the pursuit of a postsecondary education 
     certificate or an associate of arts or bachelor's degree. 
     Grants also assist correction agencies in providing 
     employment counseling and other related services that start 
     during incarceration and continue through prerelease and 
     while on parole. Each student is eligible for a grant of not 
     more than $1,500 annually for tuition, books, and essential 
     materials, and not more than $300 annually for related 
     services such as career development, substance abuse 
     counseling, parenting skills training, and health education. 
     In order to participate in a program, a student must be no 
     more than 25 years of age and be eligible to be released from 
     prison within 5 years. Youth offender grants are for a period 
     not to exceed 5 years, 1 year of which may be devoted to 
     study in remedial or graduate education.
       The Committee notes the positive findings from a recent 
     evaluation of programs funded in three States. The Three 
     State Recidivism Study found that re-arrest, reconviction, 
     and re-incarceration rates were significantly lower for the 
     prison population who had participated in correctional 
     education than for non-participants. The study found the re-
     arrest rate of correctional education participants was 48 
     percent, compared to 57 percent for the non-participants; re-
     conviction rate was 27 percent for correctional educational 
     participants, compared to 35 percent for non-participants; 
     and re-incarceration rate was 21 percent, compared to 31 
     percent for non-participants. This important program not only 
     helps make the Nation's streets safer for all Americans, but 
     it saves public money as fewer contacts are made with the 
     more expensive criminal justice system and former prisoners 
     become employed, contributing members of society.
       Within the appropriation for State grants for incarcerated 
     youth offenders, the Committee includes $5,000,000 to 
     continue the prisoner literacy initiative. The Committee 
     notes that the extremely high rates of illiteracy or marginal 
     reading skills among inmates is a national problem and 
     therefore encourages the development of a uniform model to 
     evaluate literacy programs across the country.


                      STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

Appropriations, 2002....................................$12,285,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................12,767,500,000
Committee recommendation.................................13,151,500,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $13,151,500,000 for student financial assistance, an increase 
     of $866,000,000 more than the comparable fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and $384,000,000 more than the administration 
     request. This comparison excludes $1,000,000,000 made 
     available by Public Law 107-206 to address a shortfall in the 
     Pell grant program.
     Federal Pell Grant Program
       For Pell grant awards in the 2003-2004 academic year, the 
     Committee recommends $11,180,000,000. The Committee 
     recommendation is $317,000,000 more than requested by the 
     administration.
       Pell grants provide need-based financial assistance that 
     helps low-and middle-income undergraduate students and their 
     families pay the costs of postsecondary education and

[[Page 900]]

     vocational training. Awards are determined according to a 
     statutory need analysis formula that takes into account a 
     student's family income and assets, household size, and the 
     number of family members, excluding parents, attending 
     postsecondary institutions. Pell grants are considered the 
     foundation of Federal postsecondary student aid.
       The amount recommended is sufficient to raise the maximum 
     Pell grant to $4,100, the highest level in the program's 
     history and an increase of $100 over the maximum grant for 
     the 2002-2003 academic year. The Pell grant maximum award 
     supported by the Committee recommendation is at least $100 
     more than that requested by the administration.
       The Committee has made significant gains in supporting 
     increases in funding for the Pell Grant Program. Since fiscal 
     year 2000, the maximum Pell grant has been increased from 
     $3,300 to the current recommendation of $4,100, an increase 
     of almost 25 percent in 3 years. With the Committee 
     recommendation for this year, program funding will have 
     increased by 50 percent over this period. Also, the number of 
     students receiving Pell grant awards will have increased by 
     more than 500,000 over the past 3 years. While the Committee 
     would have liked to increase the maximum grant by a larger 
     amount, budget constraints would not accommodate investments 
     greater than the Committee recommendation.
       The Committee has not included bill language requested by 
     the administration that would allow the Secretary to 
     establish the Pell grant maximum award after enactment of the 
     appropriations bill.
     Federal supplemental educational opportunity grants
       The Committee recommends $725,000,000 for Federal 
     supplemental educational opportunity grants [SEOG], the same 
     amount as the 2002 appropriation level and the budget 
     request.
       This program provides funds to postsecondary institutions 
     for need-based grants to undergraduate students. Institutions 
     must contribute 25 percent of SEOG awards, which are subject 
     to a maximum grant level of $4,000. School financial aid 
     officers have flexibility to determine student awards, though 
     they must give priority to Pell grant recipients.
     Federal work-study programs
       The Committee bill provides $1,011,000,000 for the Federal 
     Work-Study Program, the same as the 2002 level and the 
     administration request. This program provides grants to more 
     than 3,300 institutions to help an estimated 1 million 
     undergraduate, graduate, and professional students meet the 
     costs of postsecondary education through part-time 
     employment. Work-study jobs must pay at least the Federal 
     minimum wage and institutions must provide at least 25 
     percent of student earnings. Institutions also must use at 
     least 7 percent of their grants for community-service jobs.
       The Committee strongly supports continued funding for the 
     work colleges program authorized in section 448 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965. These funds help support comprehensive 
     work-service learning programs at seven work colleges, and 
     cooperative efforts among the work colleges to expose other 
     institutions of higher education to the work college concept. 
     Of the amount recommended by the Committee, $4,000,000 is 
     available for this program.
     Federal Perkins loans
       The Committee bill includes $100,000,000 for Federal 
     Perkins loans capital contributions, which is the same as the 
     2002 appropriation and the budget request. The amount 
     recommended, when combined with institutional revolving 
     funds, would maintain the 2003 loan volume at the current 
     estimated level of $1,200,000,000. At this funding level more 
     than 700,000 loans would be made.
       The Federal Perkins Loan Program supports student loan 
     revolving funds built up with capital contributions to about 
     2,000 participating institutions. Institutions use these 
     revolving funds, which also include Federal capital 
     contributions (FCC), institutional contributions equal to 
     one-third of the FCC, and student repayments, to provide low-
     interest (5 percent) loans that help financially needy 
     students pay the costs of postsecondary education. The 
     Committee has included the amount necessary to maintain the 
     current loan volume level.
       The Committee bill also includes $67,500,000 for loan 
     cancellations, the same amount as the 2002 level and amount 
     requested by the administration. These funds reimburse 
     institutional revolving funds on behalf of borrowers whose 
     loans are cancelled in exchange for statutorily specified 
     types of public or military service, such as teaching in a 
     qualified low-income school, working in a Head Start Program, 
     serving in the Peace Corps or VISTA, or nurses and medical 
     technicians providing health care services.
     Leveraging educational assistance partnership program
       For the leveraging educational assistance partnership 
     [LEAP] program, the Committee includes $67,000,000, the same 
     amount as the 2002 appropriation. The administration proposed 
     eliminating this program.
       The leveraging educational assistance partnership program 
     provides a Federal match to States as an incentive for 
     providing need-based grant and work-study assistance to 
     eligible postsecondary students. When the appropriation 
     exceeds $30,000,000, amounts above this threshold must be 
     matched by States on a 2:1 basis. Federally supported grants 
     and job earnings are limited to $5,000 per award year for 
     full-time students.
       The Committee recognizes the important role that the LEAP 
     program plays in maintaining a Federal-State partnership for 
     ensuring that postsecondary education is available to all 
     academically-qualified Americans. The Committee notes that a 
     recent Advisory Committee on Student Financial Aid report 
     recommended that Federal policy should encourage a far more 
     substantial State and institutional commitment to need-based 
     grant aid. The Committee notes that this important program 
     leverages almost $1,000,000,000 in State spending for need-
     based student grant programs. Therefore, it is the 
     Committee's intent to continue this important program.
     Loan forgiveness for child care providers
       The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for this demonstration 
     program, the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and 
     the budget request. Under this demonstration program, 
     Stafford and Unsubsidized Stafford Loan borrowers under the 
     Federal Family Education Loan Program and the William D. Ford 
     Direct Loan program who have earned a degree in early 
     childhood education and work for 2 full years as a child care 
     provider in a low-income community may have a portion of 
     their loan obligation forgiven.
       The Committee encourages the Department to prepare the 
     required final evaluation report of this important program as 
     soon as possible. The Committee looks forward to receiving 
     this report, so further actions and investments can be made 
     that support improvements in the education level and 
     compensation of the early childcare profession.


                            HIGHER EDUCATION

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,031,048,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,883,053,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,047,640,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,047,640,000 
     for higher education programs, $16,592,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 amount and $164,587,000 more than the budget 
     request.
     Aid for institutional development
       The Committee recommends $475,413,000 for aid for 
     institutional development authorized by titles III and V of 
     the Higher Education Act, $36,788,000 above the 2002 
     appropriation and $20,999,000 more than the budget request.
       The Committee encourages the Department to provide 
     technical assistance and conduct research on issues germane 
     to predominately and Historically Black Colleges and 
     Universities (HBCUs) and other institutions of higher 
     education that have large minority student populations, 
     including disseminating best practices information on the 
     most efficient and cost-effective uses of title III funding, 
     reducing student loan default rates, increasing graduation 
     rates, and grant writing training.
       Strengthening institutions.--The Committee bill includes 
     $82,000,000 for the part A strengthening institutions 
     program, an increase of $8,375,000 over the fiscal year 2002 
     level and $5,725,000 more than the budget request. The part A 
     program supports competitive, 1-year planning and 5-year 
     development grants for institutions with a significant 
     percentage of financially needy students and low educational 
     and general expenditures per student in comparison with 
     similar institutions. Applicants may use part A funds to 
     develop faculty, strengthen academic programs, improve 
     institutional management, and expand student services. 
     Institutions awarded funding under this program are not 
     eligible to receive grants under other sections of part A or 
     part B.
       Hispanic-serving institutions [HSI].--The Committee 
     recommends $93,000,000 for institutions at which Hispanic 
     students make up at least 25 percent of enrollment, 
     $7,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $3,904,000 more than the administration request. Institutions 
     applying for title V funds must meet the regular part A 
     requirements and show that at least one-half of their 
     Hispanic students are low-income college students. Funds may 
     be used for acquisition, rental or lease of scientific or 
     laboratory equipment, renovation of instructional facilities, 
     development of faculty, support for academic programs, 
     institutional management, and purchase of educational 
     materials. Title V recipients are not eligible for other 
     awards provided under title III, parts A and B.
       Strengthening historically black colleges and 
     universities.--The Committee provides $215,415,000 for part B 
     grants, $9,415,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $2,000,000 more than the administration request. The part B 
     strengthening historically black colleges and universities 
     [HBCU] program makes formula grants to HBCUs that may be used 
     to purchase equipment, construct and renovate facilities, 
     develop faculty, support academic programs, strengthen 
     institutional management, enhance fundraising activities, 
     provide tutoring and counseling services to

[[Page 901]]

     students, and conduct outreach to elementary and secondary 
     school students. The minimum allotment is $500,000 for each 
     eligible institution. Part B recipients are not eligible for 
     awards under part A.
       Strengthening historically black graduate institutions.--
     The Committee bill includes $53,764,000 for the part B, 
     section 326 program, $4,764,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $3,000,000 more than the administration 
     request. The section 326 program provides 5-year grants to 
     strengthen historically black graduate institutions [HBGIs]. 
     The Higher Education Amendments of 1998 increased the number 
     of recipients to 18 named institutions, but reserved the 
     first $26,600,000 appropriated each year to the 16 
     institutions included in the previous authorization. Grants 
     may be used for any part B purpose and to establish an 
     endowment.
     Strengthening Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-serving 
         institutions
       The Committee recommends $8,234,000 for this program, an 
     increase of $1,734,000 over the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and $1,500,000 more than budget request. The 
     purpose of this program is to improve and expand the capacity 
     of institutions serving Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian 
     students. Funds may be used to plan, develop, and implement 
     activities that encourage: faculty and curriculum 
     development, better fund and administrative management, 
     renovation and improvement of instructional facilities, 
     student services, and the purchase of library books and other 
     educational materials.
     Strengthening tribally controlled colleges and universities
       The Committee recommends $23,000,000 for strengthening 
     tribal colleges and universities (TCUs), an increase of 
     $5,500,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level and $4,870,000 
     more than the budget request. Still in their early stages, 
     TCUs rely on a portion of these funds to address 
     developmental needs, including faculty development, 
     curriculum and student services. In addition, the Committee 
     in fiscal year 2001 helped launch a competitive grant program 
     to assist institutions in addressing long overdue and high-
     priority infrastructure and facilities requirements. The 
     funds provided shall be used to support continuation of 
     existing basic grants and new planning or implementation 
     grant awards. The remaining funds shall be available for 
     grants for renovation and construction of facilities to help 
     address urgently needed facilities repair and expansion.
     International education and foreign language studies
       The bill includes a total of $101,500,000 for international 
     education programs, an increase of $3,000,000 over the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and $1,000,000 less than the budget request.
       Domestic programs.--The Committee recommends $87,000,000 
     for domestic program activities related to international 
     education and foreign language studies, including 
     international business education, under title VI of the HEA, 
     an increase of $1,800,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and $1,000,000 less than the administration 
     request. Domestic programs include national resource centers, 
     undergraduate international studies and foreign language 
     programs, international research and studies projects, 
     international business education projects and centers, 
     American overseas research centers, language resource 
     centers, foreign language and area studies fellowships, and 
     technological innovation and cooperation for foreign 
     information access.
       Overseas programs.--The bill includes $13,000,000 for 
     overseas programs authorized under the Mutual Educational and 
     Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, popularly known as the 
     Fulbright-Hays Act. The recommendation is an increase of 
     $1,200,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and the same 
     as the budget request. Under these overseas programs, grants 
     are provided for group and faculty research projects abroad, 
     doctoral dissertation research abroad, and special bilateral 
     projects. Unlike other programs authorized by the Fulbright-
     Hays Act and administered by the Department of State, these 
     Department of Education programs focus on training American 
     instructors and students in order to improve foreign language 
     and area studies education in the United States.
       Institute for International Public Policy.--The Committee 
     bill recommends $1,500,000 for the Institute for 
     International Public Policy. This is the same amount as the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the budget request. This program 
     is designed to increase the number of minority individuals in 
     foreign service and related careers by providing a grant to a 
     consortium of institutions for undergraduate and graduate 
     level foreign language and international studies. An 
     institutional match of 50 percent is required.
     Fund for the improvement of postsecondary education
       The Committee recommends $126,926,000 for the Fund for the 
     Improvement of Postsecondary Education [FIPSE], which is 
     $53,996,000 less than the 2002 appropriation and $87,788,000 
     more than the administration request. FIPSE stimulates 
     improvements in education beyond high school by supporting 
     exemplary, locally developed projects that have potential for 
     addressing problems and recommending improvements in 
     postsecondary education. The fund is administered by an 
     independent board that provides small, competitive grants and 
     contracts to a variety of postsecondary institutions and 
     agencies, including 2- and 4-year colleges and universities, 
     State education agencies, community-based organizations, and 
     other non-profit institutions and organizations concerned 
     with education beyond high school.
       The Committee recommendation includes $25,810,000, the full 
     amount requested for the comprehensive program. The Committee 
     rejects the budget request to consolidate the Demonstration 
     Projects to Ensure Quality Higher Education for Students with 
     Disabilities program within the FIPSE program.
     Minority science and engineering improvement
       The Committee recommends $9,500,000 for the Minority 
     Science and Engineering Improvement program [MSEIP], 
     $1,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     administration request. This program provides discretionary 
     grants to institutions with minority enrollments greater than 
     50 percent to purchase equipment, develop curricula, and 
     support advanced faculty training. Grants are intended to 
     improve science and engineering education programs and 
     increase the number of minority students in the fields of 
     science, mathematics, and engineering.
     Interest subsidy grants
       The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for interest subsidy 
     grants, $2,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     the same as the administration request. This appropriation is 
     required to meet the Federal commitment to pay interest 
     subsidies on 73 loans made in past years for constructing, 
     renovating, and equipping postsecondary academic facilities. 
     No new interest subsidy commitments have been entered into 
     since 1973 but subsidy payments on existing loans are 
     expected to continue until the year 2013.
     Federal TRIO programs
       The Committee bill includes $832,500,000 for Federal TRIO 
     programs, an increase of $30,000,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation and the administration request.
       TRIO programs provide a variety of services to improve 
     postsecondary education opportunities for low-income 
     individuals and first-generation college students: Upward 
     Bound offers disadvantaged high school students academic 
     services to develop the skills and motivation needed to 
     continue their education; Student Support Services provides 
     remedial instruction, counseling, summer programs and grant 
     aid to disadvantaged college students to help them complete 
     their postsecondary education; Talent Search identifies and 
     counsels individuals between ages 11 and 27 regarding 
     opportunities for completing high school and enrolling in 
     postsecondary education; Educational Opportunity Centers 
     provide information and counseling on available financial and 
     academic assistance to low-income adults who are first-
     generation college students; and the Ronald E. McNair 
     Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program supports research 
     internships, seminars, tutoring, and other activities to 
     encourage disadvantaged college students to enroll in 
     graduate programs.
       The Committee urges the Department to use a funding 
     allocation strategy in making awards under TRIO that balances 
     the need to fund a larger number of grantees with the need 
     for projects to improve the quality of student services and 
     expand to serve all eligible students. The Committee notes 
     that, at the budget request level, $5,365,000 has not been 
     allocated to any particular TRIO program.
     Gaining early awareness and readiness for undergraduate 
         programs [GEAR UP]
       The Committee recommends $295,000,000, an increase of 
     $10,000,000 over the amount provided in fiscal year 2002 and 
     the budget request. Under this program funds are used by 
     States and partnerships of colleges, middle and high schools, 
     and community organizations to assist middle and high schools 
     serving a high percentage of low-income students. Services 
     provided help students prepare for and pursue a postsecondary 
     education.
     Byrd honors scholarships
       The Committee recommends $41,001,000 for the Byrd honors 
     scholarship program, the same amount as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the budget request.
       The Byrd honors scholarship program is designed to promote 
     student excellence and achievement and to recognize 
     exceptionally able students who show promise of continued 
     excellence. Funds are allocated to State education agencies 
     based on each State's school-aged population. The State 
     education agencies select the recipients of the scholarships 
     in consultation with school administrators, teachers, 
     counselors, and parents. The funds provided will support a 
     new cohort of first-year students in 2003, and continue 
     support for the 2000, 2001, and 2002 cohorts of students in 
     their fourth, third and second years of study, respectively. 
     The amount recommended will provide scholarships of $1,500 to 
     27,334 students.
     Javits fellowships
       The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Javits 
     Fellowships program, the same as the fiscal year 2002 amount 
     and the budget request.

[[Page 902]]

       The Javits Fellowships program provides fellowships of up 
     to 4 years to students of superior ability who are pursuing 
     doctoral degrees in the arts, humanities, and social sciences 
     at any institution of their choice. Each fellowship consists 
     of a student stipend to cover living costs, and an 
     institutional payment to cover each fellow's tuition and 
     other expenses. Funds provided in the fiscal year 2003 
     appropriation support fellowships for the 2004-2005 academic 
     year.
     Graduate assistance in areas of national need [GAANN]
       The Committee recommends $31,000,000 for graduate 
     assistance in areas of national need, the same as the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and the budget request. This program awards 
     competitive grants to graduate academic departments and 
     programs for fellowship support in areas of national need as 
     determined by the Secretary. In fiscal year 2001, the 
     Secretary designated the following areas of national need: 
     biology, chemistry, computer and information sciences, 
     engineering, geological and related sciences, mathematics and 
     physics. Recipients must demonstrate financial need and 
     academic excellence, and seek the highest degree in their 
     fields.
     Teacher quality enhancement grants
       The Committee recommends $90,000,000 for the teacher 
     quality enhancement grants program, the same amount as the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and the budget request. The program 
     was established to support statewide initiatives that best 
     meet their specific teacher preparation and recruitment 
     needs. Further, the Act provides and designates funding for 
     the program in three focus areas: 45 percent of resources 
     support a State grant program, 45 percent of funds are used 
     for a partnership program, and 10 percent are designated for 
     a recruitment grant program.
       Under the State grant program, funds may be used for a 
     variety of State-level reforms, including more rigorous 
     teacher certification and licensure requirements; provision 
     of high-quality alternative routes to certification; 
     development of systems to reward high-performing teachers and 
     principals; and development of efforts to reduce the shortage 
     of qualified teachers in high-poverty areas.
       Teacher training partnership grants, which are awarded to 
     local partnerships comprised of at least one school of arts 
     and science, one school or program of education, a local 
     education agency, and a K-12 school, may be used for a 
     variety of activities designed to improve teacher preparation 
     and performance, including efforts to provide increased 
     academic study in a proposed teaching specialty area; to 
     prepare teachers to use technology effectively in the 
     classroom; to provide preservice clinical experiences; and to 
     integrate reliable research-based teaching methods into the 
     curriculum. Partnerships may work with other entities, with 
     those involving businesses receiving priority consideration. 
     Partnerships are eligible to receive a one-time-only grant to 
     encourage reform and improvement at the local level.
       The recruitment grant program supports efforts to reduce 
     shortages of qualified teachers in high-need school districts 
     as well as provide assistance for high-quality teacher 
     preparation and induction programs to meet the specific 
     educational needs of the local area.
     Child care access means parents in schools
       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,300,000 
     for the Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CAMPUS) 
     program, $8,700,000 less than the 2002 appropriation and 
     $1,300,000 more than the budget request. The Committee takes 
     this action because of the $8,700,000 lapsed in fiscal year 
     2001 and the additional funds that lapsed in fiscal year 
     2002. This program was established in the Higher Education 
     Amendments of 1998 to support the efforts of a growing number 
     of non-traditional students who are struggling to complete 
     their college degrees at the same time that they take care of 
     their children. Discretionary grants of up to 4 years are 
     made to institutions of higher education to support or 
     establish a campus-based childcare program primarily serving 
     the needs of low-income students enrolled at the institution.
       The Committee expects the Department to continue to 
     publicize the availability of these funds, provide 
     appropriate technical assistance and offer pre-application 
     workshops to ensure that eligible entities are able to access 
     funding made available through this program.
     Demonstration projects to ensure quality higher education for 
         students with disabilities
       The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for this program, the 
     same amount appropriated in fiscal year 2002. The Department 
     proposed eliminating funding for this program. This program's 
     purpose is to ensure that students with disabilities receive 
     a high-quality postsecondary education. Grants are made to 
     support model demonstration projects that provide technical 
     assistance and professional development activities for 
     faculty and administrators in institutions of higher 
     education.
     Underground railroad program
       The Committee recommendation includes $2,500,000 for the 
     Underground Railroad program, an increase of $500,000 over 
     the fiscal year 2002 amount. The administration did not 
     request any resources for this program. The program was newly 
     authorized by the Higher Education Amendments of 1998 and was 
     funded for the first time in fiscal year 1999. Grants are 
     provided to research, display, interpret, and collect 
     artifacts relating to the history of the underground 
     railroad. Educational organizations receiving funds must 
     demonstrate substantial private support through a public-
     private partnership, create an endowment fund that provides 
     for ongoing operation of the facility, and establish a 
     network of satellite centers throughout the United States to 
     share information and teach people about the significance of 
     the underground railroad in American history.
     GPRA/Higher Education Act Program Evaluation
       The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for the Government 
     Performance and Results Act data collection and for the 
     Higher Education Act Program Evaluation program, the same 
     amount as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget 
     request. The administration requested these funds to comply 
     with the Government Performance and Results Act, which 
     requires the collection of data and evaluation of Higher 
     Education programs and the performance of recipients of 
     Higher Education funds.
     Thurgood Marshall legal educational opportunity program
       The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for this program, 
     $1,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation. The 
     Department did not request funding for this program. 
     Resources will be used to provide minority, low-income or 
     disadvantaged college students with the information, 
     preparation, and financial assistance needed to gain access 
     to and complete law school study.
     B.J. Stupak Olympic scholarships
       The Committee recommendation does not include funding for 
     this program, the same as the budget request. The $1,000,000 
     appropriated for fiscal year 2002 will be used to provide 
     financial assistance to athletes who are training at the 
     United States Olympic Education Center or one of the United 
     States Olympic Training Centers and who are pursuing a 
     postsecondary education at an institution of higher 
     education.


                           howard university

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$237,474,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................237,474,000
Committee recommendation....................................239,974,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $239,974,000 
     for Howard University, which is $2,500,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the budget request. Howard 
     University is located in the District of Columbia and offers 
     undergraduate, graduate, and professional degrees through 12 
     schools and colleges. The university also administers the 
     Howard University Hospital, which provides both inpatient and 
     outpatient care, as well as training in the health 
     professions. Federal funds from this account support about 53 
     percent of the university's projected educational and general 
     expenditures, excluding the hospital. The Committee agrees 
     with the administration and recommends, within the funds 
     provided, $3,600,000 for the endowment program.
       Howard University Hospital.--Within the funds provided, the 
     Committee recommends $30,374,000 for the Howard University 
     Hospital, the same as the fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     budget request. The hospital serves as a major acute and 
     ambulatory care center for the District of Columbia and 
     functions as a major teaching facility attached to the 
     university. The Federal appropriation provides partial 
     funding for the hospital's operations.


             college housing and academic facilities loans

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$762,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................762,000
Committee recommendation........................................762,000

       Federal administration.--The Committee bill includes 
     $762,000 for Federal administration of the CHAFL program, the 
     same as the 2002 level and the administration request.
       These funds will be used to reimburse the Department for 
     expenses incurred in managing the existing CHAFL loan 
     portfolio during fiscal year 2003. These expenses include 
     salaries and benefits, travel, printing, contracts (including 
     contracted loan servicing activities), and other expenses 
     directly related to the administration of the CHAFL Program.


  historically black college and university capital financing program

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$208,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................208,000
Committee recommendation........................................208,000

       Federal administration.--The Committee recommends $208,000 
     for Federal administration of the Historically Black College 
     and University [HBCU] Capital Financing Program, the same as 
     the fiscal year 2002 level and the administration request.
       The HBCU Capital Financing Program makes capital available 
     to HBCUs for construction, renovation, and repair of academic

[[Page 903]]

     facilities by providing a Federal guarantee for private 
     sector construction bonds. Construction loans will be made 
     from the proceeds of the sale of the bonds.


                     institute of education science

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$443,870,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................432,887,000
Committee recommendation....................................397,387,000

       The bill includes $397,387,000 for educational research, 
     statistics, and assessment programs. This amount is 
     $46,483,000 below the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and 
     $35,500,000 less than the budget request. This account 
     supports education research, data collection and analysis 
     activities, and the assessment of student progress.
     Research, development and dissemination
       The Committee recommends $89,500,000 for educational 
     research, development and national dissemination activities. 
     This amount is $32,317,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and $85,500,000 less than the budget request. 
     Funds are available for obligationfor 2 fiscal years. These 
     funds support research, development, and dissemination 
     activities that are aimed at expanding fundamental knowledge 
     of education and promoting the use of research and 
     development findings in the design of efforts to improve 
     education.
     Regional educational laboratories
       The Committee recommends $67,500,000, the same amount as 
     the budget request and the fiscal 2002 appropriation, for 
     regional educational laboratories. Funding supports a network 
     of 10 laboratories that are responsible for promoting the use 
     of broad-based systemic strategies to improve student 
     achievement.
     Statistics
       The Committee recommends $87,000,000 for data-gathering and 
     statistical-analysis activities of the National Center for 
     Education Statistics (NCES). This amount is $2,000,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and $8,000,000 less 
     than the budget request.
       The NCES collects, analyzes, and reports statistics on 
     education in the United States. Activities are carried out 
     directly and through grants and contracts. The Center 
     collects data on educational institutions at all levels, 
     longitudinal data on student progress, and data relevant to 
     public policy. The NCES also provides technical assistance to 
     State and local education agencies and postsecondary 
     institutions.
     Assessment
       The Committee recommends $95,387,000, the same as the 
     budget request, for assessment. This amount is $16,166,000 
     less than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
       These funds provide support for the National Assessment of 
     Educational Progress (NAEP), a congressionally mandated 
     assessment created to measure the educational achievement of 
     American students. The primary goal of NAEP is to determine 
     and report the status and trends over time in educational 
     achievement, subject by subject. Beginning in 2002, the 
     Department will pay for State participation in biennial 
     reading and mathematics assessments in grades 4 and 8.
       Within the funds appropriated, the Committee recommends 
     $4,562,000 for the National Assessment Governing Board 
     (NAGB), which is responsible for formulating policy for NAEP. 
     The amount is the same as the budget request and $509,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 appropriation.
     Multi-year grants and contracts
       The Committee recommends $58,000,000 to continue multi-year 
     grants and contracts to comprehensive regional assistance 
     centers, Eisenhower regional mathematics and science 
     consortia, and regional technology in education consortia 
     (R*TECs). This amount is the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation. The administration requested no funds for this 
     purpose.
       Within the funds appropriated, the Committee recommends: 
     $28,000,000 for the comprehensive regional assistance centers 
     program, which funds 15 university-based or nonprofit centers 
     that offer technical assistance to States, school districts, 
     and schools on a variety of topics; $15,000,000 for 
     Eisenhower regional mathematics and science consortia, which 
     disseminate exemplary mathematics and science education 
     instruction materials and provide technical assistance for 
     the implementation of teaching methods and assessment tools; 
     $5,000,000 for the Eisenhower Math and Science Clearinghouse; 
     and $10,000,000 for R*TECs, which are regional centers that 
     help States, local educational agencies, teachers, school 
     library and media personnel, administrators, and other 
     education entities successfully integrate technologies into 
     K-12 classrooms, library media centers, and other educational 
     settings, including adult literacy centers.

                        Departmental Management


                         Program Administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$364,761,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................411,795,000
Committee recommendation....................................412,093,000

       The Committee recommends $412,093,000 for program 
     administration, $47,332,000 more than the comparable fiscal 
     year 2002 funding level and $298,000 more than the budget 
     request.
       Funds support personnel compensation and benefits, travel, 
     rent, communications, utilities, printing, equipment and 
     supplies, automated data processing, and other services 
     required to award, administer, and monitor approximately 170 
     Federal education programs. Support for program evaluation 
     and studies and advisory councils is also provided under this 
     activity.
       The Committee is concerned about the delay applicants are 
     experiencing in receiving awards under grant programs. The 
     Committee is aware of grant competitions that have taken more 
     than 1 year from the announcement of the competition to the 
     official notification of awards. The Committee understands 
     that the events of September 11th and late enactment of the 
     bill caused some delay in the process. However, it is the 
     Committee's strong belief that every action should be taken 
     to reduce the time it takes for applicants to learn whether 
     their program has been renewed or whether they have been 
     funded for the first time, while still maintaining a strong 
     peer and grant review framework. The Committee requests that 
     the Department provide a report within 60 days of enactment 
     of this bill on the steps that it can take to reduce the 
     delay in administering grant competitions.
       The Committee has included $750,000 to provide to all Title 
     IV institutions, that are eligible for funding under the 
     higher education, a handbook providing detailed instructions 
     on compliance with section 485(f) of the Higher Education Act 
     of 1965. The Committee expects that these handbooks will be 
     distributed no later than August 1, 2003.
       The Committee has provided the authority for the Department 
     to lease from non-Federal sources one additional passenger 
     motor vehicle as requested in the budget.
       The Committee has included $12,795,000, requested by the 
     administration, to support costs associated with the 
     renovation and modernization of the Mary E. Switzer building. 
     These funds are available until expended. The Committee 
     expects the Department to include a detailed explanation and 
     justification of the funding required to complete this 
     project in its fiscal year 2004 budget justification.


                        office for civil rights

Appropriations, 2002........................................$79,934,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................86,276,000
Committee recommendation.....................................86,276,000

       The Committee bill includes $86,276,000 for the Office for 
     Civil Rights [OCR], $6,342,000 more than the comparable 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget 
     request.
       The Office for Civil Rights is responsible for the 
     enforcement of laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis 
     of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and age in 
     all programs and institutions funded by the Department of 
     Education. To carry out this responsibility, OCR investigates 
     and resolves discrimination complaints, monitors 
     desegregation and equal educational opportunity plans, 
     reviews possible discriminatory practices by recipients of 
     Federal education funds, and provides technical assistance to 
     recipients of funds to help them meet civil rights 
     requirements.


                    office of the inspector general

Appropriations, 2002........................................$38,720,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................41,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................41,000,000

       The Committee recommends $41,000,000 for the Office of the 
     Inspector General, $2,280,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the same as the budget request.
       The Office of the Inspector General has the authority to 
     investigate all departmental programs and administrative 
     activities, including those under contract or grant, to 
     prevent and detect fraud and abuse, and to ensure the quality 
     and integrity of those programs. The Office investigates 
     alleged misuse of Federal funds, and conducts audits to 
     determine compliance with laws and regulations, efficiency of 
     operations, and effectiveness in achieving program goals.


                       STUDENT AID ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$107,484,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................105,388,000
Committee recommendation....................................105,388,000

       The Committee recommends $105,388,000 in discretionary 
     resources for the new Student Aid Administration account. The 
     Committee recommendation is $2,096,000 less than the 
     comparable fiscal year 2002 funding level and the same as the 
     request.
       Fiscal year 2002 funding for activities funded in this new 
     account was provided by the the FFEL Federal Administration 
     account and program administration account.
       Funds appropriated for the Student Aid Administration 
     account, in addition to mandatory funding available through 
     Section 458 of the Higher Education Act, will support the 
     Department's student aid management expenses. The Office of 
     Student Financial Assistance and Office of Postsecondary 
     Education have primary responsibility for administering 
     Federal student financial assistance programs.

[[Page 904]]

       The Committee rejects the Administration's legislative 
     proposal to fund this new account solely through annual 
     appropriations.

                           General Provisions

       The Committee bill contains language which has been 
     included in the bill since 1974, prohibiting the use of funds 
     for the transportation of students or teachers in order to 
     overcome racial imbalance (sec. 301).
       The Committee bill contains language included in the bill 
     since 1977, prohibiting the transportation of students other 
     than to the school nearest to the student's home (sec. 302).
       The Committee bill contains language which has been 
     included in the bill since 1980, prohibiting the use of funds 
     to prevent the implementation of programs of voluntary prayer 
     and meditation in public schools (sec. 303).
       The Committee bill includes a provision giving the 
     Secretary of Education authority to transfer up to 1 percent 
     of any discretionary funds between appropriations (sec. 304).
       The Committee bill includes a provision mandating the 
     certain funds for reading activities not be used to supplant 
     non-Federal funds (sec. 305).
       The Committee bill includes a provision regarding 
     allocation of Title I funds in New York City (sec. 306).
       The Committee bill includes language making minor 
     corrections in the Alaska native section of Public Law 107-
     110 (sec. 307).
       The Committee includes language making a minor correction 
     in the Native Hawaiian section of Public Law 107-110 (sec. 
     308).

                       TITLE IV--RELATED AGENCIES

                   Armed Forces Retirement Home Board

Appropriations, 2002........................................$71,440,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................67,340,000
Committee recommendation.....................................67,340,000

       The Committee recommends authority to expend $67,340,000 
     from the Armed Forces Home Trust Fund to operate and maintain 
     the Armed Forces Retirement Home--Washington and the Armed 
     Forces Retirement Home--Gulfport. This amount is equal to the 
     budget request.

             Corporation for National and Community Service


                  Domestic Volunteer Service Programs

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$328,895,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................396,063,000
Committee recommendation....................................351,063,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $351,063,000 
     for the domestic volunteer service programs of the 
     Corporation for National and Community Service. The Committee 
     recommendation is $22,168,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     comparable level, and $45,000,000 less than the budget 
     request.
     VISTA
       The Committee bill provides $94,287,000 for the Volunteers 
     in Service to America (VISTA) Program, $9,000,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 level and equal to the budget request.
       VISTA is a 36-year-old program which provides capacity 
     building for small community-based organizations. VISTA 
     volunteers raise resources for local projects, recruit and 
     organize volunteers, and establish and expand local 
     community-based programs in housing, employment, health, and 
     economic development activities.
     Special Volunteer Programs
       The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Special 
     Volunteer Programs, double the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $45,000,000 below the budget request.
       These funds will be used to carry out Part C of Title I of 
     the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, which authorizes 
     grants to volunteer organizations to encourage and enable 
     persons from all age groups to perform volunteer service in 
     agencies, institutions and situations of need. Grants are 
     awarded to organizations that strengthen and support 
     volunteer efforts, with a particular emphasis on anti-poverty 
     efforts.
       The Committee commends the CNS for its stated goal of 
     recruiting new Senior Corps volunteers and strongly supports 
     this effort. The Committee is aware that one of the most 
     important factors in the decision to continue volunteering is 
     the quality of the first volunteer experience and the ongoing 
     presence of the volunteer organization. For this reason, the 
     Committee urges the Corporation to coordinate this newly 
     funded program with the Senior Corps direct service programs. 
     No funds have been included for the proposed Parent Drug 
     Corps.
     National Senior Volunteer Corps
       The Committee bill provides $212,547,000 for the National 
     Senior Volunteer Corps programs, equal to the fiscal year 
     2002 level and the budget request.
       The Committee recognizes the valuable contributions of 
     seniors participating in the Foster Grandparent (FGP), 
     Retired and Senior Volunteer (RSVP) and Senior Companion 
     Programs (SCP). In accordance with the Domestic Volunteer 
     Service Act (DVSA), the Committee intends that at least one-
     third of each program's increase over the fiscal year 2001 
     level shall be used to fund Program of National Significance 
     (PNS) expansion grants to allow existing FGP, RSVP and SCP 
     programs to expand the number of volunteers serving in areas 
     of critical need as identified by Congress in the DVSA. 
     Within the appropriation, sufficient funding has been 
     included to provide adequate resources for administrative 
     cost increases realized by all current grantees in each DVSA 
     program. Remaining funds should be used to begin new FGP, 
     RSVP and SCP programs in geographic areas currently 
     underserved. The Committee expects these projects to be 
     awarded via a nationwide competition among potential 
     community-based sponsors.
       The Committee is concerned that 1,474 service years under 
     the Senior Corps programs went unfilled in fiscal year 2001. 
     These unfilled slots resulted in over $5,000,000 of 
     unexpended funds. Since the early 1990's, the Corporation has 
     maintained a 15 percent allowance for health care costs above 
     the income guidelines. Over the same period of time, health 
     care costs have risen exponentially. Data from the Centers 
     for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) indicates that 
     seniors under 125 percent of poverty (those eligible for 
     Senior Corps) spend an average of 35 percent of their out-of-
     pocket income on prescription drugs alone--more than twice 
     the Corporations' allowance for all healthcare costs. In 
     addition, seniors just above the Senior Corps eligibility, 
     between 135 percent and 150 percent of poverty, spend an 
     average of 30 percent of their income on prescription drugs. 
     The Committee urges the Corporation to examine the potential 
     for a more appropriate health care allowance that would allow 
     the Senior Corps to tap into these potential volunteers and 
     engage more of the President's projected new volunteers into 
     sustained volunteer opportunities.
       The Committee has included $400,000 for senior 
     demonstration programs, equal to the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and the budget request.
     Foster Grandparent Program
       The Committee recommends $106,700,000 for the Foster 
     Grandparent Program, equal to the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriations level and the budget request.
       This program provides volunteer opportunities to seniors 
     age 60 and over who serve at-risk youth. This program 
     involves seniors in their communities and provides a host of 
     services to children.
     Senior Companion Program
       For the Senior Companion Program, the Committee bill 
     includes $46,563,000, an increase of $2,168,000 over the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriations level and equal to the budget 
     request.
       This program enables senior citizens to provide personal 
     assistance and companionship to adults with physical, mental, 
     or emotional difficulties. Senior companions provide vital 
     in-home services to elderly Americans who would otherwise 
     have to enter nursing homes. The volunteers also provide 
     respite care to relieve care givers.
     Retired and Senior Volunteer Program
       The Committee bill provides $58,884,000 for the Retired and 
     Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP), $4,000,000 above the fiscal 
     year 2002 level and equal to the budget request.
       This program involves persons age 55 and over in volunteer 
     opportunities in their communities.
     Program support
       The Committee bill includes $34,229,000 for program 
     support, $2,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 appropriation 
     and equal to the budget request.

                  Corporation for Public Broadcasting

Appropriations, 2003.......................................$365,000,000
Appropriations, 2004........................................380,000,000
Budget estimate, 2005.......................................395,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................395,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $395,000,000 
     for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), an advance 
     appropriation for fiscal year 2005. This amount is 
     $15,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2004 appropriation and 
     equal to the budget request.
       In addition, the Committee recommends $48,744,000 for the 
     conversion to digital broadcasting. The recommendation is 
     $23,744,000 above last year's appropriation and the 
     administration request.
       The Committee notes that since the passage of the 1996 
     Telecommunications Act, only 87 of the Nation's 356 public 
     television stations have converted to digital. The remaining 
     269 stations are facing a May 2003 deadline by which to 
     complete conversion or risk losing their licenses. To date, 
     Federal funding for this conversion totals $158,000,000 out 
     of the total estimated cost of $1,700,000,000. Stations have 
     raised over $750,000,000 from State and private sources and 
     are generally expected to cover more than half of the costs 
     of conversion. The Committee is concerned that the 
     Administration's request is not sufficient to meet the 
     Federal mandate and to cover the Federal share of conversion.

               Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service

Appropriations, 2002........................................$39,982,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................40,718,000
Committee recommendation.....................................40,718,000


[[Page 905]]

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,718,000 
     for the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), 
     $736,000 above the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and equal 
     to the budget request.
       The FMCS was established by Congress in 1947 to provide 
     mediation, conciliation, and arbitration services to labor 
     and management. FMCS is authorized to provide dispute 
     resolution consultation and training to all Federal agencies.

            Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,939,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,127,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,127,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,127,000 for 
     the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, an 
     increase of $188,000 over the fiscal year 2002 appropriation 
     and the same as the budget request.
       The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission 
     provides administrative trial and appellate review of legal 
     disputes under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 
     1977. The five-member Commission provides administrative 
     appellate review of the Commission's administrative law judge 
     decisions.

             National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities


                Institute of Museum and Library Service

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$224,501,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................210,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................203,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $203,000,000 
     for the Institute of Museum and Library Services. This is 
     $21,501,000 less than the 2002 level and $7,000,000 less than 
     the administration request.
     Office of Museum Services Operations Grants
       The Committee recommends $15,932,000 for operations grants. 
     These funds support grants to museums for building increased 
     public access, expanding educational services, reaching 
     families and children, and using technology more effectively 
     in support of these goals. In addition, non-competitive 
     grants are awarded for technical assistance in four types of 
     assessments: Institutional, Collections Management, Public 
     Dimension, and governance.
     Museum Conservation Programs
       The Committee recommends $3,630,000 for Conservation 
     programs. These funds support grants to allow museums to 
     survey collections, perform training, research, treatment and 
     environmental improvements. In addition, grantees may receive 
     additional funds to develop an education component that 
     relates to their conservation project. In addition, non-
     competitive grants are awarded for technical assistance in 
     conservation efforts.
     Museum National Leadership Projects
       The Committee recommends $5,700,000 for National Leadership 
     projects. The National Leadership Grants encourage innovation 
     in meeting community needs, widespread and creative use of 
     new technologies, greater public access to museum 
     collections, and an extended impact of Federal dollars 
     through collaborative projects.
     Office of Museum Services Administration
       The Committee recommends $3,463,000 for program 
     administration, the same as the budget request. Funds support 
     personnel compensation and benefits, travel, rent, 
     communications, utilities, printing, equipment and supplies, 
     automated data processing, and other services.
     Office of Library Services State Grants
       The Committee recommends $154,494,000 for State grants. 
     Funds are provided to States by formula to carry out 5-year 
     State plans. These plans must set goals and priorities for 
     the State consistent with the purpose of the act, describe 
     activities to meet the goals and priorities and describe the 
     methods by which progress toward the goals and priorities and 
     the success of activities will be evaluated. States may 
     apportion their funds between two activities, technology and 
     targeted services. For technology, States may use funds for 
     electronic linkages among libraries, linkages to educational, 
     social and information services, accessing information 
     through electronic networks, or link different types of 
     libraries or share resources among libraries. For targeted 
     services, States may direct library and information services 
     to persons having difficulty using a library, underserved 
     urban and rural communities, and children from low income 
     families. Within the total recommended, $3,075,000 has been 
     provided for library services to Native Americans and Native 
     Hawaiians.
     Library National leadership projects
       The Committee recommends $14,081,000 for national 
     leadership projects. These funds support activities of 
     national significance to enhance the quality of library 
     services nationwide and to provide coordination between 
     libraries and museums. Activities are carried out through 
     grants and contracts awarded on a competitive basis to 
     libraries, agencies, institutions of higher education and 
     museums. Priority is given to projects that focus on 
     education and training of library personnel, research and 
     development for the improvement of libraries, preservation, 
     digitization of library materials, partnerships between 
     libraries and museums and other activities that enhance the 
     quality of library services nationwide.
       The Committee commends the administration for proposing an 
     Initiative to Recruit and Educate Librarians and has included 
     $3,000,000 for this purpose. The nation is facing an 
     impending retirement wave of librarians. The Bureau of Labor 
     Statistics reports that 57 percent of current librarians are 
     45 and older and 50 percent of librarians are expected to 
     leave the profession in the next 10 years. In addition, 
     current librarians are being asked to take on expanded duties 
     as information technology advances and our society 
     experiences an ever-increasing need for the dissemination of 
     public safety and public health data.
     Office of Library Services Administration
       The Committee recommends $5,700,000 for program 
     administration, the same as the budget request. Funds support 
     personnel compensation and benefits, travel, rent, 
     communications, utilities, printing, equipment and supplies, 
     automated data processing, and other services.

                  Medicare Payment Advisory Commission

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,250,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................8,250,000
Committee recommendation......................................8,250,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,250,000 for 
     the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, equal to the fiscal 
     year 2002 appropriation and the budget request.
       The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) was 
     established by Congress as part of the Balanced Budget Act of 
     1997 (Public Law 105-33). Congress merged the Physician 
     Payment Review Commission with the Prospective Payment 
     Assessment Commission to create MedPAC.

        National Commission on Libraries and Information Science

Appropriations, 2002........................................$1,000,000-
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation......................................1,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000 for 
     the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, 
     the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and $1,000,000 
     more than the budget request.
       The Commission determines the need for, and makes 
     recommendations on, library and information services, and 
     advises the President and Congress on the development and 
     implementation of national policy in library and information 
     sciences.

                     National Council on Disability

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,830,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,830,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,830,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,830,000 for 
     the National Council on Disability, equal to the fiscal year 
     2002 appropriation and the budget request.
       The Council is mandated to make recommendations to the 
     President, the Congress, the Rehabilitation Services 
     Administration, and the National Institute on Disability and 
     Rehabilitation Research, on the public issues of concern to 
     individuals with disabilities. The Council gathers 
     information on the implementation, effectiveness, and impact 
     of the Americans With Disabilities Act and looks at emerging 
     policy issues as they affect persons with disabilities and 
     their ability to enter or reenter the Nation's work force and 
     to live independently.

                     National Labor Relations Board

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$226,618,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................233,223,000
Committee recommendation....................................238,223,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $238,223,000 
     for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), $11,605,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 comparable level and 
     $5,000,000 more than the budget request.
       The NLRB is a law enforcement agency which adjudicates 
     disputes under the National Labor Relations Act.
       The Committee is disappointed to note that the progress 
     made by the NLRB reducing the backlog of unfair labor 
     practice cases has been stymied by an increase in case 
     intakes. The backlog at the end of fiscal year 2001 was 
     approximately 970 cases and grew to 2,010 cases by the end of 
     fiscal year 2002. The Committee is concerned about the impact 
     this backlog has on workplace conditions. To that end, the 
     Committee has included additional funds to continue the 
     effort to reduce backlogged cases.

                        National Mediation Board

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,635,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................11,203,000
Committee recommendation.....................................11,203,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,203,000 
     for the National Mediation Board, $568,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the same as the budget 
     request.
       The National Mediation Board protects interstate commerce 
     as it mediates labor-

[[Page 906]]

     management relations in the railroad and airline industries 
     under the Railway Labor Act. The Board mediates collective 
     bargaining disputes, determines the choice of employee 
     bargaining representatives through elections, and administers 
     arbitration of employee grievances.

            Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,964,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,577,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,577,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,577,000 for 
     the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 
     $613,000 above the fiscal year 2002 appropriation and the 
     same as the budget request.
       The Commission serves as a court to justly and 
     expeditiously resolve disputes between the Occupational 
     Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and employers charged 
     with violations of health and safety standards enforced by 
     OSHA.

                       Railroad Retirement Board


                     Dual Benefits Payments Account

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$137,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................124,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................124,000,000

       The Committee has provided a total of $124,000,000 for dual 
     benefits, including $8,000,000 in income tax receipts on dual 
     benefits as authorized by law. The Committee recommendation 
     is $13,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 level and the 
     same as the budget request.
       This appropriation provides for vested dual benefit 
     payments authorized by the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974, 
     as amended by the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981. This 
     separate account, established for the payment of dual 
     benefits, is funded by general fund appropriations and income 
     tax receipts of vested dual benefits.


          Federal Payments to the Railroad Retirement Account

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$150,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................150,000
Committee recommendation........................................150,000

       The Committee recommends $150,000 for interest earned on 
     unnegotiated checks. This is the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriation and budget request.


                      Limitation on Administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$97,700,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................97,720,000
Committee recommendation.....................................97,720,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $97,720,000 
     for the administration of railroad retirement/survivor 
     benefit programs. This amount is $20,000 more than the fiscal 
     year 2002 comparable level, and the same as the budget 
     request.
       The Board administers comprehensive retirement-survivor and 
     unemployment-sickness insurance benefit programs for the 
     Nation's railroad workers and their families. This account 
     limits the amount of funds in the railroad retirement and 
     railroad unemployment insurance trust funds which may be used 
     by the Board for administrative expenses.
       The Committee is concerned by the administration's lack of 
     a consistent policy on the payment of commercial rent by 
     trust fund agencies. The Committee requests that the Office 
     of Management and Budget clarify its policy in the fiscal 
     year 2004 budget. In the meantime, the Committee has included 
     language to prohibit funds from the railroad retirement trust 
     fund from being spent on any charges over and above the 
     actual cost of administering the trust fund, including 
     commercial rental rates.


           Limitation on the Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,261,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................6,300,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,300,000

       The Committee recommends $6,300,000 for the Office of the 
     Inspector General, $39,000 above the 2002 appropriation and 
     the same as the budget request.
       The Committee has included bill language to allow the 
     Office of the Inspector General to use funds to conduct 
     audits, investigations, and reviews of the Medicare program. 
     The Committee finds that as long as the RRB has the authority 
     to negotiate and administer the separate Medicare contract, 
     the RRB Inspector General should not be prohibited from using 
     funds to review, audit, or investigate the RRB's separate 
     Medicare contract.

                     Social Security Administration


                PAYMENTS TO SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$434,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................20,400,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,400,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,400,000 
     for payments to Social Security trust funds, the same as the 
     administration request. This amount reimburses the old age 
     and survivors and disability insurance trust funds for 
     special payments to certain uninsured persons, costs incurred 
     administering pension reform activities, and the value of the 
     interest for benefit checks issued but not negotiated. This 
     appropriation restores the trust funds to the same financial 
     position they would have been in had they not borne these 
     costs, properly charged to the general funds.
       The decrease in appropriation is a result of the inclusion 
     of $414,000,000 in last year's appropriation for the 
     quinquennial adjustment to reimburse the OASI trust funds for 
     the costs of granting noncontributory wage credits for 
     military service.


               SPECIAL BENEFITS FOR DISABLED COAL MINERS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$332,840,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................300,177,000
Committee recommendation....................................300,177,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $300,177,000 
     for special benefits for disabled coal miners. This is in 
     addition to the $108,000,000 appropriated last year as an 
     advance for the first quarter of fiscal year 2003. The 
     recommendation is the same as the administration request. 
     These funds are used to provide monthly benefits to coal 
     miners disabled by black lung disease and to their widows and 
     certain other dependents, as well as to pay related 
     administrative costs.
       The Social Security Administration holds primary 
     responsibility for claims filed before July 1973, with the 
     Department of Labor responsible for claims filed after that. 
     By law, increases in black lung benefit payments are tied 
     directly to Federal pay increases. The year-to-year decrease 
     in this account reflects a declining beneficiary population.
       The Committee recommends an advance appropriation of 
     $97,000,000 for the first quarter of fiscal year 2004, the 
     same as the administration request. These funds will ensure 
     uninterrupted benefit payments to coal miners, their widows, 
     and dependents.


                      SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME

Appropriations, 2002....................................$21,577,412,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................24,017,392,000
Committee recommendation.................................24,025,392,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $24,025,392,000 for supplemental security income. This is in 
     addition to the $10,790,000,000 appropriated last year as an 
     advance for the first quarter of fiscal year 2003 and 
     includes funds for continuing disability reviews. The 
     recommendation is $2,447,980,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $8,000,000 more than the administration's 
     request. The Committee also recommends an advance 
     appropriation of $11,080,000,000 for the first quarter of 
     fiscal year 2004 to ensure uninterrupted benefits payments.
       These funds are used to pay benefits under the SSI Program, 
     which was established to ensure a Federal minimum monthly 
     benefit for aged, blind, and disabled individuals, enabling 
     them to meet basic needs. It is estimated that approximately 
     6.5 million persons will receive SSI benefits each month 
     during fiscal year 2003. In many cases, SSI benefits 
     supplement income from other sources, including Social 
     Security benefits. The funds are also used to reimburse the 
     Social Security trust funds for the administrative costs for 
     the program with a final settlement by the end of the 
     subsequent fiscal year as required by law, to reimburse 
     vocational rehabilitation agencies for costs incurred in 
     successfully rehabilitating SSI recipients and for research 
     and demonstration projects.
       The Committee is concerned about backlogs in the amount of 
     time that many applicants for Social Security disability 
     benefits must wait before they finally receive disability 
     benefits to which they are entitled. In fiscal year 2002, the 
     Committee provided funding to reduce this backlog, as well as 
     the funding to address a special caseload of beneficiaries 
     who have received Supplemental Security Income disability 
     benefits, but are entitled to Social Security disability 
     benefits as well. In May 2002, the Social Security 
     Administration discovered that this special caseload was more 
     extensive than originally believed, potentially including 
     more than 500,000 individuals. The Committee understands that 
     the Commissioner is in the process of undertaking a thorough 
     review of this issue to determine the number of affected 
     individuals and the cost of processing this caseload. These 
     complex cases must be re-examined by specially trained SSA 
     staff so that these SSI beneficiaries can receive Social 
     Security disability benefits to which they are entitled, some 
     from as far back as the 1970's. The Committee is also 
     concerned that re-examining these cases and calculating past 
     due benefits will lengthen the already-unacceptable waiting 
     periods facing disabled Americans. The Committee directs the 
     SSA Commissioner to submit a report to the Committee within 
     30 days of the enactment of this bill detailing the amount of 
     funds necessary to complete the training of staff and 
     processing of this special caseload, as well as a plan for 
     eliminating the backlog of disability applications and 
     appeals and the amount of funding necessary to execute that 
     plan.
     Beneficiary services
       The Committee recommendation includes $45,728,000 for 
     beneficiary services, which is

[[Page 907]]

     the same as the administration request and $8,316,000 more 
     than the fiscal year 2002 level. This appropriation added to 
     an estimated $39,300,000 in carryover funding will bring the 
     fiscal year 2003 program funding level to approximately 
     $85,000,000. This amount is available for payments to 
     Employment Networks for successful outcomes or milestone 
     payments under the Ticket to Work program and for 
     reimbursement of State vocational rehabilitation agencies and 
     alternate public or private providers.
     Research and demonstration projects
       The Committee recommendation includes $38,000,000 for 
     research and demonstration projects conducted under sections 
     1110 and 1115 of the Social Security Act. This is $1,000,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 level and $8,000,000 more than 
     the administration request.
       This amount will support SSA's efforts to strengthen its 
     policy evaluation capability and focus on research of: 
     program issues, the impact of demographic changes on future 
     workloads and effective return-to-work strategies for 
     disabled beneficiaries.
       The Committee commends the Administration on their stated 
     goal of preventing and ending homelessness for people with 
     disabilities, within 10 years. The Committee believes that 
     increasing the Social Security Administration's outreach and 
     application assistance to homeless people as well as others 
     who are economically disadvantaged is an important part of 
     this effort. The Committee is aware that SSA operated an 
     effective outreach program in the early 1990's, where grants 
     were awarded to local non-profits to provide SSI outreach and 
     application assistance. In light of the ongoing need for SSI 
     outreach and application assistance, the Committee has 
     included an additional $8,000,000 to provide and to 
     administer a competitive demonstration grants demonstration 
     program, targeted toward providing outreach and application 
     assistance to homeless persons and other underserved 
     populations.
     Administration
       The Committee recommendation includes $2,824,000,000 for 
     payment to the Social Security trust funds for the SSI 
     Program's share of SSA's base administrative expenses. This 
     is $197,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level and equal to 
     the administration request.


                 LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$7,575,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................7,936,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................7,936,000,000

       The Committee recommends a program funding level of 
     $7,936,000,000 for the limitation on administrative expenses, 
     which is equal to the administration request and $360,500,000 
     higher than the fiscal year 2002 level.
       This account provides resources from the Social Security 
     trust funds to administer the Social Security retirement and 
     survivors and disability insurance programs, and certain 
     Social Security health insurance functions. As authorized by 
     law, it also provides resources from the trust funds for 
     certain nontrust fund administrative costs, which are 
     reimbursed from the general funds. These include 
     administration of the supplemental security income program 
     for the aged, blind and disabled; work associated with the 
     Pension Reform Act of 1984; and the portion of the annual 
     wage reporting work done by the Social Security 
     Administration for the benefit of the Internal Revenue 
     Service. The dollars provided also support automated data 
     processing activities and fund the State disability 
     determination services which make initial and continuing 
     disability determinations on behalf of the Social Security 
     Administration. Additionally, the limitation provides funding 
     for computer support, and other administrative costs.
       The limitation includes $7,825,000,000 for routine 
     operating expenses of the agency, which is equal to the 
     amount requested by the President and $782,500,000 over the 
     2002 comparable amount. These funds, as well as those derived 
     from an increase in the user fees which are discussed below, 
     cover the mandatory costs of maintaining equipment and 
     facilities, as well as staffing.
       The Committee commends SSA for monitoring and assessing the 
     impact of Social Security Ruling (SSR) 99-2p regarding 
     Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. The Committee is pleased that SSA 
     officials have continued to educate adjudicators at all 
     levels of the SSA process about the April 1999 Chronic 
     Fatigue Syndrome ruling (99-2p). The Committee encourages SSA 
     to continue these educational efforts, as many SSA employees 
     remain unfamiliar with or misinformed about CFS and the 
     functional limitations it imposes. Finally, the Committee 
     encourages SSA to continue examining obstacles to benefits 
     for persons with CFS. The Committee also encourages SSA to 
     examine the impact of the ruling on CFS patients' access to 
     benefits, and to keep medical information updated throughout 
     all levels of the application and review process.
     Social Security Advisory Board
       The Committee has included $1,800,000 within the limitation 
     on administrative expenses account for the Social Security 
     Advisory Board for fiscal year 2003, the same level as the 
     administration request and the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     level.
     User fees
       In addition to other amounts provided, the Committee 
     recommends $111,000,000 for administrative activities funded 
     from user fees that were authorized in fiscal year 1998. This 
     is equal to the administration's request and an increase of 
     $11,000,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level.


                    Office of the Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$75,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................83,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................83,000,000

       The Committee recommends $83,000,000 for activities for the 
     Office of the Inspector General, $8,000,000 more than fiscal 
     year 2002 and equal to the administration request. This 
     includes a general fund appropriation of $21,000,000 together 
     with an obligation limitation of $62,000,000 from the Federal 
     old-age and survivors insurance trust fund and the Federal 
     disability insurance trust fund.

                        U.S. Institute of Peace

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,104,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................16,200,000
Committee recommendation.....................................16,200,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,200,000 
     for the U.S. Institute of Peace, $1,096,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriation and equal to the budget 
     request.
       The Institute was established by the U.S. Institute of 
     Peace Act (Public Law 98-525) in 1984. The Institute is an 
     independent, nonprofit, national organization whose primary 
     mission is to promote, through scholarship and education, 
     international peace, and the resolution of conflicts without 
     recourse to violence.

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       The Committee recommendation retains provisions which: 
     authorize transfers of unexpended balances (sec. 501); limit 
     funding to 1 year availability unless otherwise specified 
     (sec. 502); limit lobbying and related activities (sec. 503); 
     limit official representation expenses (amended) (sec. 504); 
     prohibit funding of any program to carry out distribution of 
     sterile needles for the hypodermic injection of any illegal 
     drug unless the Secretary of HHS determines such programs are 
     effective in preventing the spread of HIV and do not 
     encourage the use of illegal drugs (sec. 505); state the 
     sense of Congress about purchase of American-made equipment 
     and products (sec. 506); clarify Federal funding as a 
     component of State and local grant funds (sec. 507); limit 
     use of funds for abortion (sec. 508 and sec. 509); restrict 
     human embryo research (sec. 510); limit the use of funds for 
     promotion of legalization of controlled substances included 
     last year (sec. 511); limits use of funds to enter into or 
     review contracts with entities subject to the requirement in 
     section 4212(d) of title 38, United States Code, if the 
     report required by that section has not been submitted (sec. 
     512); and prohibits the use of funds to promulgate 
     regulations regarding the individual health identifier (sec. 
     513).
       The Committee recommendation includes a new provision 
     regarding the Institute of Peace (sec. 514).
       The Committee recommendation includes an across-the-board 
     administrative cost reduction (sec. 515).

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee report on 
     general appropriations bills identify each Committee 
     amendment to the House bill ``which proposes an item of 
     appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions 
     of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or 
     resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.''

       The following items are identified pursuant to this 
     requirement:
       Nursing Loan Repayment, $--------------; Title VII of the 
     Public Health Services Act, $305,564,000; Title VIII of the 
     Public Health Services Act, $88,002,000; Universal Newborn 
     Hearing Screening, $10,000,000; Trauma Care, $5,000,000; 
     Abstinence Education, $40,000,000; Organ Transplantation, 
     $24,990,000; Rural Hospital Flex Grants, $45,000,000; Denali 
     Commission, $30,000,000; Family Planning, $285,000,000; State 
     Offices of Rural Health, $10,000,000; Health statistics, 
     $125,899,000; Birth defects and developmental disabilities, 
     $97,691,000; Adolescent Family Life, $31,124,000; Office of 
     Minority Health, $46,329,000; Office of Disease Prevention 
     and Health Promotion, $7,589,000; Child Care and Development 
     Block Grant, $2,099,994,000; Child Abuse Prevention and 
     Treatment Act, $109,186,000; Abandoned Infants Assistance 
     Act, $12,205,000; Native American Programs, $45,912,000; 
     Refugee and Entrant Assistance Programs, $432,724,000; 
     Alzheimer's Disease Demonstration Grants to States, 
     $14,000,000; Volunteers in Service to America, $94,287,000; 
     Special Volunteer Programs, $10,000,000; National Senior 
     Volunteer Corps, $212,547,000; Institute of Museum and 
     Library Services, $203,000,000; United States Institute of 
     Peace, $16,200,000;

[[Page 908]]



 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or a joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or part thereof 
     which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print 
     of that part of the bill or joint resolution making the 
     amendment and of the statute or part thereof proposed to be 
     amended, showing by stricken through type and italics, 
     parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices 
     the omissions and insertions which would be made by the bill 
     or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by the 
     committee.''
       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or -)
                Item                  2002 comparable       Budget       House allowance     Committee    ---------------------------------------------------
                                                       estimate        deg.        recommendation                        Budget            House
                                                                                                           2002 comparable  estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
    TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
 
       EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING
           ADMINISTRATION
 
  TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
 
Grants to States:
    Adult Training, current year....         238,000           188,000          188,000          -50,000   ...............
        Advance from prior year.....        (712,000)         (712,000)        (712,000)  ...............  ...............
        Fiscal year 2004............         712,000           712,000          712,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Adult Training............         950,000           900,000          900,000          -50,000   ...............
 
    Youth Training..................       1,127,965         1,000,965        1,000,965         -127,000   ...............
 
    Dislocated Worker Assistance....         281,200           258,432          258,432          -22,768   ...............
        Advance from prior year.....        (848,000)         (848,000)        (848,000)  ...............  ...............
        Fiscal year 2004............         848,000           848,000          848,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Dislocated Worker                1,129,200         1,106,432        1,106,432          -22,768   ...............
           Assistance...............
 
Federally Administered Programs:
    Dislocated Worker Assistance....          30,300            64,608           64,608          +34,308   ...............
        Advance from prior year.....        (212,000)         (212,000)        (212,000)  ...............  ...............
        Fiscal year 2004............         212,000           212,000          212,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Dislocated Worker                  242,300           276,608          276,608          +34,308   ...............
           Assistance...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Dislocated Workers.       1,371,500         1,383,040        1,383,040          +11,540   ...............
 
    Native Americans................          57,000            55,000           57,000   ...............          +2,000
    Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers          79,751   ................          79,751   ...............         +79,751
 
    Job Corps:
        Operations:                          737,377           813,610          800,000          +62,623          -13,610
            Advance from prior year.        (591,000)         (591,000)        (591,000)  ...............  ...............
            Fiscal year 2004........         591,000           591,000          591,000   ...............  ...............
        Construction and Renovation.          30,375            27,550           27,550           -2,825   ...............
            Advance from prior year.        (100,000)         (100,000)        (100,000)  ...............  ...............
            Fiscal year 2004........         100,000           100,000          100,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Job Corps,         1,458,752         1,532,160        1,518,550          +59,798          -13,610
               program level........
 
    National activities:
        Pilots, Demonstrations and           130,149            35,000           55,161          -74,988          +20,161
         Research...................
        Responsible Reintegrat'n of           55,000   ................          55,000   ...............         +55,000
         Youthful Offenders.........
        Evaluation..................           9,098             9,098            9,098   ...............  ...............
        Youth Opportunity Grants....         225,100            44,500           44,500         -180,600   ...............
        Other.......................          16,019            15,000           16,019   ...............          +1,019
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, National                 435,366           103,598          179,778         -255,588          +76,180
           activities...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
          Subtotal, Federal                2,273,169         1,967,366        2,111,687         -161,482         +144,321
           activities...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
          Total, Workforce                 5,480,334         4,974,763        5,119,084         -361,250         +144,321
           Investment Act...........
 
    Women in Apprenticeship.........           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
    Skill Standards.................           3,500   ................  ...............          -3,500   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, National activities,         439,866           104,598          180,778         -259,088          +76,180
       TES..........................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Subtotal, Training and               5,484,834         4,975,763        5,120,084         -364,750         +144,321
       Employment Services..........
          Current Year..............      (3,021,834)       (2,512,763)      (2,657,084)       (-364,750)       (+144,321)
          Fiscal year 2004..........      (2,463,000)       (2,463,000)      (2,463,000)  ...............  ...............
 
COMMUNITY SERVICE EMPLOYMENT FOR             445,100           440,200          440,200           -4,900   ...............
 OLDER AMERICANS....................
 
WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS.......         175,000   ................  ...............        -175,000   ...............
 
  FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS AND
             ALLOWANCES
 
Trade Adjustment....................         349,500            13,000          972,200         +622,700         +959,200
NAFTA Activities....................          66,150   ................  ...............         -66,150   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................         415,650            13,000          972,200         +556,550         +959,200
 
  STATE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND
             EMPLOYMENT
 
         SERVICE OPERATIONS
 
Unemployment Compensation:
    State Operations\1\.............       2,777,986         2,717,688        2,641,488         -136,498          -76,200
    National Activities.............          10,000            10,000           10,000   ...............  ...............
    Emergency Response Funds........           4,100   ................  ...............          -4,100   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Unemployment               2,792,086         2,727,688        2,651,488         -140,598          -76,200
       Compensation.................
 
Employment Service:
    Allotments to States:
        Federal Funds...............          23,452            23,452           23,452   ...............  ...............
        Trust Funds.................         773,283           773,283          773,283   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 909]]

 
          Subtotal..................         796,735           796,735          796,735   ...............  ...............
 
    ES National Activities..........          50,680            29,120           50,680   ...............         +21,560
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Subtotal, Employment Service..         847,415           825,855          847,415   ...............         +21,560
          Federal Funds.............          23,452            23,452           23,452   ...............  ...............
          Trust Funds...............         823,963           802,403          823,963   ...............         +21,560
 
One Stop Career Centers/Labor Market         120,000           113,000          100,000          -20,000          -13,000
 Information........................
Work Incentives Grants..............          20,000            20,000           20,000   ...............  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, State Unemployment.....       3,779,501         3,686,543        3,618,903         -160,598          -67,640
          Federal Funds.............         167,552           156,452          143,452          -24,100          -13,000
          Trust Funds...............       3,611,949         3,530,091        3,475,451         -136,498          -54,640
 
ADVANCES TO THE UI AND OTHER TRUST           464,000           463,000          463,000           -1,000   ...............
 FUNDS\1\...........................
 
       PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
 
Adult Employment and Training.......          34,076            42,620           39,090           +5,014           -3,530
 
    Trust Funds.....................           2,887             2,973            2,973              +86   ...............
Youth Employment and Training.......          37,603            38,947           40,858           +3,255           +1,911
Employment Security.................           5,867             6,051            6,051             +184   ...............
    Trust Funds.....................          44,216            45,586           51,586           +7,370           +6,000
Apprenticeship Services.............          21,406            20,836           22,036             +630           +1,200
Executive Direction.................           7,914             8,286            8,286             +372   ...............
    Trust Funds.....................           1,404             2,051            2,051             +647   ...............
Welfare to Work.....................           5,903             4,711            4,711           -1,192   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Program                      161,276           172,061          177,642          +16,366           +5,581
       Administration...............
          Federal Funds.............         112,769           121,451          121,032           +8,263             -419
          Trust Funds...............          48,507            50,610           56,610           +8,103           +6,000
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Employment and Training      10,925,361         9,750,567       10,792,029         -133,332       +1,041,462
       Administration...............
          Federal Funds.............       7,264,905         6,169,866        7,259,968           -4,937       +1,090,102
              Current Year..........      (4,801,905)       (3,706,866)      (4,796,968)         (-4,937)     (+1,090,102)
              Fiscal year 2004......      (2,463,000)       (2,463,000)      (2,463,000)  ...............  ...............
          Trust Funds...............       3,660,456         3,580,701        3,532,061         -128,395          -48,640
 
    PENSION AND WELFARE BENEFITS
           ADMINISTRATION
 
Enforcement and Compliance..........          85,502            92,125           92,125           +6,623   ...............
Policy, Regulation and Public                 19,694            20,575           20,575             +881   ...............
 Service............................
Program Oversight...................           5,736             4,344            4,344           -1,392   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, PWBA...................         110,932           117,044          117,044           +6,112   ...............
 
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION
 
Program Administration subject to             11,567            13,050           13,050           +1,483   ...............
 limitation (TF)....................
Termination services not subject to         (178,924)         (179,844)        (179,844)           (+920)  ...............
 limitation (NA)....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, PBGC (Program level)...        (190,491)         (192,894)        (192,894)         (+2,403)  ...............
 
 EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS ADMINISTRATION
 
        SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 
Enforcement of Wage and Hour                 155,580           155,387          157,387           +1,807           +2,000
 Standards..........................
Office of Labor-Management Standards          30,622            34,503           34,503           +3,881   ...............
Federal Contractor EEO Standards              77,678            77,544           79,544           +1,866           +2,000
 Enforcement........................
Federal Programs for Workers'                 91,327            96,975           97,675           +6,348             +700
 Compensation.......................
    FECA Fees.......................  ...............          -86,442   ...............  ...............         +86,442
    Trust Funds.....................           1,975             2,029            2,029              +54   ...............
Program Direction and Support.......          13,054            14,319           14,319           +1,265   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, ESA salaries and                370,236           294,315          385,457          +15,221          +91,142
       expenses.....................
          Federal Funds.............         368,261           292,286          383,428          +15,167          +91,142
          Trust Funds...............           1,975             2,029            2,029              +54   ...............
 
          SPECIAL BENEFITS
 
Federal employees compensation               118,000           160,000          160,000          +42,000   ...............
 benefits...........................
Longshore and harbor workers'                  3,000             3,000            3,000   ...............  ...............
 benefits...........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Special Benefits.......         121,000           163,000          163,000          +42,000   ...............
 
    ENERGY EMPLOYEES OCCUPATIONAL
               ILLNESS
 
          COMPENSATION FUND
 
Program Benefits....................        (769,000)         (758,000)        (758,000)        (-11,000)  ...............
Administrative Expenses.............         135,665           104,867          104,867          -30,798   ...............
 
  BLACK LUNG DISABILITY TRUST FUND
 
Benefit payments and interest on             981,283           979,371          979,371           -1,912   ...............
 advances...........................
Employment Standards Adm. S&E.......          31,377            31,987           31,987             +610   ...............
Departmental Management S&E.........          22,590            22,952           22,952             +362   ...............
Departmental Management, Inspector               328               334              334               +6   ...............
 General............................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Black Lung Disablty.       1,035,578         1,034,644        1,034,644             -934   ...............
 
Treasury Administrative Costs.......             356               356              356   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Black Lung Disability         1,035,934         1,035,000        1,035,000             -934   ...............
       Trust Fund...................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Employment Standards          1,662,835         1,597,182        1,688,324          +25,489          +91,142
       Administration...............
          Federal Funds.............       1,660,860         1,595,153        1,686,295          +25,435          +91,142
          Trust Funds...............           1,975             2,029            2,029              +54   ...............
 
   OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
           ADMINISTRATION
 
        SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 
Safety and Health Standards.........          15,567            14,237           18,000           +2,433           +3,763

[[Page 910]]

 
Federal Enforcement.................         161,998           161,080          166,998           +5,000           +5,918
State Programs......................          89,747            89,747           92,531           +2,784           +2,784
Technical Support...................          19,612            20,234           20,234             +622   ...............
 
Compliance Assistance:..............
    Federal Assistance..............          59,104            60,248           63,195           +4,091           +2,947
    State Consultation Grants.......          51,021            52,521           54,582           +3,561           +2,061
    Training Grants.................          11,175             4,000           11,175   ...............          +7,175
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Compliance                   121,300           116,769          128,952           +7,652          +12,183
       Assistance...................
 
Safety and Health Statistics........          26,257            25,739           26,386             +129             +647
Executive Direction and                        9,017             9,213            9,213             +196   ...............
 Administration.....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, OSHA...................         443,498           437,019          462,314          +18,816          +25,295
 
       MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
           ADMINISTRATION
 
        SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 
Coal Enforcement....................         117,049           112,337          119,655           +2,606           +7,318
Metal/Non-Metal Enforcement.........          61,099            63,910           63,910           +2,811   ...............
Standards Development...............           2,357             2,328            2,428              +71             +100
Assessments.........................           4,807             4,836            4,936             +129             +100
Educational Policy and Development..          27,984            27,914           27,914              -70   ...............
Technical Support...................          28,085            28,675           28,675             +590   ...............
Program Administration..............          12,551            14,323           14,323           +1,772   ...............
Mine Mapping........................  ...............  ................          10,000          +10,000          +10,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Mine Safety and Health          253,932           254,323          271,841          +17,909          +17,518
       Administration...............
 
     BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
 
        SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 
Employment and Unemployment                  146,889           151,004          143,294           -3,595           -7,710
 Statistics.........................
Labor Market Information (Trust               69,132            72,029           72,029           +2,897   ...............
 Funds).............................
Prices and Cost of Living...........         148,494           160,716          160,716          +12,222   ...............
Compensation and Working Conditions.          74,221            76,422           76,422           +2,201   ...............
Productivity and Technology.........           9,605             9,925            9,925             +320   ...............
Executive Direction and Staff                 27,090            28,068           28,068             +978   ...............
 Services...........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Bureau of Labor                 475,431           498,164          490,454          +15,023           -7,710
       Statistics...................
          Federal Funds.............         406,299           426,135          418,425          +12,126           -7,710
          Trust Funds...............          69,132            72,029           72,029           +2,897   ...............
 
   OFFICE OF DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT
               POLICY
 
Office of Disability Employment               35,416            47,015           47,015          +11,599   ...............
 Policy.............................
Task Force on Employment of Adults             2,640   ................  ...............          -2,640   ...............
 with Disabilities..................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Disability             38,056            47,015           47,015           +8,959   ...............
       Employment Policy............
 
       DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT
 
        SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 
Executive Direction.................          27,054            26,468           29,468           +2,414           +3,000
Departmental IT Crosscut............          50,000            74,000           55,000           +5,000          -19,000
Departmental Management Crosscut....             884             7,000            5,884           +5,000           -1,116
Legal Services......................          77,104            77,680           77,680             +576   ...............
    Trust Funds.....................             310               310              310   ...............  ...............
International Labor Affairs.........         148,015            54,574          148,015   ...............         +93,441
Administration and Management.......          35,553            30,191           30,191           -5,362   ...............
Adjudication........................          24,632            25,472           25,232             +600             -240
Women's Bureau......................          10,165             8,369           10,973             +808           +2,604
Civil Rights Activities.............           5,635             5,969            5,969             +334   ...............
Chief Financial Officer.............           6,249             7,901            7,901           +1,652   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses..         385,601           317,934          396,623          +11,022          +78,689
          Federal Funds.............         385,291           317,624          396,313          +11,022          +78,689
          Trust Funds...............             310               310              310   ...............  ...............
 
  VETERANS EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING
 
State Administration:
    Disabled Veterans Outreach                81,615            81,615           83,615           +2,000           +2,000
     Program........................
    Local Veterans Employment                 77,253            77,253           79,253           +2,000           +2,000
     Program........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, State Administration         158,868           158,868          162,868           +4,000           +4,000
 
Federal Administration..............          27,956            26,669           28,669             +713           +2,000
Homeless Veterans Program...........          18,250            17,500           19,000             +750           +1,500
Veterans Workforce Investment                  7,550             7,300            7,550   ...............            +250
 Programs...........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Veterans Employment and         212,624           210,337          218,087           +5,463           +7,750
       Training.....................
          Federal Funds.............          25,800            24,800           26,550             +750           +1,750
          Trust Funds...............         186,824           185,537          191,537           +4,713           +6,000
 
   OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
 
Program Activities..................          51,909            56,659           56,659           +4,750   ...............
    Trust Funds.....................           4,951             5,597            5,597             +646   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Inspector          56,860            62,256           62,256           +5,396   ...............
       General......................
          Federal funds.............          51,909            56,659           56,659           +4,750   ...............
          Trust funds...............           4,951             5,597            5,597             +646   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Departmental Management         655,085           590,527          676,966          +21,881          +86,439
          Federal Funds.............         463,000           399,083          479,522          +16,522          +80,439
          Trust Funds...............         192,085           191,444          197,444           +5,359           +6,000
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Labor Department.......      14,576,697        13,304,891       14,559,037          -17,660       +1,254,146
          Federal Funds.............      10,641,482         9,445,638       10,742,424         +100,942       +1,296,786
              Current Year..........      (8,178,482)       (6,982,638)      (8,279,424)       (+100,942)     (+1,296,786)

[[Page 911]]

 
              Fiscal year 2004......      (2,463,000)       (2,463,000)      (2,463,000)  ...............  ...............
          Trust Funds...............       3,935,215         3,859,253        3,816,613         -118,602          -42,640
 
 TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
           HUMAN SERVICES
 
    HEALTH RESOURCES AND SERVICES
           ADMINISTRATION
 
    HEALTH RESOURCES AND SERVICES
 
Community health centers............       1,343,570         1,457,864        1,533,570         +190,000          +75,706
 
National Health Service Corps:
    Field placements................          46,506            46,498           46,498               -8   ...............
    Recruitment.....................          98,989           142,918          142,918          +43,929   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, National Health              145,495           189,416          189,416          +43,921   ...............
       Service Corps................
 
         Health Professions
 
Consolidated Title VII Health         ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
 Professions........................
Training for Diversity:
    Centers of excellence...........          32,633   ................          36,000           +3,367          +36,000
    Health careers opportunity                34,791   ................          38,000           +3,209          +38,000
     program........................
    Faculty loan repayment..........           1,330   ................           1,330   ...............          +1,330
    Scholarships for disadvantaged            46,233            10,000           50,000           +3,767          +40,000
     students.......................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Training for                 114,987            10,000          125,330          +10,343         +115,330
       Diversity....................
 
Training in Primary Care Medicine             93,037   ................          93,037   ...............         +93,037
 and Dentistry......................
 
Interdisciplinary Community-Based
 Linkages:
    Area health education centers...          33,358   ................          33,358   ...............         +33,358
    Health education and training              4,402   ................           4,402   ...............          +4,402
     centers........................
    Allied health and other                    9,499   ................           9,499   ...............          +9,499
     disciplines....................
    Geriatric programs..............          20,408   ................          20,408   ...............         +20,408
    Quentin N. Burdick program for             6,999   ................           6,999   ...............          +6,999
     rural training.................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Interdisciplinary             74,666   ................          74,666   ...............         +74,666
       Comm. Linkages...............
 
Health Professions Workforce Info                824             1,000              824   ...............            -176
 and Analysis.......................
 
Public Health Workforce Development:
    Public health, preventive med.            10,477   ................          10,477   ...............         +10,477
     and dental pgms................
    Health administration programs..           1,230   ................           1,230   ...............          +1,230
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Public Health                 11,707   ................          11,707   ...............         +11,707
       Workforce Development........
 
      Subtotal, Title VII Health             295,221            11,000          305,564          +10,343         +294,564
       Professions..................
Children's Hospitals Graduate                284,967           200,000          285,000              +33          +85,000
 Medical Educ.......................
 
Advanced Education Nursing..........          60,041            61,041           47,596          -12,445          -13,445
Basic nurse education and practice..          16,289            16,289           10,855           -5,434           -5,434
Nursing workforce diversity.........           6,172             6,172           25,051          +18,879          +18,879
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Subtotal, Health Professions..         662,690           294,502          674,066          +11,376         +379,564
 
Other HRSA Programs:
    Hansen's Disease Services.......          17,839            18,142           18,142             +303   ...............
    Healthy Communities Innovation    ...............           20,000           20,000          +20,000   ...............
     Initiative.....................
    Maternal and Child Health Block          731,531           731,531          741,531          +10,000          +10,000
     Grant..........................
    Abstinence Education:
        Advance from prior year.....         (30,000)  ................  ...............        (-30,000)  ...............
        Current Year................          10,000            72,979           40,000          +30,000          -32,979
    Healthy Start...................          98,989            98,989           98,989   ...............  ...............
    Universal Newborn Hearing.......           9,999   ................          10,000               +1          +10,000
    Organ Transplantation...........          19,990            24,990           24,990           +5,000   ...............
    Bone Marrow Program.............          21,997            22,034           22,034              +37   ...............
    Rural outreach grants...........          52,117            37,852           51,472             -645          +13,620
    Rural Health Research...........          14,808             6,000           16,808           +2,000          +10,808
    Telehealth......................          37,192             5,609           39,192           +2,000          +33,583
    State offices of rural health...           7,999             4,000           10,000           +2,001           +6,000
    Denali Commission...............          20,000   ................          30,000          +10,000          +30,000
 
    Critical Care Programs:
        Emergency medical services            18,991   ................          20,000           +1,009          +20,000
         for children\2\............
        Poison control\2\...........          21,208   ................          24,000           +2,792          +24,000
        Traumatic Brain Injury......           7,499             7,499            9,000           +1,501           +1,501
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Critical Care             47,698             7,499           53,000           +5,302          +45,501
           Programs.................
 
    Black lung clinics..............           6,000             6,000            6,000   ...............  ...............
    Trauma Care.....................           3,500   ................           5,000           +1,500           +5,000
    Nursing loan repayment for                10,239            15,000           15,000           +4,761   ...............
     shortage area service..........
    Payment to Hawaii, treatment of            2,045             2,045            2,045   ...............  ...............
     Hansen's.......................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Other HRSA programs--Current         1,111,943         1,072,670        1,204,203          +92,260         +131,533
       Year.........................
 
Ryan White AIDS Programs:
    Emergency Assistance............         619,514           619,514          630,000          +10,486          +10,486
    Comprehensive Care Programs.....         977,373           977,373        1,095,000         +117,627         +117,627
        AIDS Drug Assistance Program        (639,000)         (639,000)        (739,000)       (+100,000)       (+100,000)
         (ADAP) (NA)................
    Early Intervention Program......         193,917           194,055          200,000           +6,083           +5,945
    Pediatric HIV/AIDS..............          70,990            70,990           75,000           +4,010           +4,010
    AIDS Dental Services............          13,498            13,498           16,000           +2,502           +2,502
    Education and Training Centers..          35,295            35,295           35,295   ...............  ...............
    Special projects of National      ...............  ................         -25,000          -25,000          -25,000
     Significance...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Ryan White AIDS            1,910,587         1,910,725        2,026,295         +115,708         +115,570
       programs.....................
 
    Evaluation Tap Funding (NA).....  ...............  ................         (25,000)        (+25,000)        (+25,000)
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Ryan White program         1,910,587         1,910,725        2,051,295         +140,708         +140,570
       level........................
 
Family Planning.....................         265,055           265,275          285,000          +19,945          +19,725
Health Care and Other Facilities....         315,297   ................  ...............        -315,297   ...............
Buildings and Facilities............             250               250              250   ...............  ...............

[[Page 912]]

 
Rural Hospital Flexibility Grants...          40,000            25,000           45,000           +5,000          +20,000
Rural Access to Emergency Devices...          12,500             2,000           12,500   ...............         +10,500
Radiation Exposure Compensation Act.           4,000             4,000            2,000           -2,000           -2,000
National Practitioner Data Bank.....          16,600            19,500           19,500           +2,900   ...............
    User Fees.......................         -16,600           -19,500          -19,500           -2,900   ...............
Health Care Integrity and Protection           5,100             5,600            5,600             +500   ...............
 Data Bank..........................
    User Fees.......................          -5,100            -5,600           -5,600             -500   ...............
Community Access Program............         120,027   ................  ...............        -120,027   ...............
Program Management..................         149,137           143,702          143,354           -5,783             -348
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Health resources and          6,080,551         5,365,404        6,115,654          +35,103         +750,250
       services.....................
 
HEALTH EDUCATION ASSISTANCE LOANS
 PROGRAM:
    Liquidating account.............         (10,000)           (7,000)          (7,000)         (-3,000)  ...............
    Program management..............           3,791             3,914            3,914             +123   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, HEAL...................           3,791             3,914            3,914             +123   ...............
 
VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION PROGRAM
 TRUST FUND:
    Post-Fiscal year 88 claims......          81,704            85,918           85,918           +4,214   ...............
    HRSA administration.............           2,992             2,991            2,991               -1   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Vaccine Injury                   84,696            88,909           88,909           +4,213   ...............
       Compensation Trust Fund......
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Health Resources and          6,169,038         5,458,227        6,208,477          +39,439         +750,250
       Services Admin...............
 
     CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL
 
Birth Defects/Developmental                   89,910            89,323           97,691           +7,781           +8,368
 Disabilities/Disability and Health.
Chronic Disease Prevention and               747,222           690,230          745,600           -1,622          +55,370
 Health Promotion...................
Environmental Health................         153,431           152,155          189,489          +36,058          +37,334
Epidemic Services and Response......          80,139            78,001           78,001           -2,138   ...............
Health Statistics...................         103,393            78,917          125,899          +22,506          +46,982
    Evaluation Tap Funding..........         (23,286)          (46,982)  ...............        (-23,286)        (-46,982)
HIV/AIDS, STD and TB Prevention.....       1,135,000         1,135,000        1,168,532          +33,532          +33,532
Immunization........................         627,601           627,601          638,895          +11,294          +11,294
    Evaluation tap funding..........  ...............  ................         (14,000)        (+14,000)        (+14,000)
        Program level...............         627,601           627,601          652,895          +25,294          +25,294
Infectious Disease Control..........         344,446           334,471          334,471           -9,975   ...............
Injury Prevention and Control.......         149,447           144,764          149,385              -62           +4,621
Occupational Safety and Health\3\...         276,080           247,318          232,999          -43,081          -14,319
    Evaluation tap funding..........  ...............  ................         (41,900)        (+41,900)        (+41,900)
        Program level...............         276,080           247,318          274,899           -1,181          +27,581
Preventive Health and Health                 134,967           134,966          134,966               -1   ...............
 Services Block Grant...............
Public Health Improvement...........         148,200           116,819           87,072          -61,128          -29,747
    Evaluation tap funding..........  ...............  ................         (28,600)        (+28,600)        (+28,600)
        Program level...............         148,200           116,819          115,672          -32,528           -1,147
Buildings and Facilities............         250,000   ................         270,000          +20,000         +270,000
Office of the Director..............          51,420            44,879           49,749           -1,671           +4,870
Emergency Response and Recovery.....          12,000   ................  ...............         -12,000   ...............
ATSDR\4\............................         (78,235)          (77,388)         (77,388)           (-847)  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Disease Control........       4,303,256         3,874,444        4,302,749             -507         +428,305
      Program level.................       4,303,256         3,874,444        4,387,249          +83,993         +512,805
 
    NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
 
National Cancer Institute...........       4,128,351         4,642,394        4,642,394         +514,043   ...............
National Heart, Lung, and Blood            2,560,197         2,776,411        2,820,011         +259,814          +43,600
 Institute..........................
National Institute of Dental and             343,149           372,167          374,067          +30,918           +1,900
 Craniofacial Research..............
National Institute of Diabetes and         1,466,380         1,604,647        1,637,347         +170,967          +32,700
 Digestive and Kidney Diseases......
National Institute of Neurological         1,312,780         1,424,405        1,466,005         +153,225          +41,600
 Disorders and Stroke...............
National Institute of Allergy and          2,509,539         3,890,473        3,627,473       +1,117,934         -263,000
 Infectious Diseases................
    Global HIV/AIDS Fund Transfer...          25,000           100,000          100,000          +75,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................       2,534,539         3,990,473        3,727,473       +1,192,934         -263,000
 
National Institute of General              1,700,139         1,854,984        1,853,584         +153,445           -1,400
 Medical Sciences...................
National Institute of Child Health         1,113,087         1,213,817        1,213,817         +100,730   ...............
 and Human Development..............
National Eye Institute..............         581,191           629,990          634,290          +53,099           +4,300
National Institute of Environmental          566,118           614,258          617,258          +51,140           +3,000
 Health Sciences....................
    NIEHS/Superfund (NA)\5\.........         (76,074)          (76,074)         (76,074)  ...............  ...............
National Institute on Aging.........         893,130           968,699        1,000,099         +106,969          +31,400
National Institute of Arthritis and          448,699           486,624          489,324          +40,625           +2,700
 Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases..
National Institute on Deafness and           341,965           370,805          372,805          +30,840           +2,000
 Other Communication Disorders......
National Institute of Nursing                120,428           130,438          131,438          +11,010           +1,000
 Research...........................
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse          384,071           416,773          418,773          +34,702           +2,000
 and Alcoholism.....................
National Institute on Drug Abuse....         887,733           964,613          968,013          +80,280           +3,400
National Institute of Mental Health.       1,238,093         1,343,088        1,350,788         +112,695           +7,700
National Human Genome Research               429,312           465,137          468,037          +38,725           +2,900
 Institute..........................
National Institute of Biomedical             261,951           271,200          283,100          +21,149          +11,900
 Imaging and Bioengineering.........
National Center for Research                 986,505         1,065,272        1,161,272         +174,767          +96,000
 Resources..........................
National Center for Complementary            104,592           113,249          114,149           +9,557             +900
 and Alternative Medicine...........
National Center on Minority Health           157,742           186,929          186,929          +29,187   ...............
 and Health Disparities.............
John E. Fogarty International Center          56,918            63,380           60,880           +3,962           -2,500
National Library of Medicine........         277,273           310,299          302,099          +24,826           -8,200
    Evaluation tap funding..........  ...............  ................          (8,200)         (+8,200)         (+8,200)
        Program level...............         277,273           310,299          310,299          +33,026   ...............
Office of the Director..............         235,400           255,074          257,974          +22,574           +2,900
Buildings and Facilities............         221,000           632,800          607,800         +386,800          -25,000
    Global HIV/AIDS Fund Transfer...          75,000   ................  ...............         -75,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Buildings and                296,000           632,800          607,800         +311,800          -25,000
       Facilities...................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, N.I.H. appropriations..      23,425,743        27,167,926       27,159,726       +3,733,983           -8,200
          Global HIV/AIDS Fund              -100,000          -100,000         -100,000   ...............  ...............
           Transfer.................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, N.I.H., Program Level..     (23,325,743)      (27,067,926)     (27,067,926)     (+3,742,183)  ...............
 
  SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH
              SERVICES
 
Mental Health:
    Programs of Regional and                 229,918           213,067          226,067           -3,851          +13,000
     National Significance..........

[[Page 913]]

 
    Mental Health Performance                433,000           433,000          433,000   ...............  ...............
     Partnership....................
    Children's Mental Health........          96,631            96,694           96,694              +63   ...............
    Grants to States for the                  39,855            46,855           46,855           +7,000   ...............
     Homeless (PATH)................
    Protection and Advocacy.........          32,500            32,500           35,500           +3,000           +3,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Mental Health.......         831,904           822,116          838,116           +6,212          +16,000
 
Substance Abuse Treatment:
    Programs of Regional and                 291,383           357,994          310,000          +18,617          -47,994
     National Significance..........
    Substance Abuse Performance            1,725,000         1,785,000        1,722,800           -2,200          -62,200
     Partnership....................
        Evaluation tap funding......  ...............  ................         (62,200)        (+62,200)        (+62,200)
            Program level...........       2,016,383         2,142,994        2,095,000          +78,617          -47,994
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Substance          2,016,383         2,142,994        2,032,800          +16,417         -110,194
               Abuse Treatment......
 
Substance Abuse Prevention:
    Programs of Regional and                 198,011           152,815          183,379          -14,632          +30,564
     National Significance..........
 
Program Management and Buildings and          91,392            75,161           74,467          -16,925             -694
 Facilities.........................
    Evaluation tap funding..........  ...............  ................         (12,000)        (+12,000)        (+12,000)
        Program level...............          91,392            75,161           86,467           -4,925          +11,306
St. Elizabeth's.....................  ...............  ................             955             +955             +955
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Substance Abuse and           3,137,690         3,193,086        3,129,717           -7,973          -63,369
       Mental Health................
          Total, Program level......      (3,137,690)       (3,193,086)      (3,203,917)        (+66,227)        (+10,831)
 
 AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND
               QUALITY
 
Research on Health Costs, Quality,
 and Outcomes:
    Federal Funds...................  ...............  ................         252,645         +252,645         +252,645
    Evaluation Tap funding (NA).....        (247,645)         (194,000)  ...............       (-247,645)       (-194,000)
        Health Coverage Data          ...............          (10,000)  ...............  ...............        (-10,000)
         Improvement (CPS)..........
        Portion for reducing medical         (55,000)          (60,000)         (60,000)         (+5,000)  ...............
         errors (non-add)...........
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal including          ...............  ................        (252,645)       (+252,645)       (+252,645)
           Evaluation Tap funds.....
Health insurance and expenditure
 surveys:
    Federal Funds...................  ...............  ................          53,300          +53,300          +53,300
    Evaluation Tap funding (NA).....         (48,500)          (53,300)  ...............        (-48,500)        (-53,300)
Program Support.....................           2,600   ................           2,700             +100           +2,700
    Evaluation Tap funding (NA).....  ...............           (2,700)  ...............  ...............         (-2,700)
        Federal Funds...............           2,600   ................         308,645         +306,045         +308,645
        Evaluation Tap funding (NA).        (296,145)         (250,000)  ...............       (-296,145)       (-250,000)
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, AHRQ...............        (298,745)         (250,000)        (308,645)         (+9,900)        (+58,645)
                                     ===================================================================================================================
          Total, Public Health            37,038,327        39,693,683       41,109,314       +4,070,987       +1,415,631
           Service..................
 
  CENTER FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID
              SERVICES
 
    GRANTS TO STATES FOR MEDICAID
 
Medicaid current law benefits.......     134,308,100       148,726,168      148,726,168      +14,418,068   ...............
State and local administration......       8,293,316         9,142,049        9,142,049         +848,733   ...............
Vaccines for Children...............         795,533           823,938          823,938          +28,405   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Medicaid program         143,396,949       158,692,155      158,692,155      +15,295,206   ...............
       level........................
 
          Less Medicare Transfer             -70,000   ................  ...............         +70,000   ...............
           (Public Law 105-33)......
          Less funds advanced in         -36,207,551       -46,601,937      -46,601,937      -10,394,386   ...............
           prior year...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total, request..........     107,119,398       112,090,218      112,090,218       +4,970,820   ...............
 
            New advance, 1st quarter      46,601,937        51,861,386       51,861,386       +5,259,449   ...............
 
 PAYMENTS TO HEALTH CARE TRUST FUNDS
 
Supplemental medical insurance......      81,332,000        80,905,000       80,905,000         -427,000   ...............
Hospital insurance for the uninsured         292,000           225,000          225,000          -67,000   ...............
Federal uninsured payment...........         150,000           168,000          168,000          +18,000   ...............
Program management..................         205,200           164,700          164,700          -40,500   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Payments to Trust            81,979,200        81,462,700       81,462,700         -516,500   ...............
       Funds, current law...........
 
         PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
 
Research, Demonstration, and
 Evaluation:
    Regular Program.................         117,201            28,400           68,400          -48,801          +40,000
 
Medicare Operations.................       1,482,000         1,675,084        1,680,084         +198,084           +5,000
    H.R. 3103 funding (NA)..........        (700,000)         (720,000)        (720,000)        (+20,000)  ...............
    Medicare Plus Choice............          52,000   ................  ...............         -52,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Medicare Operations        1,534,000         1,675,084        1,680,084         +146,084           +5,000
       limit'n on new BA............
      Subtotal, Operations program        (2,234,000)       (2,395,084)      (2,400,084)       (+166,084)         (+5,000)
       level........................
 
State Survey and Certification......         254,397           247,647          254,397   ...............          +6,750
 
Federal Administration:
    Federal Administration..........         533,603           556,783          556,783          +23,180   ...............
    User Fees.......................          -2,118   ................  ...............          +2,118   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Federal                      531,485           556,783          556,783          +25,298   ...............
       Administration...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Program management.....       2,437,083         2,507,914        2,559,664         +122,581          +51,750
      Total, Program management,          (3,137,083)       (3,227,914)      (3,279,664)       (+142,581)        (+51,750)
       program level................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Center for Medicare and     238,137,618       247,922,218      247,973,968       +9,836,350          +51,750
       Medicaid Services............
          Federal funds.............     235,700,535       245,414,304      245,414,304       +9,713,769   ...............
              Current year..........    (189,098,598)     (193,552,918)    (193,552,918)     (+4,454,320)  ...............
              New advance, 1st           (46,601,937)      (51,861,386)     (51,861,386)     (+5,259,449)  ...............
               quarter, Fiscal year
               2004.................
          Trust Funds...............       2,437,083         2,507,914        2,559,664         +122,581          +51,750
 
   ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND
              FAMILIES
 
  FAMILY SUPPORT PAYMENTS TO STATES
 
Prior year AFDC and related payments          50,000   ................  ...............         -50,000   ...............

[[Page 914]]

 
Payments to territories.............          23,000            23,000           23,000   ...............  ...............
Repatriation........................           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Other payments......          74,000            24,000           24,000          -50,000   ...............
 
Child Support Enforcement:
    State and local administration..       3,452,313         3,482,800        3,541,800          +89,487          +59,000
    Federal incentive payments......         450,000           461,000          461,000          +11,000   ...............
    Hold Harmless payments..........          10,000   ................  ...............         -10,000   ...............
    Access and visitation...........          10,000            10,000           10,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Child Support              3,922,313         3,953,800        4,012,800          +90,487          +59,000
       Enforcement..................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Payments, Fiscal year         3,996,313         3,977,800        4,036,800          +40,487          +59,000
       2003 program level...........
 
          Less funds advanced in          -1,000,000        -1,100,000       -1,100,000         -100,000   ...............
           previous years...........
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total, payments, current       2,996,313         2,877,800        2,936,800          -59,513          +59,000
             request................
 
            New advance, 1st               1,100,000         1,100,000        1,100,000   ...............  ...............
             quarter, Fiscal year
             2004...................
 
  LOW INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE
 
Current Year........................       1,700,000         1,400,000        1,700,000   ...............        +300,000
    Non-emergency funding...........  ...............          300,000   ...............  ...............        -300,000
    Emergency allocation............         300,000   ................  ...............        -300,000   ...............
 
   REFUGEE AND ENTRANT ASSISTANCE
 
Transitional and Medical Services...         227,283           227,291          221,291           -5,992           -6,000
Victims of Trafficking..............          10,000            10,000           10,000   ...............  ...............
Social Services.....................         158,600           151,121          147,121          -11,479           -4,000
Preventive Health...................           4,835             4,835            4,835   ...............  ...............
Targeted Assistance.................          49,477            49,477           49,477   ...............  ...............
Victims of Torture..................          10,000            10,000           10,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Refugee and entrant             460,195           452,724          442,724          -17,471          -10,000
       assistance...................
 
CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT BLOCK           2,099,976         2,099,994        2,099,994              +18   ...............
 GRANT..............................
 
SOCIAL SERVICES BLOCK GRANT (TITLE         1,700,000         1,700,000        1,700,000   ...............  ...............
 XX)................................
 
   CHILDREN AND FAMILIES SERVICES
              PROGRAMS
 
Programs for Children, Youth, and
 Families:
    Head Start, current funded......       5,137,640         5,267,533        5,267,533         +129,893   ...............
        Advance from prior year.....      (1,400,000)       (1,400,000)      (1,400,000)  ...............  ...............
        Fiscal year 2004............       1,400,000         1,400,000        1,400,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Head Start,            6,537,640         6,667,533        6,667,533         +129,893   ...............
           program level............
 
    Consolidated Runaway, Homeless            88,102            88,133           93,000           +4,898           +4,867
     Youth Prog.....................
    Maternity Group Homes...........  ...............           10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000
    Child Abuse State Grants........          22,013            22,013           22,013   ...............  ...............
    Child Abuse Discretionary                 26,150            26,351           26,351             +201   ...............
     Activities.....................
    Abandoned Infants Assistance....          12,202            12,205           12,205               +3   ...............
    Child Welfare Services..........         291,986           291,986          291,986   ...............  ...............
    Child Welfare Training..........           7,495             7,498            7,498               +3   ...............
    Adoption Opportunities..........          27,385            27,405           27,405              +20   ...............
    Adoption Incentive..............          20,000            43,000           43,000          +23,000   ...............
    Adoption Incentive (no cap                23,000   ................  ...............         -23,000   ...............
     adjustment)....................
    Adoption Awareness..............          12,906            12,906           12,906   ...............  ...............
    Compassion Capital Fund.........          30,000           100,000           45,000          +15,000          -55,000
Social Services and Income                    31,158             6,000   ...............         -31,158           -6,000
 Maintenance Research...............
    Evaluation tap funding..........  ...............  ................          (6,000)         (+6,000)         (+6,000)
        Program level...............          31,158             6,000            6,000          -25,158   ...............
Community Based Resource Centers....          33,416            33,417           33,417               +1   ...............
 
Developmental Disabilities Program:
    State Councils..................          69,800            69,800           72,200           +2,400           +2,400
    Protection and Advocacy.........          35,000            35,000           37,000           +2,000           +2,000
    Developmental Disabilities                11,720            11,734           12,734           +1,014           +1,000
     Special Projects...............
    Developmental Disabilities                24,000            24,000           25,500           +1,500           +1,500
     University Affiliated..........
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Developmental                140,520           140,534          147,434           +6,914           +6,900
       disabilities.................
 
Native American Programs............          45,912            45,196           45,912   ...............            +716
 
Community Services:
    Grants to States for Community           649,987           570,000          649,987   ...............          79,987
     Services.......................
 
    Community Initiative Program:
        Economic Development........          32,509            32,517           33,000             +491             +483
        Individual Development                24,976            24,990           24,990              +14   ...............
         Account Initiative.........
        Rural Community Facilities..           7,000             6,161            7,500             +500           +1,339
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Community                 64,485            63,668           65,490           +1,005           +1,822
           Initiative Program.......
 
    National Youth Sports...........          17,000   ................          17,000   ...............         +17,000
    Community Food and Nutrition....           7,313             6,657            8,000             +687           +1,343
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Community Services..         738,785           640,325          740,477           +1,692         +100,152
 
Runaway Youth Prevention............          14,999            14,999           16,000           +1,001           +1,001
Domestic Violence Hotline...........           2,157             2,157            3,000             +843             +843
Battered Women's Shelters...........         124,459           124,459          130,000           +5,541           +5,541
Early Learning Fund.................          24,997   ................          38,000          +13,003          +38,000
Faith-Based Center..................           1,500             1,500            1,500   ...............  ...............
Promotion of Responsible Fatherhood   ...............           20,000   ...............  ...............         -20,000
 and Healthy Marriage...............
Mentoring Children of Prisoners.....  ...............           25,000           12,500          +12,500          -12,500
Independent Living Training Vouchers  ...............           60,000           60,000          +60,000   ...............
Program Direction...................         171,792           170,747          171,747              -45           +1,000
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Children and Families         8,428,574         8,593,364        8,648,884         +220,310          +55,520
       Services Programs............
          Current Year..............      (7,028,574)       (7,193,364)      (7,248,884)       (+220,310)        (+55,520)
          Fiscal year 2004..........      (1,400,000)       (1,400,000)      (1,400,000)  ...............  ...............
 

[[Page 915]]

 
Rescission of permanent                      -21,000   ................  ...............         +21,000   ...............
 appropriations.....................
 
PROMOTING SAFE AND STABLE FAMILIES..         305,000           305,000          305,000   ...............  ...............
    Discretionary Funds.............          70,000           200,000          200,000         +130,000   ...............
 
 PAYMENTS TO STATES FOR FOSTER CARE
            AND ADOPTION
 
Foster Care.........................       5,055,500         4,884,500        4,884,500         -171,000   ...............
Adoption Assistance.................       1,426,000         1,584,500        1,584,500         +158,500   ...............
Independent living..................         140,000           140,000          140,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Program level, Payments       6,621,500         6,609,000        6,609,000          -12,500   ...............
       to States....................
 
          Less Advances from Prior        -1,735,900        -1,754,000       -1,754,000          -18,100   ...............
           Year.....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total, payments, current       4,885,600         4,855,000        4,855,000          -30,600   ...............
             request................
 
            New Advance, 1st quarter       1,754,000         1,745,600        1,745,600           -8,400   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Administration for           25,778,658        25,629,482       25,734,002          -44,656         +104,520
       Children and Families........
          Current year..............     (21,524,658)      (21,383,882)     (21,488,402)        (-36,256)       (+104,520)
          Fiscal year 2004..........      (4,254,000)       (4,245,600)      (4,245,600)         (-8,400)  ...............
 
       ADMINISTRATION ON AGING
 
Grants to States:
    Supportive Services and Centers.         356,994           357,000          359,000           +2,006           +2,000
    Preventive Health...............          21,123            21,562           22,562           +1,439           +1,000
    Title VII.......................          17,681            17,681           19,681           +2,000           +2,000
 
    Family Caregivers...............         136,000           136,000          150,000          +14,000          +14,000
    Native American Caregivers                 5,500             5,500            6,500           +1,000           +1,000
     Support........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Caregivers..........         141,500           141,500          156,500          +15,000          +15,000
 
    Nutrition:
        Congregate Meals............         390,000           390,000          390,000   ...............  ...............
        Home Delivered Meals........         176,500           178,500          182,000           +5,500           +3,500
        Nutrition Services Incentive         149,670           149,670          149,670   ...............  ...............
         program....................
Grants to Indians...................          25,729            25,729           27,675           +1,946           +1,946
Aging Research, Training and Special          38,273            27,837           27,837          -10,436   ...............
 Projects...........................
Aging Network Support Activities....           2,379             2,379            2,379   ...............  ...............
Alzheimer's Initiative..............          11,496            11,500           14,000           +2,504           +2,500
Program Administration..............          18,102            17,986           17,986             -116   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Administration on Aging       1,349,447         1,341,344        1,369,290          +19,843          +27,946
 
       OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
 
GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT:
    Federal Funds...................         140,178           177,272          168,263          +28,085           -9,009
        NAS study...................             499   ................  ...............            -499   ...............
    Trust Funds.....................           5,851             5,851            5,851   ...............  ...............
    1 percent Evaluation funds               (21,552)          (21,552)  ...............        (-21,552)        (-21,552)
     (ASPE) (NA)....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................        (168,080)         (204,675)        (174,114)         (+6,034)        (-30,561)
 
    Adolescent Family Life (Title             28,926            31,124           31,124           +2,198   ...............
     XX)............................
    Physical Fitness and Sports.....           1,137             1,223            1,223              +86   ...............
    Minority health.................          49,557            46,329           46,329           -3,228   ...............
    Office of women's health........          26,761            28,795           28,795           +2,034   ...............
    U.S. Surgeon General violence              1,000             1,000   ...............          -1,000           -1,000
     initiative.....................
    Office of Emergency Preparedness          14,171            15,247           15,247           +1,076   ...............
    Office of Human Research                   7,021             7,554            7,554             +533   ...............
     Protection.....................
    Minority HIV/AIDS...............          49,991            50,000           50,000               +9   ...............
    IT Security and Innovation Fund.          21,960            20,000           20,000           -1,960   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General Departmental            347,052           384,395          374,386          +27,334          -10,009
       Management...................
          Federal Funds.............         341,201           378,544          368,535          +27,334          -10,009
          Trust Funds...............           5,851             5,851            5,851   ...............  ...............
 
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL:
    Federal Funds...................          35,727            39,747           39,747           +4,020   ...............
        HIPAA funding (NA)..........        (150,000)         (160,000)        (160,000)        (+10,000)  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Inspector General          (185,727)         (199,747)        (199,747)        (+14,020)  ...............
           program level............
 
OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS:
    Federal Funds...................          28,641            30,328           30,328           +1,687   ...............
    Trust Funds.....................           3,314             3,314            3,314   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office for Civil Rights          31,955            33,642           33,642           +1,687   ...............
 
POLICY RESEARCH.....................           2,500             2,499            2,499               -1   ...............
 
RETIREMENT PAY AND MEDICAL BENEFITS
 FOR COMMISSIONED:
    Retirement payments.............         207,887           222,058          222,058          +14,171   ...............
    Survivors benefits..............          12,115            12,904           12,904             +789   ...............
    Dependents' medical care........          40,780            14,668           14,668          -26,112   ...............
    Military services credits.......           1,293             1,409            1,409             +116   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Retirement pay and              262,075           251,039          251,039          -11,036   ...............
       medical benefits.............
 
HEALTH FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION AND    ...............          184,000   ...............  ...............        -184,000
 MANAGEMENT FUND....................
 
  PUBLIC HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICE
           EMERGENCY FUND
 
Public Health/Social Service               2,464,314   ................  ...............      -2,464,314   ...............
 Emergency (Public Law 107-38)......
    Public Health/Social Service             242,949         2,295,184        2,255,980       +2,013,031          -39,204
     Fund\6\........................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Office of the Secretary       3,386,572         3,190,506        2,957,293         -429,279         -233,213
          Federal Funds.............       3,377,407         3,181,341        2,948,128         -429,279         -233,213
          Trust Funds...............           9,165             9,165            9,165   ...............  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Department of Health        305,690,622       317,777,233      319,143,867      +13,453,245       +1,366,634
       and Human Services...........
          Federal Funds.............     303,244,374       315,260,154      316,575,038      +13,330,664       +1,314,884

[[Page 916]]

 
              Current year..........    (252,388,437)     (259,153,168)    (260,468,052)     (+8,079,615)     (+1,314,884)
              Fiscal year 2004......     (50,855,937)      (56,106,986)     (56,106,986)     (+5,251,049)  ...............
          Trust Funds...............       2,446,248         2,517,079        2,568,829         +122,581          +51,750
 
 TITLE III--DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
 
   EDUCATION FOR THE DISADVANTAGED
 
Grants to Local Education Agencies
 (LEAs):
    Basic Grants:
         Advance from prior year....      (5,394,300)       (4,011,272)      (4,011,272)     (-1,383,028)  ...............
        Forward funded..............       3,158,199         4,158,199        2,914,199         -244,000       -1,244,000
        Current funded..............           3,500             3,500            3,500   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Basic grants           3,161,699         4,161,699        2,917,699         -244,000       -1,244,000
           current year approp......
          Subtotal, Basic grants          (8,555,999)       (8,172,971)      (6,928,971)     (-1,627,028)     (-1,244,000)
           total funds available....
 
        Basic Grants Fiscal year           4,011,272         3,011,272        4,255,272         +244,000       +1,244,000
         2004 Advance...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Basic grants,          7,172,971         7,172,971        7,172,971   ...............  ...............
           program level............
 
        Concentration Grants:
            Advance from prior year.      (1,364,000)       (1,365,031)      (1,365,031)         (+1,031)  ...............
            Fiscal year 2004 advance       1,365,031         1,365,031        1,365,031   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal,                    1,365,031         1,365,031        1,365,031   ...............  ...............
               Concentration Grants
               program level........
 
        Targeted Grants:
            Advance from prior year.  ...............       (1,018,499)      (1,018,499)     (+1,018,499)  ...............
            Fiscal year 2004 advance       1,018,499         2,018,499        1,405,999         +387,500         -612,500
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Targeted           1,018,499         2,018,499        1,405,999         +387,500         -612,500
               Grants program level.
 
        Education Finance Incentive
         Grants:
            Advance from prior year.  ...............         (793,499)        (793,499)       (+793,499)  ...............
            Fiscal year 2004 advance         793,499           793,499        1,405,999         +612,500         +612,500
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Education            793,499           793,499        1,405,999         +612,500         +612,500
               Finance Incentive
               Grants...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
              Subtotal, Grants to         10,350,000        11,350,000       11,350,000       +1,000,000   ...............
               LEAs (program level).
 
Even Start..........................         250,000           200,000          200,000          -50,000   ...............
 
Reading First:
    State Grants (forward funded)...         690,000           790,000          790,000         +100,000   ...............
    State Grants (current funded)...          15,000            15,000           15,000   ...............  ...............
        Advance from prior year.....  ...............         (195,000)        (195,000)       (+195,000)  ...............
        Fiscal year 2004 advance....         195,000           195,000          195,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Reading First,           900,000         1,000,000        1,000,000         +100,000   ...............
           program level............
 
        Early Reading First.........          75,000            75,000           75,000   ...............  ...............
Literacy through School Libraries...          12,500            12,500           15,000           +2,500           +2,500
 
State agency programs:
    Migrant.........................         396,000           396,000          400,000           +4,000           +4,000
    Neglected and Delinquent/High             48,000            48,000           50,000           +2,000           +2,000
     Risk Youth.....................
Evaluation..........................           8,900             8,900            8,900   ...............  ...............
Comprehensive School Reform                  235,000           235,000   ...............        -235,000         -235,000
 Demonstration......................
Dropout Prevention Programs.........          10,000   ................          13,000           +3,000          +13,000
Ellender Fellowships/Close Up.......           1,500   ................           1,500   ...............          +1,500
 
Advanced Placement Fees.............          22,000            22,000           25,000           +3,000           +3,000
 
Migrant Education:
    High School Equivalency Program.          23,000            23,000           24,000           +1,000           +1,000
    College Assistance Migrant                15,000            15,000           16,000           +1,000           +1,000
     Program........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Migrant Education...          38,000            38,000           40,000           +2,000           +2,000
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Education for the            12,346,900        13,385,400       13,178,400         +831,500         -207,000
       disadvantaged................
          Current Year..............      (4,963,599)       (6,002,099)      (4,551,099)       (-412,500)     (-1,451,000)
          Fiscal year 2004..........      (7,383,301)       (7,383,301)      (8,627,301)     (+1,244,000)     (+1,244,000)
      Subtotal, forward funded......      (4,777,199)       (5,827,199)      (4,354,199)       (-423,000)     (-1,473,000)
 
             IMPACT AID
 
Basic Support Payments..............         982,500           982,500        1,012,500          +30,000          +30,000
Payments for Children with                    50,000            50,000           52,000           +2,000           +2,000
 Disabilities.......................
Facilities Maintenance (Sec. 8008)..           8,000             8,000            8,000   ...............  ...............
Construction (Sec. 8007)............          48,000            45,000           47,000           -1,000           +2,000
Payments for Federal Property (Sec.           55,000            55,000           57,000           +2,000           +2,000
 8002)..............................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Impact aid.............       1,143,500         1,140,500        1,176,500          +33,000          +36,000
 
     SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS
 
State Grants for Improving Teacher         1,700,000         1,700,000        1,700,000   ...............  ...............
 Quality............................
    Advance from prior year.........      (1,150,000)       (1,150,000)      (1,150,000)  ...............  ...............
    Fiscal year 2004 advance........       1,150,000         1,150,000        1,150,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      State Grants for Improving           2,850,000         2,850,000        2,850,000   ...............  ...............
       Teacher Quality, program
       level........................
 
National Acitivities:
    School Leadership...............          10,000   ................          15,000           +5,000          +15,000
    Advanced Credentialing..........          10,000   ................          10,000   ...............         +10,000
    Early Childhood Educator                  15,000            15,000           15,000   ...............  ...............
     Professional Development.......
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, National Activities.          35,000            15,000           40,000           +5,000          +25,000
 
Mathematics and Science Partnerships          12,500            12,500           25,000          +12,500          +12,500
Troops-to-Teachers..................          18,000            20,000           20,000           +2,000   ...............
Transition to Teaching..............          35,000            39,400           35,000   ...............          -4,400
 
State Grants for Innovative                  100,000           100,000          100,000   ...............  ...............
 Education (Education Block Grant)..
    Advance from prior year.........        (285,000)         (285,000)        (285,000)  ...............  ...............

[[Page 917]]

 
    Fiscal year 2004................         285,000           285,000          285,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Education Block Grant, program         385,000           385,000          385,000   ...............  ...............
       level........................
 
Educational Technology:
    Educational Technology State             700,500           700,500          700,500   ...............  ...............
     Grants.........................
    Ready to Learn..................          22,000            22,000           24,000           +2,000           +2,000
    Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to          62,500   ................          62,500   ...............         +62,500
     Use Technology.................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Educational                  785,000           722,500          787,000           +2,000          +64,500
       Technology...................
21st Century Community Learning            1,000,000         1,000,000        1,000,000   ...............  ...............
 Centers............................
 
Safe and Drug Free Schools:
    State Grants, current funded....         142,017           142,017          152,017          +10,000          +10,000
        Advance from prior year.....        (330,000)         (330,000)        (330,000)  ...............  ...............
        Fiscal year 2004............         330,000           330,000          330,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          State Grants, program              472,017           472,017          482,017          +10,000          +10,000
           level....................
 
    National Programs...............         182,233           172,233          162,233          -20,000          -10,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Safe and Drug Free           654,250           644,250          644,250          -10,000   ...............
       Schools......................
 
    Magnet Schools Assistance.......         110,000           110,000          110,000   ...............  ...............
    Charter Schools Grants..........         200,000           200,000          200,000   ...............  ...............
    Credit Enhancement for Charter    ...............          100,000   ...............  ...............        -100,000
     School Facilities..............
    Voluntary Public School Choice..          25,000            25,000           27,584           +2,584           +2,584
    Choice Demonstration Fund.......  ...............           50,000   ...............  ...............         -50,000
    State Assessments/Enhanced               387,000           387,000          387,000   ...............  ...............
     Assessment Instruments.........
    Education for Homeless Children           50,000            50,000           54,000           +4,000           +4,000
     and Youth......................
    Training and Advisory Services             7,334             7,334            7,334   ...............  ...............
     (Civil Rights).................
    Education for Native Hawaiians..          30,500            18,300           32,500           +2,000          +14,200
    Alaska Native Education Equity..          24,000            14,200           32,500           +8,500          +18,300
    Rural Education.................         162,500   ................         175,000          +12,500         +175,000
    Mentoring Programs..............          17,500   ................          17,500   ...............         +17,500
    Fund for the Improvement of
     Education (FIE):
        Programs of National                 308,955            35,000          380,416          +71,461         +345,416
         Signifiance, Current funded
        Programs of National                  75,000   ................  ...............         -75,000   ...............
         Signifiance, Forward funded
                                     ===================================================================================================================
          Subtotal, Programs of              383,955            35,000          380,416           -3,539         +345,416
           National Significance....
 
        Character Education.........          25,000            25,000           25,000   ...............  ...............
        Reading is Fundamental/               24,000            24,000           27,000           +3,000           +3,000
         Inexpensive Book Dist......
        School Counseling...........          32,500   ................          32,500   ...............         +32,500
 
        Smaller Learning
         Communitites...............
            Current funded..........           7,109   ................  ...............          -7,109   ...............
            Forward funded..........         135,080   ................  ...............        -135,080   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, Smaller              142,189   ................  ...............        -142,189   ...............
               Learning Communtities
 
        Javits Gifted and Talented..          11,250   ................          11,250   ...............         +11,250
        Star Schools................          27,520   ................          27,520   ...............         +27,520
        Ready to Teach..............          12,000   ................          17,000           +5,000          +17,000
        Foreign Language Assistance.          14,000   ................          18,500           +4,500          +18,500
        Carol M. White Physical               50,000   ................          70,000          +20,000          +70,000
         Education for Progress.....
        Community Technology Centers          32,475   ................          32,475   ...............         +32,475
        Exchanges with Historic                5,000   ................          10,000           +5,000          +10,000
         Whaling&Trading Partners...
        Arts in Education...........          30,000   ................          36,000           +6,000          +36,000
        Parental Assistance                   40,000   ................          45,000           +5,000          +45,000
         Information Centers........
        Women's Education Equity....           3,000   ................           3,000   ...............          +3,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Fund for the             832,889            84,000          735,661          -97,228         +651,661
           Improvement of Education.
 
    Community Service for Expelled            50,000   ................          50,000   ...............         +50,000
     or Susp'd Students.............
    Alcohol Abuse Reduction.........          25,000   ................          25,000   ...............         +25,000
    Teaching of Traditional American         100,000            50,000          100,000   ...............         +50,000
     History........................
 
    Civic Education.................  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
        Cooperative Education                 10,800   ................          12,000           +1,200          +12,000
         Exchanges..................
        We the People...............          16,200   ................          18,000           +1,800          +18,000
    National Writing Project........          14,000   ................          18,000           +4,000          +18,000
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, School improvement            7,837,473         6,784,484        7,788,329          -49,144       +1,003,845
       programs.....................
          Current Year..............      (6,072,473)       (5,019,484)      (6,023,329)        (-49,144)     (+1,003,845)
          Fiscal year 2004..........      (1,765,000)       (1,765,000)      (1,765,000)  ...............  ...............
      Subtotal, forward funded......      (2,801,597)       (2,379,017)      (2,618,017)       (-183,580)       (+239,000)
Reading Excellence Act:
    Advance from prior year.........        (195,000)  ................  ...............       (-195,000)  ...............
 
          INDIAN EDUCATION
 
Grants to Local Educational Agencies          97,133            97,133           97,133   ...............  ...............
 
Federal Programs:
    Special Programs for Indian               20,000            20,000           20,000   ...............  ...............
     Children.......................
    National Activities.............           3,235             5,235            5,235           +2,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................          23,235            25,235           25,235           +2,000   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Indian Education.......         120,368           122,368          122,368           +2,000   ...............
 
    ENGLISH LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
 
Current funded......................         250,000           196,000          196,000          -54,000   ...............
Forward funded......................         415,000           469,000          494,000          +79,000          +25,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, English Language                665,000           665,000          690,000          +25,000          +25,000
       Acquisition..................
 
          SPECIAL EDUCATION
 
State grants:
    Grants to States Part B advance        5,072,000         5,072,000        6,072,000       +1,000,000       +1,000,000
     funded.........................
        Part B advance from prior         (5,072,000)       (5,072,000)      (5,072,000)  ...............  ...............
         year.......................
    Grants to States Part B current        2,456,533         3,456,533        2,456,533   ...............      -1,000,000
     year...........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 918]]

 
      Grants to States, program            7,528,533         8,528,533        8,528,533       +1,000,000   ...............
       level........................
 
    Preschool Grants................         390,000           390,000          390,000   ...............  ...............
    Grants for Infants and Families.         417,000           437,000          437,000          +20,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, State grants,              8,335,533         9,355,533        9,355,533       +1,020,000   ...............
       program level................
 
IDEA National Acitivities (current
 funded):
    State Program Improvement Grants          51,700            51,700           51,700   ...............  ...............
    Research and Innovation.........          78,380            78,380           70,000           -8,380           -8,380
    Technical Assistance and                  53,481            53,481           53,481   ...............  ...............
     Dissemination..................
    Personnel Preparation...........          90,000            90,000           95,000           +5,000           +5,000
    Parent Information Centers......          26,000            26,000           28,000           +2,000           +2,000
    Technology and Media Services...          37,710            32,710           37,710   ...............          +5,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, IDEA special                 337,271           332,271          335,891           -1,380           +3,620
       programs.....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Special education......       8,672,804         9,687,804        9,691,424       +1,018,620           +3,620
          Current Year..............      (3,600,804)       (4,615,804)      (3,619,424)        (+18,620)       (-996,380)
          Fiscal year 2004..........      (5,072,000)       (5,072,000)      (6,072,000)     (+1,000,000)     (+1,000,000)
            Subtotal, Forward funded      (3,315,233)       (4,335,233)      (3,335,233)        (+20,000)     (-1,000,000)
 
     REHABILITATION SERVICES AND
         DISABILITY RESEARCH
 
Vocational Rehabilitation State            2,481,383         2,533,492        2,533,492          +52,109   ...............
 Grants.............................
Discretionary Supplement to Voc.      ...............           82,833   ...............  ...............         -82,833
 Rehab. State Grants................
Vocational Rehabilitation Incentive   ...............           30,000   ...............  ...............         -30,000
 Grants.............................
Client Assistance State grants......          11,897            11,897           12,397             +500             +500
Training............................          39,629            42,629           42,629           +3,000   ...............
Demonstration and training programs.          21,238            17,492           21,238   ...............          +3,746
Migrant and seasonal farmworkers....           2,350   ................           2,350   ...............          +2,350
Recreational programs...............           2,596   ................           2,596   ...............          +2,596
Protection and advocacy of                    15,200            15,200           17,500           +2,300           +2,300
 individual rights (PAIR)...........
Projects with industry..............          22,071   ................          22,071   ...............         +22,071
Supported employment State grants...          38,152   ................          38,152   ...............         +38,152
 
Independent living:
    State grants....................          22,296            22,296           22,296   ...............  ...............
    Centers.........................          62,500            69,500           69,500           +7,000   ...............
    Services for older blind                  25,000            25,000           28,000           +3,000           +3,000
     individuals....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Independent living..         109,796           116,796          119,796          +10,000           +3,000
 
Program Improvement.................             900               900              900   ...............  ...............
Evaluation..........................           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
Helen Keller National Center for               8,717             8,717            8,717   ...............  ...............
 Deaf/Blind.........................
National Inst. Disability and Rehab          110,000           110,000          110,000   ...............  ...............
 Research (NIDRR)...................
Assistive Technology................          60,884            30,884           27,000          -33,884           -3,884
Access to Telework Fund.............          20,000   ................  ...............         -20,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, discretionary                464,430           468,348          426,346          -38,084          -42,002
       programs.....................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Rehabilitation services       2,945,813         3,001,840        2,959,838          +14,025          -42,002
 
  SPECIAL INSTITUTIONS FOR PERSONS
          WITH DISABILITIES
 
AMERICAN PRINTING HOUSE FOR THE               14,000            14,000           15,500           +1,500           +1,500
 BLIND..............................
 
NATIONAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE FOR THE
 DEAF:
    Operations......................          50,000            49,414           53,000           +3,000           +3,586
    Endowment.......................  ...............            1,000   ...............  ...............          -1,000
    Construction....................           5,376             1,600            1,600           -3,776   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................          55,376            52,014           54,600             -776           +2,586
 
GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY:
    Operations......................          96,938            93,446           98,438           +1,500           +4,992
    Endowment.......................  ...............            1,000   ...............  ...............          -1,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................          96,938            94,446           98,438           +1,500           +3,992
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Special Institutions            166,314           160,460          168,538           +2,224           +8,078
       for Persons with Disabilities
 
   VOCATIONAL AND ADULT EDUCATION
 
Vocational Education:
    Basic State Grants, current              389,000           389,000          389,000   ...............  ...............
     funded.........................
        Advance from prior year.....        (791,000)         (791,000)        (791,000)  ...............  ...............
        Fiscal year 2004............         791,000           791,000          791,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Basic State Grants,              1,180,000         1,180,000        1,180,000   ...............  ...............
           program level............
 
    Tech-Prep Education State Grants         108,000           108,000          108,000   ...............  ...............
    Tribally Controlled Postsec                6,500             6,500            7,000             +500             +500
     Vocational and Tech Inst.......
    National Programs...............          12,000            12,000           12,000   ...............  ...............
    Tech-Prep Education                        5,000   ................           5,000   ...............          +5,000
     Demonstration..................
    Occupational and Employment                9,500   ................          10,000             +500          +10,000
     Information Program............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Vocational Education       1,321,000         1,306,500        1,322,000           +1,000          +15,500
 
Adult education:
    State Grants, current funded....         575,000           575,000          575,000   ...............  ...............
 
    National Programs:
        National Leadership                    9,500             9,500            9,500   ...............  ...............
         Activities.................
        National Institute for                 6,560             6,560            6,560   ...............  ...............
         Literacy...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, National                  16,060            16,060           16,060   ...............  ...............
           programs.................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
          Subtotal, Adult education.         591,060           591,060          591,060   ...............  ...............
 
State Grants for Incarcerated Youth           22,000   ................          25,000           +3,000          +25,000
 Offenders..........................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Vocational and adult          1,934,060         1,897,560        1,938,060           +4,000          +40,500
       education....................

[[Page 919]]

 
          Current Year..............      (1,143,060)       (1,106,560)      (1,147,060)         (+4,000)        (+40,500)
          Fiscal year 2004..........        (791,000)         (791,000)        (791,000)  ...............  ...............
      Subtotal, forward funded......      (1,136,560)       (1,100,060)      (1,140,060)         (+3,500)        (+40,000)
 
    STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
 
Pell Grants--maximum grant (NA).....          (4,000)           (4,000)          (4,100)           (+100)           (+100)
 
Pell Grants--Regular Program........      10,314,000        10,863,000       11,180,000         +866,000         +317,000
Pell Grants Shortfall--Supplemental.       1,000,000   ................  ...............      -1,000,000   ...............
Federal Supplemental Educational             725,000           725,000          725,000   ...............  ...............
 Opportunity Grants.................
Federal Work Study..................       1,011,000         1,011,000        1,011,000   ...............  ...............
 
Federal Perkins loans:
    Capital Contributions...........         100,000           100,000          100,000   ...............  ...............
    Loan Cancellations..............          67,500            67,500           67,500   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Federal Perkins              167,500           167,500          167,500   ...............  ...............
       loans........................
 
LEAP program........................          67,000   ................          67,000   ...............         +67,000
Loan Forgiveness for Child Care.....           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Student Financial            13,285,500        12,767,500       13,151,500         -134,000         +384,000
       Assistance...................
 
          HIGHER EDUCATION
 
Aid for institutional development:
    Strengthening Institutions......          73,625            76,275           82,000           +8,375           +5,725
    Hispanic Serving Institutions...          86,000            89,096           93,000           +7,000           +3,904
    Strengthening Historically Black         206,000           213,415          215,415           +9,415           +2,000
     Colleges (HBCUs)...............
    Strengthening historically black          49,000            50,764           53,764           +4,764           +3,000
     graduate insts.................
    Strengthening Alaska/Native                6,500             6,734            8,234           +1,734           +1,500
     Hawaiian-Serving Inst..........
    Strengthening Tribal Colleges...          17,500            18,130           23,000           +5,500           +4,870
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Aid for                      438,625           454,414          475,413          +36,788          +20,999
       Institutional development....
 
    International education and
     foreign language:
        Domestic Programs...........          85,200            88,000           87,000           +1,800           -1,000
        Overseas Programs...........          11,800            13,000           13,000           +1,200   ...............
        Institute for International            1,500             1,500            1,500   ...............  ...............
         Public Policy..............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, International Ed          98,500           102,500          101,500           +3,000           -1,000
           and Foreign Lang.........
 
Fund for the Imporvement of Postsec.         180,922            39,138          126,926          -53,996          +87,788
 Ed. (FIPSE)........................
Minority Science and Engineering               8,500             8,500            9,500           +1,000           +1,000
 Improvement........................
Interest Subsidy Grants.............           5,000             3,000            3,000           -2,000   ...............
Federal TRIO Programs...............         802,500           802,500          832,500          +30,000          +30,000
GEAR UP.............................         285,000           285,000          295,000          +10,000          +10,000
Byrd Honors Scholarships............          41,001            41,001           41,001   ...............  ...............
Javits Fellowships..................          10,000            10,000           10,000   ...............  ...............
Graduate Assistance in Areas of               31,000            31,000           31,000   ...............  ...............
 National Need......................
Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants..          90,000            90,000           90,000   ...............  ...............
Child Care Access Means Parents in            25,000            15,000           16,300           -8,700           +1,300
 School.............................
Demonstration in Disabilities /                7,000   ................           7,000   ...............          +7,000
 Higher Education...................
Underground Railroad Program........           2,000   ................           2,500             +500           +2,500
GPRA data/HEA program evaluation....           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
Thurgood Marshall Scholarships......           4,000   ................           5,000           +1,000           +5,000
B.J. Stupak Olympic Scholarships....           1,000   ................  ...............          -1,000   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Higher education.......       2,031,048         1,883,053        2,047,640          +16,592         +164,587
 
          HOWARD UNIVERSITY
 
Academic Program....................         203,500           203,500          206,000           +2,500           +2,500
Endowment Program...................           3,600             3,600            3,600   ...............  ...............
Howard University Hospital..........          30,374            30,374           30,374   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Howard University......         237,474           237,474          239,974           +2,500           +2,500
 
College Housing and Academic                     762               762   ...............  ...............
 Facilities Loans Program: (CHAFL)
 762................................
 
HBCU Capital Financing Program:                  208               208              208   ...............  ...............
 Federal Administration.............
 
   INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION SCIENCE
 
Research and statistics:
    Research........................         121,817           175,000           89,500          -32,317          -85,500
    Regional Educational                      67,500            67,500           67,500   ...............  ...............
     Laboratories...................
    Statistics......................          85,000            95,000           87,000           +2,000           -8,000
 
    Assessment:
        National Assessment.........         107,500            90,825           90,825          -16,675   ...............
        National Assessment                    4,053             4,562            4,562             +509   ...............
         Governing Board............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Assessment......         111,553            95,387           95,387          -16,166   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
          Subtotal, Research and             385,870           432,887          339,387          -46,483          -93,500
           statistics...............
 
Multi-year Grants and Contracts.....          58,000   ................          58,000   ...............         +58,000
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, IES....................         443,870           432,887          397,387          -46,483          -35,500
 
       DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT
 
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION..............         364,761           411,795          412,093          +47,332             +298
 
OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS.............          79,934            86,276           86,276           +6,342   ...............
 
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.....          38,720            41,000           41,000           +2,280   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental management         483,415           539,071          539,369          +55,954             +298
 
     STUDENT AID ADMINISTRATION
 
Administrative Costs................         107,484           932,000          105,388           -2,096         -826,612
Federal Direct Student Loan           ...............         -797,000   ...............  ...............        +797,000
 Reclassification (Leg pro).........
                                     ===================================================================================================================

[[Page 920]]

 
      Total, Department of Education      52,421,993        52,841,371       54,195,685       +1,773,692       +1,354,314
          Current Year..............     (37,410,692)      (37,830,070)     (36,940,384)       (-470,308)       (-889,686)
          Fiscal year 2004..........     (15,011,301)      (15,011,301)     (17,255,301)     (+2,244,000)     (+2,244,000)
 
     TITLE IV--RELATED AGENCIES
 
    ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME
 
Operations and Maintenance..........          61,628            61,628           61,628   ...............  ...............
Capital Program.....................           9,812             5,712            5,712           -4,100   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, AFRH...................          71,440            67,340           67,340           -4,100   ...............
 
    CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
        COMMUNITY SERVICE\7\
 
Volunteers in Service to America              85,287            94,287           94,287           +9,000   ...............
 (VISTA)............................
 
Special Volunteer Programs..........           5,000            55,000           10,000           +5,000          -45,000
 
National Senior Volunteer Corps:
    Foster Grandparents Program.....         106,700           106,700          106,700   ...............  ...............
    Senior Companion Program........          44,395            46,563           46,563           +2,168   ...............
    Retired Senior Volunteer Program          54,884            58,884           58,884           +4,000   ...............
    Senior Demonstration Program....             400               400              400   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Senior Volunteers...         206,379           212,547          212,547           +6,168   ...............
 
Program Administration..............          32,229            34,229           34,229           +2,000   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Domestic Volunteer              328,895           396,063          351,063          +22,168          -45,000
       Service Programs.............
 
CORPORATION FOR PUBLIC BROADCASTING:
    Fiscal year 2005 (current                380,000   ................         395,000          +15,000         +395,000
     request) with fiscal year 2004
     comparable.....................
    Fiscal year 2004 advance with           (365,000)         (380,000)        (380,000)        (+15,000)  ...............
     fiscal year 2003 comparable
     (NA)...........................
    Fiscal year 2003 advance with           (350,000)         (365,000)        (365,000)        (+15,000)  ...............
     fiscal year 2002 comparable
     (NA)...........................
    Digitalization program\8\.......          25,000            25,000           48,744          +23,744          +23,744
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Fiscal year 2003              25,000            25,000           48,744          +23,744          +23,744
       appropriation................
 
FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION           D40,718            40,718             +736   ...............
 SERVICE............................
 
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH                 6,939             7,127            7,127             +188   ...............
 REVIEW COMMISSION..................
 
INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM AND LIBRARY              224,501           210,000          203,000          -21,501           -7,000
 SERVICES\9\........................
 
MEDICARE PAYMENT ADVISORY COMMISSION           8,250             8,250            8,250   ...............  ...............
 
NATIONAL COMMISSION ON LIBRARIES AND           1,000   ................           1,000   ...............          +1,000
 INFO SCIENCE.......................
 
NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY......           2,830             2,830            2,830   ...............  ...............
 
NATIONAL EDUCATION GOALS PANEL......             400   ................  ...............            -400   ...............
 
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD......         226,618           233,223          238,223          +11,605           +5,000
 
NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD............          10,635            11,203           11,203             +568   ...............
 
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH                 8,964             9,577            9,577             +613   ...............
 REVIEW COMMISSION..................
 
      RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD
 
Dual Benefits Payments Account......         146,000           132,000          132,000          -14,000   ...............
Less Income Tax Receipts on Dual              -9,000            -8,000           -8,000           +1,000   ...............
 Benefits...........................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Dual Benefits.......         137,000           124,000          124,000          -13,000   ...............
 
Federal Payment to the RR Retirement             150               150              150   ...............  ...............
 Account............................
 
Limitation on administration........          97,700            97,720           97,720              +20   ...............
    Inspector General...............           6,261             6,300            6,300              +39   ...............
 
   SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
 
Payments to Social Security Trust            434,400            20,400           20,400         -414,000   ...............
 Funds..............................
 
 SPECIAL BENEFITS FOR DISABLED COAL
               MINERS
 
Benefit payments....................         440,931           402,089          402,089          -38,842   ...............
Administration......................           5,909             6,088            6,088             +179   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Black Lung, Fiscal           446,840           408,177          408,177          -38,663   ...............
       year 2004 program level......
 
          Less funds advanced in            -114,000          -108,000         -108,000           +6,000   ...............
           prior year...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total, Black Lung,               332,840           300,177          300,177          -32,663   ...............
             current request, Fiscal
             year 2004..............
 
            New advances, 1st                108,000            97,000           97,000          -11,000   ...............
             quarter Fiscal year
             2004...................
 
    SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME
 
Federal benefit payments............      29,046,000        31,795,664       31,795,664       +2,749,664   ...............
Beneficiary services................          37,412            45,728           45,728           +8,316   ...............
Research and demonstration..........          37,000            30,000           38,000           +1,000           +8,000
Administration......................       2,627,000         2,825,000        2,825,000         +198,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, SSI program level...      31,747,412        34,696,392       34,704,392       +2,956,980           +8,000
 
          Less funds advanced in         -10,470,000       -10,790,000      -10,790,000         -320,000   ...............
           prior year...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, regular SSI           21,277,412        23,906,392       23,914,392       +2,636,980           +8,000
           current year.............
 
              Additional CDR                 200,000   ................  ...............        -200,000   ...............
               funding\1\...........
              User Fee Activities...         100,000           111,000          111,000          +11,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Total, SSI, current       21,577,412        24,017,392       24,025,392       +2,447,980           +8,000
                 request............
 
                New advance, 1st          10,790,000        11,080,000       11,080,000         +290,000   ...............
                 quarter, fiscal
                 year 2004..........
 
    LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE
              EXPENSES
 
OASDI Trust Funds...................       3,219,700         3,775,200        3,775,200         +555,500   ...............
HI/SMI Trust Funds..................       1,194,000         1,223,000        1,223,000          +29,000   ...............

[[Page 921]]

 
Social Security Advisory Board......           1,800             1,800            1,800   ...............  ...............
SSI.................................       2,627,000         2,825,000        2,825,000         +198,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, regular LAE.........       7,042,500         7,825,000        7,825,000         +782,500   ...............
 
User Fee Activities (SSI)...........         100,000           111,000          111,000          +11,000   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      TOTAL, REGULAR LAE............       7,142,500         7,936,000        7,936,000         +793,500   ...............
 
        Additional CDR funding:\1\
            OASDI...................         233,000   ................  ...............        -233,000   ...............
            SSI.....................         200,000   ................  ...............        -200,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal, CDR funding.         433,000   ................  ...............        -433,000   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      TOTAL, LAE....................       7,575,500         7,936,000        7,936,000         +360,500   ...............
 
     OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
 
Federal Funds.......................          19,000            21,000           21,000           +2,000   ...............
Trust Funds.........................          56,000            62,000           62,000           +6,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Inspector          75,000            83,000           83,000           +8,000   ...............
       General......................
 
Adjustment: Trust fund transfers          -2,927,000        -2,936,000       -2,936,000           -9,000   ...............
 from general revenues..............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Social Security              37,966,152        40,597,969       40,605,969       +2,639,817           +8,000
       Administration...............
          Federal funds.............      33,261,652        35,535,969       35,543,969       +2,282,317           +8,000
              Current year..........     (22,363,652)      (24,358,969)     (24,366,969)     (+2,003,317)         (+8,000)
              New advances, 1st          (10,898,000)      (11,177,000)     (11,177,000)       (+279,000)  ...............
               quarter..............
          Trust funds...............       4,704,500         5,062,000        5,062,000         +357,500   ...............
 
UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE....          15,104            16,200           16,200           +1,096   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, Title IV, Related            39,557,821        41,853,670       42,234,414       +2,676,593         +380,744
       Agencies.....................
          Federal Funds.............      34,741,110        36,679,400       37,060,144       +2,319,034         +380,744
              Current Year..........     (23,463,110)      (25,502,400)     (25,488,144)     (+2,025,034)        (-14,256)
              Fiscal year 2004......     (10,898,000)      (11,177,000)     (11,177,000)       (+279,000)  ...............
              Fiscal year 2005......        (380,000)  ................        (395,000)        (+15,000)       (+395,000)
          Trust Funds...............       4,816,711         5,174,270        5,174,270         +357,559   ...............
 
               SUMMARY
Federal Funds.......................     401,048,959       414,226,563      418,573,291      +17,524,332       +4,346,728
 
    Current year....................    (321,440,721)     (329,468,276)    (331,176,004)     (+9,735,283)     (+1,707,728)
    2004 advance....................     (79,228,238)      (84,758,287)     (87,002,287)     (+7,774,049)     (+2,244,000)
    2005 advance....................        (380,000)  ................        (395,000)        (+15,000)       (+395,000)
Trust Funds.........................      11,198,174        11,550,602       11,559,712         +361,538           +9,110
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand Total...................     412,247,133       425,777,165      430,133,003      +17,885,870       +4,355,838
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Two year availability.
\2\Requested in the Public Health and Human Services Emergency Fund.
\3\Includes Mine Safety and Health.
\4\Funded in VA/HUD Bill.
\5\Superfund dollars are appropriated in the VA/HUD Bill.
\6\Funding transferred from Office of the Secretary and CDC to the PHSSEF.
\7\Appropriations for Americorps are provided in the VA-HUD bill.
\8\Current Funded.
\9\Fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003 includes both Interior and LHHS portions.

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

                LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

   Mr. Bennett, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for the legislative branch for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other 
     purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the 
     bill do pass.


            Amount of new budget (obligational) authority\1\

Amount of bill as reported to Senate.....................$2,342,634,000
Amount of 2003 budget estimate............................2,408,616,000
Legislative branch appropriations, 2002...................2,276,910,000
Amount of bill below budget estimate, 2003..................-65,982,000
Amount of bill above legislative branch appropriations, 2002+65,724,000

\1\Excludes House items.

                     GENERAL STATEMENT AND SUMMARY

       The Committee recommends new budget (obligational 
     authority) of $2,342,634,000 for the legislative branch, for 
     fiscal year 2003. This total is $65,982,000 below the budget 
     request and $65,724,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. The 
     bill excludes House items pursuant to the normal protocol.
       Highlights of the bill include $203,775,000 for the U.S. 
     Capitol Police, an increase of $30,485,000 over the fiscal 
     year 2002 level, to enhance the security of the U.S. Capitol 
     complex; $335,185,000 for the Architect of the Capitol to 
     maintain, improve, and construct buildings and facilities of 
     the Congress; and $499,253,000 for the Library of Congress. 
     Increases over the fiscal year 2002 level are aimed 
     principally at security upgrades.
       The Committee expects all agencies to notify the Committee 
     of any significant departures from budget plans presented to 
     the Committee in any agency's budget justifications. In 
     particular, agencies funded through this bill are required to 
     notify the Committee prior to each reprogramming of funds in 
     excess of the lesser of 10 percent or $500,000 between 
     programs, projects or activities, or in excess of $500,000 
     between object classifications (except for shifts within the 
     pay categories, object class 11, 12, and 13 or as further 
     specified in each agency's respective section). This includes 
     cumulative reprogrammings that together total at least 
     $500,000 from or to a particular program, activity, or object 
     classification. The Committee desires to be notified of 
     reprogramming actions which involve less than the above-
     mentioned amounts if such actions would have the effect of 
     changing an agency's funding requirements in future years or 
     if programs or projects specifically cited in the Committee's 
     reports are affected.
       The Committee also expects all agencies to submit operating 
     plans for the Committee's approval within 30 days of the 
     bill's enactment.

     LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AGENCIES' BUDGET AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION

       The Committee's review of the legislative branch agencies' 
     budget submissions, including the presentation of Full Time 
     Equivalent

[[Page 922]]

     (FTE) estimates; operating plans; and related materials 
     identified a number of differences in the approaches and 
     methodologies used by each agency. The Committee believes 
     that there should be greater consistency and transparency in 
     the assumptions, techniques, and methods used by legislative 
     branch agencies in preparing and presenting their budget, 
     financial reports and other FTE and financial management 
     information for the Committee. Also, the presentation of 
     budget estimates broken out by Title I and Title II will no 
     longer be necessary in the fiscal year 2004 budget 
     submission. Therefore, the Committee directs the Legislative 
     Branch Financial Managers Council (LBFMC) in consultation 
     with financial management officials in the legislative branch 
     agencies, to propose guidelines on the form and content for 
     preparing agency budget, FTE, and financial information in a 
     more consistent, transparent, and useful manner. The proposed 
     guidelines should be based on prevailing best practices and 
     should better integrate budget formulation and execution, 
     financial reporting, and performance management information. 
     At a minimum, the LBFMC should develop and recommend 
     guidelines on the form and content for the (1) annual budget 
     submission without distinction by Title, (2) consistent 
     presentation of FTE estimates, (3) budget markup material, 
     and (4) annual operating plan. The Committee directs the 
     agencies to focus greater attention, management, and review 
     to the allocation, costing, and monitoring of on-board 
     positions in order to better utilize FTE ceilings. The 
     Committee expect to see improvements in the execution of FTE 
     ceilings during fiscal year 2003, and better formulation of 
     payroll cost in fiscal year 2004 budget requests.

               TITLE I--LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS

                                 SENATE

      Payment to Widows and Heirs of Deceased Members of Congress

       The Committee has included $150,000 for a payment to the 
     heirs of the late Senator Paul David Wellstone.

                           Expense Allowances

Appropriations, 2002............................................$62,000
Budget estimate, 2003............................................62,000
Committee recommendation........................................120,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $120,000 for 
     the expense allowances of the Vice President, the President 
     pro tempore of the Senate, the majority and minority leaders, 
     the majority and minority whips, the chairmen of the majority 
     and minority conference committees, and the chairmen of the 
     majority and minority policy committees. The expense 
     allowances have not been increased in some time. In most 
     cases, the proposed increase is substantially less than the 
     increase in the cost of living since the establishment of the 
     allowance. The recommended allowances are as follows:
       For the expense allowance of the Vice President, the 
     Committee recommends an amount of $20,000. An allowance of 
     $10,000 was first provided by Public Law 81-71, effective 
     January 20, 1949.
       For the expense allowance of the President pro tempore, the 
     Committee recommends an amount of $20,000. An allowance of 
     $10,000 was first provided by the Second Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 1978 (Public Law 95-355), effective 
     October 1, 1977.
       For the expense allowance of the majority and minority 
     leaders, the Committee recommends $20,000 for each leader, 
     for a total of $40,000. An allowance of $10,000 was first 
     provided by Public Law 84-242, effective July 1, 1955.
       For the expense allowance of the majority and minority 
     whips, the Committee recommends $10,000 for each whip, for a 
     total of $20,000. An allowance of $10,000 was first provided 
     by the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1977, Public Law 95-
     26, effective April 1, 1977.
       For the expense allowance for the chairmen of the majority 
     and minority conference committees, the Committee recommends 
     $5,000 for each chairman, for a total of $10,000. An 
     allowance was first provided in the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1985, Public Law 99-88, 
     effective August 15, 1985.
       For the expense allowance for the chairmen of the majority 
     and minority policy committees, the Committee recommends 
     $5,000 for each chairman, for a total of $10,000.
       Expenditures from all the foregoing allowances are made 
     upon certification from the individuals for whom the 
     allowances are authorized, and are reported semiannually in 
     the report of the Secretary of the Senate.

    Representation Allowances for the Majority and Minority Leaders

Appropriations, 2002............................................$30,000
Budget estimate, 2003............................................30,000
Committee recommendation.........................................30,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,000 for 
     representation allowances for the majority and minority 
     leaders.
       This allowance was established in the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1985 (Public Law 99-88). 
     The funds were authorized to be used by the majority and 
     minority leaders solely for the discharge of their 
     appropriate responsibilities in connection with official 
     visits to the United States by members of foreign legislative 
     bodies and representatives of foreign governments and 
     intergovernmental agencies. The recommended amount is to be 
     divided equally between the two leaders.
       Expenditures from this allowance are made upon 
     certification of the leaders and are reported in the 
     semiannual report of the Secretary of the Senate.

                    Salaries, Officers and Employees

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$104,039,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................119,671,000
Committee recommendation....................................116,891,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $116,891,000 
     for the subaccounts funded under the overall account for the 
     salaries of officers and employees of the Senate.
       It should be noted that except for a handful of positions 
     in the Offices of the Secretary and the Sergeant at Arms that 
     are required by statute, specific staffing levels are not 
     stipulated either by the budget request or by the Committee's 
     recommendation. Rather, lump-sum allowances are provided to 
     fund staffing levels each office finds necessary and 
     appropriate for the performance of its duties. Estimated 
     staffing levels for offices funded under this appropriation 
     for fiscal year 2003 are 1,339 positions.

                    SALARIES, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
         [Estimated staffing levels--fiscal years 2002 and 2003]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2003
                                                     request      2002
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Vice President......................         45         45
Office of the President pro tempore...............         11         11
Office of the majority and minority leaders.......         47         47
Offices of the majority and minority whips........         16         16
Conference committees.............................         48         48
Offices of the secretaries of the conference of            12         12
 the majority and the conference of the minority..
Policy committees.................................         57         55
Office of the Chaplain............................          4          4
Office of the Secretary...........................        252        252
Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper.....        829        779
Offices of the secretaries for the majority and            18         18
 minority.........................................
                                                   ---------------------
      Totals......................................      1,339      1,287
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Any change from the allocation of funds in the subaccounts 
     within this appropriation is subject to the approval of the 
     Committee.
       The total amount appropriated is allocated to the various 
     offices of the Senate as displayed under the headings for the 
     offices that follow.


                      office of the vice president

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,867,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,949,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,949,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,949,000 to 
     fund the salaries of the administrative and clerical staff of 
     the Office of the Vice President in connection with his 
     duties as the President of the Senate.


                  office of the president pro tempore

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$473,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................518,000
Committee recommendation........................................518,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $518,000 for 
     the Office of the President pro tempore.


              offices of the majority and minority leaders

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,868,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,094,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,094,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,094,000 for 
     the offices of the majority and minority leaders.
       The administrative and clerical staffs funded by this 
     appropriation were authorized under the provisions of Public 
     Law 91-145, effective November 1, 1969. The amount 
     recommended is to be equally divided, providing $1,547,000 
     for each office.


               offices of the majority and minority whips

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,912,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,042,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,042,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,042,000 for 
     the offices of the majority and minority whips. It is to be 
     equally divided, providing $1,021,000 for each office.
       The authority for the administrative and clerical staff 
     funded by this appropriation was created by Public Law 84-
     242, effective July 1, 1955.


                      committee on appropriations

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,825,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................11,266,000
Committee recommendation.....................................11,266,000

       For the salaries of the Committee on Appropriations, the 
     Committee recommends an appropriation of $11,266,000, an 
     increase of $441,000 over the enacted level.

[[Page 923]]




                         conference committees

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,610,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,610,000

       For the administrative and clerical staffs of the majority 
     and minority conference committees, the Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $2,610,000. The appropriation provides 
     $1,305,000 in salaries for the staff of each conference 
     committee.
       The chairman of each conference committee may transfer to 
     or from amounts provided for salaries of each conference to 
     the account for conference committee expenses within the 
     ``Miscellaneous items'' appropriation.


 offices of the secretaries of the conference of the majority and the 
                       conference of the minority

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$618,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................648,000
Committee recommendation........................................648,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $648,000 for 
     the majority and minority conference secretaries.
       These offices were created by section 6 of Senate 
     Resolution 17, agreed to January 10, 1977, and two positions 
     in each office were first funded in the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 1977 (Public Law 95-26).
       Section 102 of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1979 
     (Public Law 96-38), abolished the specific positions and 
     established a lump-sum allowance for the employment of staff, 
     effective October 1, 1979. The amount recommended is to be 
     divided equally between the majority secretary and the 
     minority secretary.


                           POLICY COMMITTEES

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,550,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,724,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,724,000

       For the salaries of the administrative and clerical staffs 
     of the majority and minority policy committees, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $2,724,000, or $1,362,000 for 
     each committee.
       The chairman of each policy Committee may transfer to or 
     from amounts provided for salaries of each policy Committee 
     to the account for policy Committee expenses within the 
     ``Miscellaneous items'' appropriation.


                         office of the chaplain

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$301,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................315,000
Committee recommendation........................................315,000

       For the Office of the Chaplain, the Committee recommends an 
     appropriation of $315,000. The amount recommended would 
     provide the salaries for the Chaplain of the Senate and 
     support staff to assist the Chaplain with his pastoral 
     duties. The Fiscal Year 1988 Legislative Branch 
     Appropriations Act, Public Law 100-202, established the rate 
     of pay for the Chaplain at Executive Level IV, currently 
     $130,000.


                        office of the secretary

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,424,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................17,079,000
Committee recommendation.....................................17,079,000

       The Committee recommends $17,079,000 for salaries of the 
     Office of the Secretary. Fiscal year 2003 staffing levels are 
     estimated at 252 positions.
       This appropriation provides funds for four statutory 
     positions (Secretary of the Senate, Assistant Secretary of 
     the Senate, Financial Clerk of the Senate, and 
     Parliamentarian of the Senate) and lump-sum allowances for 
     the employment and adjustment of salaries of personnel in the 
     Office of the Secretary of the Senate, as authorized by 
     Public Law 97-51, effective October 1, 1981 (2 U.S.C. 61a-
     11).
       The following departmental guidelines for fiscal year 2003 
     have been submitted by the Secretary to the Committee. The 
     departmental budgets grouped in the apportionment schedule 
     under executive offices include: the Executive Office of the 
     Secretary of the Senate, Page school, Senate Security and 
     Information Systems. The departmental budgets grouped in the 
     apportionment schedule under administrative services include: 
     captioning services, conservation and preservation, curator, 
     disbursing office, gift shop, historical office, human 
     resources, interparliamentary services, library, printing and 
     document services, public records, and the stationery room. 
     The departmental budgets grouped in the apportionment 
     schedule under legislative and legal services include: the 
     bill clerk, chief counsel for employment, daily digest, 
     enrolling clerk, journal clerk, legislative clerk, Official 
     Reporters of Debate, and Parliamentarian.
       The Committee is aware that the Secretary of the Senate 
     intends to implement a pilot program within available funds, 
     to install real time closed captioning of Senate Committee 
     hearings for deaf and hard of hearing individuals. The 
     current lack of these services inhibits the opportunity for 
     all Senate staff and constituents to participate fully in 
     Committee proceedings. The Committee supports these efforts 
     and encourages implementation of this pilot program as soon 
     as possible.

                  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE SENATE
         [Estimated staffing levels--fiscal years 2002 and 2003]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            2003
                                           request    2002    Difference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive offices.......................        40        40  ..........
Administrative services.................       157       167        -10
Legislative and legal services..........        55        45        +10
                                         -------------------------------
      Totals............................       252       252  ..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------

             office of the sergeant at arms and doorkeeper

Appropriations, 2002........................................$39,082,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................45,941,000
Committee recommendation.....................................43,161,000

       This appropriation provides funds for the salaries of three 
     statutory positions (Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper, Deputy 
     Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper, and Administrative Assistant 
     to the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper) and lump-sum 
     allowances for employment and adjustments of salaries of 
     personnel in the Office of the Sergeant at Arms and 
     Doorkeeper of the Senate, as authorized by Public Law 97-51, 
     effective October 1, 1981 (2 U.S.C. 61f-7).
       The Committee recommends a total of $43,161,000 for fiscal 
     year 2003. This is an increase of $4,079,000 over the fiscal 
     year 2002 level. The amount recommended reflects the 
     increased costs of the equipment, services, and support 
     required to ensure the security of the physical, information, 
     and communication assets of the U.S. Senate. Specifically, 
     the increase over the enacted level is attributable to 
     funding a cost-of-living adjustment, merit funding, and 
     additional positions, most of which are directed at enhancing 
     security for the Senate community. The reduction from the 
     original budget request reflects the Sergeant at Arms' 
     efforts to develop a more cost-efficient method of processing 
     mail and packages and deferred hiring of new staff.
       The offices and personnel covered by this appropriation are 
     shown in the following table.

  STAFFING--OFFICE OF THE SERGEANT AT ARMS AND DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2003 Committee
                                         2002 level      recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations division:
    Capitol Division................       $11,719,000       $13,123,000
        Positions...................               284               306
    Central operations..............        $7,855,000        $8,146,000
        Positions...................               181               183
    Technology Development Services.        $7,599,000        $9,031,000
        Positions...................               108               128
    IT Support Services.............        $4,987,000        $5,506,000
        Positions...................                93                98
    Office Support Division.........        $1,693,000        $1,871,000
        Positions...................                28                28
    Staff Offices Division..........        $4,819,000        $5,036,000
        Positions...................                80                81
    SMI Project.....................          $410,000          $448,000
        Positions...................                 5                 5
                                     -----------------------------------
          Total.....................       $39,082,000       $43,161,000
              Positions.............               779               829
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee has no objection to the Sergeant at Arms 
     moving staff positions between divisions without a formal 
     reprogramming request but expects to be notified of such 
     changes.


        offices of the secretaries for the majority and minority

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,350,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,410,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,410,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,410,000 for 
     the offices of the secretaries for the majority and minority. 
     The appropriation is to be equally divided, providing 
     $705,000 for each office.


                          agency contributions

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,219,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................30,075,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,075,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,075,000 
     for agency contributions for employees paid under the 
     appropriation, ``Salaries, officers and employees,'' and 
     employees paid under the appropriation ``Expenses of the 
     United States Senate Caucus on International Narcotics 
     Control'' and employees paid under the appropriation ``Joint 
     Economic Committee.''
       Agency contributions include the Senate's contributions as 
     an employer to the civil service retirement system, the 
     Federal Employees' Retirement System, the thrift savings 
     plan, Federal employee group life insurance, Federal employee 
     health insurance programs, and FICA. The Senate is required 
     by law to make these payments, and the total required is 
     dependent upon the number of Senate employees, their 
     compensation levels, the benefit programs in which they are 
     enrolled, and the extent of the benefits elected.

            Office of the Legislative Counsel of the Senate

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,306,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,581,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,581,000

       For the Office of the Legislative Counsel of the Senate, 
     the Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,581,000. The 
     fiscal year 2003 staffing level is estimated to be 35 
     positions. The amount provided pays for the salaries, 
     expenses, and agency contributions of the office.

[[Page 924]]



                     Office of Senate Legal Counsel

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,109,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,176,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,176,000

       The Office of Senate Legal Counsel was established pursuant 
     to section 701 of Public Law 95-521. The Committee recommends 
     an appropriation of $1,176,000 for the Office. The amount 
     provided pays for the salaries, expenses, and agency 
     contributions of the Office.

Expense Allowances of the Secretary of the Senate, Sergeant at Arms and 
Doorkeeper of the Senate, and Secretaries for the Majority and Minority 
                             of the Senate

Appropriations, 2002............................................$12,000
Budget estimate, 2003............................................12,000
Committee recommendation.........................................12,000

       Section 119 of Public Law 97-51 authorized an expense 
     allowance for the Secretary of the Senate, the Sergeant at 
     Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate, the Secretary for the 
     Majority, and the Secretary for the Minority. Since fiscal 
     year 1983, the amount has been provided through a direct 
     appropriation. The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $12,000, providing an allowance of $3,000 for each office.

                   Contingent Expenses of the Senate


                      inquiries and investigations

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$107,264,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................\1\109,450,000
Committee recommendation....................................109,450,000

\1\Reflects budget amendment $2,067,000.

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $109,450,000 
     for inquiries and investigations by all Senate standing, 
     special, and select committees, consistent with S. Res. 54, 
     authorizing expenditures by the Committees of the Senate for 
     fiscal year 2003.
       This appropriation funds the liquidation of obligations 
     incurred by committees under the authorization provided in 
     Committee funding resolutions.


         U.S. senate caucus on international narcotics control

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$520,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................520,000
Committee recommendation........................................520,000

       The Committee recommends $520,000 for the expenses of the 
     U.S. Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control. 
     Established in 1985 by ``The Foreign Relations Authorization 
     Act'', the Caucus was created to monitor and promote 
     international compliance with narcotics control treaties and 
     monitor and encourage U.S. Government and private programs 
     seeking to expand international cooperation against drug 
     abuse. The Caucus is composed of seven Senators and five 
     members from the public sector with a chairman from the 
     majority party and a co-chairman from the minority party. It 
     was the intent of the original conferees that the caucus 
     operate in the manner of the Helsinki Commission.


                        secretary of the senate

Appropriations, 2002......................................\1\$8,821,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,077,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,077,000

\1\Includes $250,000 in fiscal year 2002 supplemental appropriations.

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,077,000 for 
     expenses of the Office of the Secretary. The Committee has 
     included $5,000,000 for a multi-year program to upgrade and 
     expand the Financial Management Information System. These 
     funds are made available until September 30, 2007.
       The table printed below sets forth the apportionment of 
     funds under this appropriation, followed by a brief 
     description of the line items. Any deviation of more than 10 
     percent cumulatively from the stated levels for each item 
     will require the customary prior approval of the Committee.

                                        EXPENSES--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Amount
                                                                     available        Budget
                              Item                                  fiscal year      estimate       Difference
                                                                   2002, Public     fiscal year
                                                                    Law 107-68         2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive office................................................        $452,700        $397,800        -$54,900
Administrative services.........................................         849,185       1,422,900        +573,715
Legislative and legal services..................................         269,115         256,300         -12,815
Special projects................................................       7,000,000       5,000,000      -2,000,000
Emergency Response Fund.........................................         250,000  ..............        -250,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Totals......................................................       8,821,000       7,077,000      -1,744,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Typical expenditures of the Secretary of the Senate 
     include:
       Consultants.--Funding is provided for not to exceed two 
     individual consultants as authorized by section 110 of Public 
     Law 95-94, August 5, 1977, which amends section 101 of Public 
     Law 95-26, May 4, 1977. Consultants employed under this 
     authority shall not be paid in excess of the per diem 
     equivalent of the highest gross rate of annual compensation 
     which may be paid to employees of a standing committee of the 
     Senate.
       Legal reference volumes and dictionaries.--Funding is 
     provided to furnish U.S. Senators with volumes of the U.S. 
     Code Annotated or U.S. Code service, pocket parts and 
     supplements, as authorized by Public Law 92-51, July 9, 1971.
       The Disbursing Office is responsible for providing the U.S. 
     Code Annotated or the U.S. Code Service to Senators when they 
     assume office and upon receipt of a written request of a 
     Senator. In addition, dictionary and dictionary stands are 
     also furnished to Senators from funds provided for in this 
     account.
       Contractual legal and administrative services and 
     miscellaneous expenses.--Funding is provided for various 
     contractual, administrative, and miscellaneous expenses 
     incurred by the Office of the Secretary. The Office of the 
     Secretary of the Senate has contractual authority under 
     Public Law 92-342, for the Federal Election Campaign Act and 
     has utilized this authority to employ professional legal 
     services in the past. In addition, the Office of the 
     Secretary has incurred various types of legal and other 
     expenses which have been authorized by the Senate. 
     Administrative services and miscellaneous expenses are 
     housekeeping expenses of the Office of the Secretary.
       Travel and registration fees.--Funding is provided for 
     travel expenses and registration fees incurred by the 
     Secretary of the Senate and the employees of the Office of 
     the Secretary. This line item excludes funding for travel 
     expenses for the Federal Election Campaign Act under the 
     Office of Public Records, which is provided separately under 
     the authority of Public Law 93-342.
       The authority for the travel portion of this account was 
     provided for by section 101 of Public Law 94-59, July 25, 
     1975. The current limitation for travel expenses was 
     increased to $10,000 (Section 102 of Public Law 97-12, June 
     5, 1981). Section 1 of Public Law 98-367, July 17, 1984, 
     removed the not-to-exceed limitation on travel expenses for 
     the Secretary of the Senate, during any fiscal year.
       Orientation and training.--Funding is provided for expenses 
     incurred by the Secretary of the Senate to conduct 
     orientation seminars or similar meetings for Senators, Senate 
     officials, or members of staffs of Senators or Senate 
     officials, not to exceed $10,000 each fiscal year, under the 
     authority of 2 U.S.C. 69a.
       The Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the 
     Senate is also authorized under these provisions to conduct 
     seminars or similar meetings in the same manner and to the 
     same extent as the Office of the Secretary of the Senate.
       Newspapers.--Funding is provided to furnish newspapers and 
     magazines for official purposes to the Marble Room, 
     leadership offices, Republican and Democratic Cloakrooms, 
     Senate officers, and certain other offices.
       Senate service awards.--Funding is provided for the 
     issuance of service pins or emblems as authorized by Senate 
     Resolution 21, September 10, 1965. Senate Resolution 21 
     authorizes the Secretary of the Senate, under the direction 
     of the Committee on Rules and Administration and in 
     accordance with regulation promulgated by the Committee, to 
     procure such pins or emblems and award them to Members, 
     officers, and employees of the Senate who are entitled.
       Postage.--This account also provides funding for postage 
     for the Office of the Secretary of the Senate for special 
     delivery, registered mail, and additional postage not covered 
     under the frank.
       Education of Senate pages.--Funding is provided for the 
     education of Senate pages. Senate Resolution 184, July 29, 
     1983, authorized the Secretary of the Senate to enter into a 
     contract, agreement, or other arrangement with the board of 
     education of the District of Columbia, or to provide such 
     educational services and items in such other manner as he may 
     deem appropriate. Public Law 98-125, October 13, 1983, 
     amended Public Law 98-51, July 14, 1983, striking out the 
     heading and paragraph ``Education of Pages'' under the 
     heading ``Joint Items'', and redesignated the funds provided 
     in Public Law 98-51 for the education of pages between the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate. Each House is to 
     provide for the education of its own pages.
       Stationery.--Funding is provided for stationery supplies 
     for the Office of the Secretary of the Senate. The funds 
     provided have been allocated to the various departments of 
     the Office of the Secretary.
       Senate Commission on Art.--Funding is provided for the 
     Senate Commission on Art, authorized by Public Law 100-696, 
     November 18, 1988, to acquire any work of art, historical 
     object, documents or material relating to historical matters, 
     or exhibits for placement or exhibition within the Senate 
     wing of the Capitol, any Senate office building, or in rooms, 
     spaces, or corridors thereof, and to publish a Senate 
     historical objects inventory and calendar of exhibits on 
     display within the Senate wing of the Capitol and Senate 
     office buildings.
       The Senate Commission on Art was formerly the Commission on 
     Arts and Antiquities, which was authorized by Senate 
     Resolution 382, October 1, 1968, as amended by Senate 
     Resolution 95, April 1, 1977, and Senate Resolution 400, 
     March 23, 1988.
       Representation expenses.--Funding is provided (not to 
     exceed $50,000) to the Secretary of the Senate to coordinate 
     and carry out responsibilities in connection with foreign 
     parliamentary groups or other foreign officials

[[Page 925]]

     visiting the United States. Authorized by section 2 of Public 
     Law 101-163, November 21, 1989.
       Office of Conservation and Preservation.--Funding is 
     provided for the Office of Conservation and Preservation to 
     develop and coordinate programs directly related to the 
     conservation and protection of Senate records and materials 
     for which the Secretary of the Senate has statutory 
     authority.
       Book preservation.--Funding is provided for the Office of 
     Conservation and Preservation to use outside sources for the 
     preservation and protection of the Senate book collection, 
     including historically valuable documents under the care of 
     the Secretary of the Senate.
       Office of Public Records.--Funding is provided for expenses 
     of the Office of Public Records. This office has evolved 
     through various pieces of legislation and various 
     responsibilities authorized by the Federal Election Campaign 
     Act, as amended, the Ethics in Government Act, as amended, 
     and the Lobbying Disclosure Act, as amended. Public Law 92-
     342, July 10, 1972, authorizes the Secretary of the Senate to 
     procure technical support services, consultants, use of 
     detailed employees and travel expenses in carrying out his 
     duties under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. The 
     Office of Public Records is mentioned for the first time in 
     Public Law 93-145, November 1, 1973, which authorizes the 
     Secretary of the Senate to appoint and fix the compensation 
     of a superintendent and other position for the Office of 
     Public Records. In addition, under the authority of Public 
     Law 95-521, October 26, 1978 (Ethics in Government Act) 
     reports filed under section 101 shall be available for public 
     inspection and a copy of the report shall be provided to any 
     person upon request. Any person requesting a copy of a report 
     may be require to pay a reasonable fee to cover the cost of 
     reproduction. Any moneys received by the Secretary shall be 
     deposited into the Office of Public Records Revolving Fund 
     under the authority of Public Law 101-163, November 21, 1989. 
     The office also performs functions under the Senate Select 
     Committee on Ethics, such as registration of mass mailings; 
     and under the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
       Disbursing Office.--Funding is provided for expenses 
     incurred in the operation of the disbursing office. Typical 
     expenses for this office include online access charges for 
     Department of Treasury systems, notary bonds, seals and 
     supplies, necessary supplies in conjunction with the various 
     machinery maintained in the office, which are not available 
     in the stationery room, and necessary insurance policies 
     required for the protection of the disbursing officer of the 
     Senate for moneys assigned to his accountability.
       Office of Captioning Services.--Funding is provided for the 
     closed captioning of the televised Senate floor proceedings 
     for the hearing impaired. Closed captioning was first 
     authorized under the authority of Public Law 101-163, 
     November 21, 1989.
       Senate Chief Counsel for Employment.--Funding is provided 
     for the Office of the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment. 
     This office is a nonpartisan office formed in May 1993 at the 
     direction of the joint leadership and is charged with 
     providing legal advice and representation of Senate offices 
     in all areas of employment law.


             sergeant at arms and doorkeeper of the senate

Appropriations, 2002........................................$95,904,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................117,133,000
Committee recommendation....................................114,423,000

       The Committee recommends the appropriation of $114,423,000 
     for expenses of the Sergeant at Arms. The increase of 
     $18,519,000 over the enacted level is attributable in large 
     part to security-related needs such as new mail and package 
     handling costs and the new Office of Security and Emergency 
     Preparedness.
       The Sergeant at Arms budget structure reflects six major 
     divisions: Capitol Division, Central Operations Division, 
     Technology Development Services Division, IT Support Services 
     Division, Office Support Division, and the Staff Offices 
     Division. The Capitol Division centralizes all functions 
     related to the maintenance and administration of the Senate 
     wing of the U.S. Capitol Building, and provides mailing, 
     photographic studio, and recording studio services. The 
     Central Operations Division provides printing, mailing and 
     parking services to the Senate. The Technology Development 
     Services Division supports enterprise information technology 
     systems, applications development, Internet/Intranet 
     services, information security, and network engineering. The 
     IT Support Services Division provides desktop computer 
     support, mail system acquisition, maintenance and support, 
     telecommunications, and Web and technology assessment 
     support. The Office Support Division includes desktop 
     computer acquisition and customer support. The Staff Offices 
     Division includes Financial Management, Human Resources, and 
     the Joint Office of Education and Training.
       The following table compares the component categories 
     within this account for fiscal years 2002 and 2003.

         EXPENSES--OFFICE OF THE SERGEANT AT ARMS AND DOORKEEPER
                        [In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2003 Committee
                                         2002 level      recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capitol Division....................            13,455            10,410
Central Operations Division.........             2,443             3,965
Technology Development Services                 17,565            22,330
 Division...........................
IT Support Services Division........            34,754            42,701
Office Support Division.............            24,688            28,686
Staff Offices Division..............             1,222             1,589
SMI Project.........................             1,777             4,742
                                     -----------------------------------
      Total.........................            95,904           114,423
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee requests that the Sergeant at Arms provide to 
     the Committee a spending plan prior to the beginning of 
     fiscal year 2003. Any deviation of more than 10 percent 
     cumulatively from the level for each item in the spending 
     plan will require the customary approval of the Committee.


                          miscellaneous items

Appropriations, 2002........................................$14,274,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................\1\19,409,000
Committee recommendation.....................................18,513,000

\1\Reflects pending budget estimate of $1,000,000.

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,513,000 
     for miscellaneous items.
       Any deviation of more than 10 percent cumulatively from the 
     stated levels for each item will require the customary prior 
     approval of the Committee.
       The following table sets forth the apportionment of funds 
     under this appropriation:

                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 BUDGET--MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS APPORTIONMENT SCHEDULE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      AMOUNT
                                                                    AUTHORIZED       COMMITTEE
                              ITEM                                  FISCAL YEAR   RECOMMENDATION    DIFFERENCE
                                                                    2002 PUBLIC     FISCAL YEAR
                                                                    LAW 107-68         2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution and reorganization reserve...........................      $2,450,000      $2,500,000        +$50,000
Unallocated.....................................................       1,000,000       7,000,500      +6,000,500
Reserve for contingencies (miscellaneous items).................         600,000         600,000  ..............
Employees' compensation fund reimbursement (worker's                     715,000         744,000         +29,000
 compensation)..................................................
Mailing of Town Meeting Notices (Public Law 107-68, dated Nov.         3,000,000         500,000      -2,500,000
 12, 2001)......................................................
Jacob K. Javits Fellowship Program (S. Res. 193, dated Sept. 30,         250,000         350,000        +100,000
 1999, as amended) (expires Sept. 30, 2004).....................
John Heinz Fellowship Program (S. Res. 356, dated Oct. 7, 1992,           71,000          71,000  ..............
 S. Res. 238, dated July 1, 1994, and S. Res. 180 dated Sept.
 30, 1999 (expires Sept. 30, 2004)).............................
Reception of foreign dignitaries (S. Res. 247, dated Feb. 7,              30,000          30,000  ..............
 1962, as amended by S. Res. 370, dated Oct. 10, 2000)..........
Foreign travel--Members and employees (S. Res. 179, dated May            125,000         125,000  ..............
 25, 1977)......................................................
Federal employees compensation account (Public Law 96-499, dated       1,750,000       1,750,000  ..............
 Dec. 5, 1980 (Unemployment Compensation))......................
Conferences for the Majority and Minority (Public Laws: 97-51,           200,000         200,000  ..............
 dated Jan. 3, 1983, 101-250, dated Nov. 5, 1990, and 107-68,
 dated Nov. 12, 2001)...........................................
Policy Committees for the Majority and Minority (Public Law 104-         144,000         150,000          +6,000
 53, dated Nov. 19, 1995).......................................
Postage.........................................................           6,000        \1\6,000  ..............
Stationery......................................................          13,000       \2\16,500          +3,500
Consultants--including agency contributions (2 USC 61h-6 as            2,000,000       2,500,000        +500,000
 amended).......................................................
National Security Working Group (S. Res. 75, March 25, 1999              700,000         700,000  ..............
 (expires Dec. 31, 2002)).......................................
Committee on Appropriations (Public Law 105-275, dated Oct. 21,          950,000         950,000  ..............
 1998)..........................................................
Senate Child Care Center:
    Agency Contribution costs authorized by Public Laws 102-90,          250,000         300,000         +50,000
     dated Aug. 14, 1991 and 103-50, dated July 2, 1993.........
    Training classes, conferences, and travel expenses as                 20,000          20,000  ..............
     authorized by Public Law 104-197, dated Sept. 16, 1996.....
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
        Total...................................................      14,274,000      18,513,000      +4,239,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  \1\Postage apportionment (fiscal year 2003):
    President of the Senate....................................   $2,700
    Secretary for the Majority.................................    1,100
    Secretary for the Minority.................................    1,100
    Chaplain...................................................    1,100
                                                                --------
      Total....................................................    6,000

[[Page 926]]

 
  \2\Stationery apportionment (fiscal year 2003):
    President of the Senate....................................   $8,000
    Conference of the Majority.................................      300
    Conference of the Minority.................................      300
    Chaplain...................................................      700
    Senate Chamber.............................................    7,200
                                                                --------
      Total....................................................   16,500
 

       Resolution and reorganization reserve.--This line item is 
     used to cover the costs of Senate resolutions and public laws 
     that authorize expenditures from the contingent fund of the 
     Senate that do not have specific appropriations for such 
     purpose.
       Reserve for contingencies.--This is a Committee on Rules 
     and Administration line item which includes payment for 
     gratuities for family members of deceased Senate employees; 
     damage to automobiles in the Senate parking lots; 
     contractual, legal, and administrative services; and 
     miscellaneous expenses.
       Employees' compensation fund reimbursements (worker's 
     compensation).--Reimbursements made to the U.S. Department of 
     Labor for total benefits and other payments made on behalf of 
     Senate employees from the employees' compensation fund.
       Reception of foreign dignitaries.--The Committee on Foreign 
     Relations is authorized to expend not to exceed $30,000 each 
     fiscal year to receive foreign dignitaries under the 
     authority of Senate Resolution 247, agreed to February 7, 
     1962, as amended.
       Jacob K. Javits Fellowship Program.--This fellowship 
     program was first authorized by S. Res. 425, agreed to June 
     23, 1988, for a 5-year period ending June 22, 1993, and 
     reauthorized by S. Res. 193 through September 30, 2004. The 
     authorized funding level of $350,000 each fiscal year 
     provides for up to 10 fellows each fiscal year. The 
     appointing authority is the Secretary of the Senate.
       John Heinz Fellowship Program.--This fellowship program was 
     first authorized by S. Res. 356 and extended by S. Res. 238, 
     and S. Res. 180. It is authorized through September 30, 2004 
     and provides for up to 2 fellows each calendar year. The 
     appointing authority is the Secretary of the Senate.
       Foreign travel--Members and employees.--Senate Resolution 
     179, agreed to May 25, 1977, authorized payment from the 
     contingent fund of the Senate, of the domestic portion of 
     transportation costs and travel expenses incurred by Members 
     and employees of the Senate when engaged in authorized 
     foreign travel.
       Federal employees' compensation account (unemployment 
     compensation).--This line item provides for expenses incurred 
     for the Senate to reimburse the Federal employees' 
     compensation account, pursuant to Public Law 96-499, approved 
     December 5, 1980, for unemployment compensation payments made 
     to Senate employees.
       Conferences for the majority and minority.--The amount 
     recommended provides for the expenses of the majority and 
     minority conference committees.
       Policy committees for the majority and minority.--The 
     amount recommended provides for the expenses of the majority 
     and minority policy committees.
       Postage.--Provides for postage allowances for the President 
     of the Senate, Secretary of the Majority, Secretary of the 
     Minority, and Senate Chaplain.
       Stationery.--Provides funds for stationery and office 
     supplies for the President of the Senate, conference 
     committees of the Senate, Office of the Chaplain, and the 
     Senate Chamber.
       Consultants--including agency contributions.--Provides 
     authority for the appointment and payment of consultants to 
     the majority and minority leaders, president pro tempore, 
     president pro tempore emeritus, and the legislative counsel. 
     The following summarizes the current authority and 
     limitations:
       Majority leader: Eight consultants at not to exceed the 
     daily rate for maximum standing committee rate. All of the 
     consultants may be appointed at an annual rate of 
     compensation not to exceed the maximum annual rate for a 
     standing committee.
       Minority leader: Eight consultants at not to exceed the 
     daily rate for maximum standing committee rate. All of the 
     consultants may be appointed at an annual rate of 
     compensation not to exceed the maximum annual rate for a 
     standing committee.
       Legislative counsel (subject to President Pro Tempore 
     approval): Two consultants at not to exceed the daily rate 
     for maximum standing committee rate. All of the consultants 
     may be appointed at an annual rate of compensation not to 
     exceed the maximum annual rate for a standing committee.
       President Pro Tempore: Two consultants at not to exceed the 
     daily rate for maximum standing committee rate. The 
     consultants may be appointed at an annual rate of 
     compensation not to exceed the maximum annual rate for a 
     standing committee.
       President Pro Tempore Emeritus: One consultant at not to 
     exceed the daily rate for maximum standing committee rate. 
     The consultants may be appointed at an annual rate of 
     compensation not to exceed the maximum annual rate for a 
     standing committee.
       Senate National Security Working Group.--Provides funding 
     for the Senate National Security Working Group, under the 
     authority of Senate Resolution 75, agreed to March 25, 1999. 
     The Senate National Security Working Group was formerly the 
     Senate Arms Control Observer Group.
       Committee on Appropriations.--Pursuant to Public Law 105-
     275 provides funding for administrative expenses for the 
     Committee on Appropriations.
       Senate Employees' Child Care Center--agency 
     contributions.--Provides for the payment of agency 
     contribution costs as authorized by Public Law 102-90, 
     approved August 14, 1991, and Public Law 103-50, approved 
     July 2, 1993, for employees of the Senate Employees Child 
     Care Center.
       Senate Employees' Child Care Center--training classes and 
     conference costs.--Provides for the reimbursement of any 
     individual employed by the Senate Employees' Child Care 
     Center for the cost of training classes and conferences in 
     connection with the provision of child care services and for 
     travel, transportation, and subsistence expenses incurred in 
     connection with the training classes and conferences, as 
     authorized by Public Law 104-197, approved September 16, 
     1996.
       Student Loan Repayment Program.--The Committee notes that 
     in fiscal year 2003 the Senate will be entering the second 
     year of a pilot of the student loan repayment program and 
     will evaluate its future as part of the fiscal year 2004 
     budget cycle.


        senators' official personnel and office expense account

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$270,494,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................303,879,000
Committee recommendation....................................294,545,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation for fiscal year 
     2003 of $294,545,000 for the Senators' Official Personnel and 
     Office Expense Account.
       This account funds salaries and benefits of Senators' 
     staffs as well as the office expense allowance for Senators' 
     offices. These funds were formerly carried under several 
     accounts including: ``Administrative, clerical and 
     legislative assistance to Senators;'' ``Agency 
     contributions,'' under the heading ``Salaries, officers and 
     employees;'' and ``Official office expense allowances.'' 
     Those separate appropriations were merged into this single 
     account in Public Law 100-137.
       The Senators' official personnel and office expense 
     allowance [SOPOEA] is comprised of three components. Two of 
     these are for salaries of personnel in Senators' offices. The 
     allowance for administrative and clerical assistance is based 
     on the population of States, beginning with States with a 
     population of fewer than 5 million people to States with a 
     population of 28 million or more. The table illustrates the 
     allowances per population category and the States which fall 
     into those categories.
       The second component of the salaries allowance is for 
     legislative assistance to Senators, as authorized by Public 
     Law 95-94. This allowance provides funding for three 
     positions in each Senator's office at an annual rate of 
     $145,459 for a total of $436,377 per office, or $43,637,700 
     for all 100 Senators.
       The third component of the SOPOEA is for office expenses. 
     Each Senator's office is allocated an amount for office 
     expenses, as displayed in the following table, including the 
     Committee on Rules and Administration's reallocations of the 
     official mail. In addition, an amount of $200,000 is provided 
     to cover additional expenses that may be incurred in the 
     event of the death or resignation of a Senator, and to 
     provide for transitional expenses during election years 
     subject to regulations set by the Committee on Rules and 
     Administration with respect to official mail.
       It should be noted that the amounts provided for the 
     various components of the SOPOEA are entirely fungible. 
     Amounts provided for salaries may be used for expenses, and 
     vice versa, subject to regulations set by the Committee on 
     Rules and Administration with respect to official mail. It 
     should also be noted that the figures in the following table 
     are preliminary, and that official notification of member 
     budgets is issued by the Financial Clerk of the Senate after 
     final passage of this bill.
       The following table illustrates the several components of 
     the SOPOEA.

[[Page 927]]



                   SENATORS' OFFICIAL PERSONNEL AND OFFICE EXPENSE ALLOWANCE--FISCAL YEAR 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Admin. & cler.    Legislative
                                                      assist.         assist.        O.O.E.A.          Total
                      State                       allowance 10/1/ allowance 10/1/ allowance 10/1/ allowance 10/1/
                                                       2002            2002            2002            2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.........................................      $1,568,333        $436,377        $184,725      $2,189,435
Alaska..........................................       1,568,333         436,377         253,398       2,258,108
Arizona.........................................       1,623,297         436,377         202,086       2,261,760
Arkansas........................................       1,568,333         436,377         169,662       2,174,372
California......................................       2,669,720         436,377         468,377       3,574,474
Colorado........................................       1,568,333         436,377         190,990       2,195,700
Connecticut.....................................       1,568,333         436,377         161,586       2,166,296
Delaware........................................       1,568,333         436,377         128,525       2,133,235
Florida.........................................       2,227,928         436,377         309,366       2,973,671
Georgia.........................................       1,788,197         436,377         217,935       2,442,509
Hawaii..........................................       1,568,333         436,377         280,511       2,285,221
Idaho...........................................       1,568,333         436,377         165,280       2,169,990
Illinois........................................       2,008,061         436,377         267,158       2,711,596
Indiana.........................................       1,678,265         436,377         196,938       2,311,580
Iowa............................................       1,568,333         436,377         172,052       2,176,762
Kansas..........................................       1,568,333         436,377         169,620       2,174,330
Kentucky........................................       1,568,333         436,377         178,878       2,183,588
Louisiana.......................................       1,568,333         436,377         187,300       2,192,010
Maine...........................................       1,568,333         436,377         148,923       2,153,633
Maryland........................................       1,623,297         436,377         172,709       2,232,383
Massachusetts...................................       1,678,265         436,377         196,800       2,311,442
Michigan........................................       1,843,161         436,377         237,130       2,516,668
Minnesota.......................................       1,568,333         436,377         189,323       2,194,033
Mississippi.....................................       1,568,333         436,377         170,417       2,175,127
Missouri........................................       1,623,297         436,377         199,253       2,258,927
Montana.........................................       1,568,333         436,377         162,918       2,167,628
Nebraska........................................       1,568,333         436,377         161,413       2,166,123
Nevada..........................................       1,568,333         436,377         174,344       2,179,054
New Hampshire...................................       1,568,333         436,377         143,596       2,148,306
New Jersey......................................       1,788,197         436,377         207,679       2,432,253
New Mexico......................................       1,568,333         436,377         167,556       2,172,266
New York........................................       2,353,224         436,377         323,996       3,113,597
North Carolina..................................       1,788,197         436,377         217,694       2,442,268
North Dakota....................................       1,568,333         436,377         150,614       2,155,324
Ohio............................................       1,953,096         436,377         258,199       2,647,672
Oklahoma........................................       1,568,333         436,377         181,862       2,186,572
Oregon..........................................       1,568,333         436,377         190,883       2,195,593
Pennsylvania....................................       2,008,061         436,377         265,654       2,710,092
Rhode Island....................................       1,568,333         436,377         139,314       2,144,024
South Carolina..................................       1,568,333         436,377         174,653       2,179,363
South Dakota....................................       1,568,333         436,377         152,480       2,157,190
Tennessee.......................................       1,623,297         436,377         195,614       2,255,288
Texas...........................................       2,423,558         436,377         361,087       3,221,022
Utah............................................       1,568,333         436,377         170,610       2,175,320
Vermont.........................................       1,568,333         436,377         137,310       2,142,020
Virginia........................................       1,733,230         436,377         196,082       2,365,689
Washington......................................       1,623,297         436,377         215,816       2,275,490
West Virginia...................................       1,568,333         436,377         149,269       2,153,979
Wisconsin.......................................       1,623,297         436,377         193,061       2,252,735
Wyoming.........................................       1,568,333         436,377         153,825       2,158,535
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................      84,730,932      21,818,850      10,064,471     116,614,253
                                                            x  2            x  2            x  2            x  2
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand Total...............................     169,461,864      43,637,700      20,128,942     233,228,506
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       According to the most recent employment data compiled by 
     the Secretary of the Senate, as of April 30, 2002, there were 
     4,121 individuals employed in Senators' offices throughout 
     the United States and covered by this appropriation.


 U.S. Senators' staff as of September 30, 1993-2001 and April 30, 2002


        Year                                            Number of Staff
1993..............................................................4,262
1994..............................................................4,142
1995..............................................................4,112
1996..............................................................3,959
1997..............................................................4,044
1998..............................................................4,022
1999..............................................................4,039
2000..............................................................4,072
2001..............................................................3,964
2002..............................................................4,121

       In addition to providing funds for compensation of 
     employees within Senators' offices, this appropriation also 
     provides for agency contributions for those employees; that 
     is, the Senate's share, as an employer, of the various 
     employee benefit programs for which Senate employees are 
     eligible. These payments are mandatory, and fluctuate 
     according to the programs in which employees are enrolled, 
     the level of compensation, and the degree of participation. 
     Budget requests for this account prepared by the Financial 
     Clerk must be based on both experience and evaluation of 
     trends. The fiscal year 2003 request for this account 
     anticipates $68,739,000 in agency contribution costs.
       The amount recommended by the Committee for the SOPOEA is 
     less than would be required to cover all obligations that 
     could be incurred under the authorized allowances for all 
     Senators. The Committee is able to recommend an appropriation 
     of a lesser amount than potentially necessary because 
     Senators typically do not obligate funds up to the absolute 
     ceiling of their respective allowances. In fact, a number of 
     offices spend less than their total allowances. Evidence of 
     this can be found in the semiannual report of the Secretary 
     of the Senate. At the direction of this Committee in the 
     Fiscal Year 1996 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, the 
     Secretary's report now includes summary information on each 
     Senator's authorized allowance, expenditures made, and the 
     balance, if any.
       In the alternative, the Committee could recommend an 
     appropriation to fund fully the sum total of all the 
     authorized allowances. For fiscal year 2003, that would mean 
     an appropriation of $303,879,000, $9,334,000 more than that 
     recommended.
       The Committee expects that all offices are complying with 
     long-standing rules regarding the Senate employees transit 
     subsidy.


                       senate official mail costs

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$300,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................300,000
Committee recommendation........................................300,000

       For the official mail costs of the Senate, the Committee 
     recommends an appropriation of $300,000, which is the same as 
     the budget request.

                       Administrative Provisions

       Sec. 1. This provision amends the authorization for expense 
     allowances for leadership offices.
       Sec. 2. This provision amends the authorization for the 
     stationery allowance for the office of the president of the 
     Senate.
       Sec. 3. This provision increases by $50,000 the allowance 
     for administrative and clerical assistance.
       Sec. 4. This provision authorizes the Majority Policy 
     Committee, Minority Policy Committee, Conference of the 
     Majority, and Conference of the Minority to use the services 
     of personnel of government departments or agencies, with the 
     prior approval of such department or agency and the Committee 
     on Rules and Administration.
       Sec. 5. This provision authorizes a public safety exception 
     to the Government inscriptions requirement on mobile Senate 
     offices.
       Sec. 6. This provision authorizes multi-year contracting 
     authority for the Secretary of the Senate and Sergeant at 
     Arms, subject to the approval of the Rules Committee.
       Sec. 7. This provision relates to consultant positions for 
     leadership offices.

                              JOINT ITEMS

                        joint economic committee

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,424,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,658,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,658,000


[[Page 928]]

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,658,000 for 
     the Joint Economic Committee. This is an increase of $234,000 
     over the enacted level needed for cost-of-living increases 
     and one additional position.

                      joint committee on taxation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,733,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,323,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,323,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,323,000 for 
     salaries and expenses of the Joint Committee on Taxation. 
     This is an increase of $590,000 over the enacted level 
     primarily to accommodate cost-of-living increases.

                   Office of the Attending Physician

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,865,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,947,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,000,000 for 
     the Office of the Attending Physician. The Office was first 
     established by House Resolution 253, adopted December 5, 
     1928. The increase of $1,053,000 over the request level will 
     provide for an additional medical officer/physician, and will 
     accommodate higher equipment costs. It will also provide for 
     an increase in the allowances for the attending physician and 
     medical officers, the first adjustment in the allowances 
     since 1988. The bill provides authority of $300,000 to remain 
     available until expended.

               Capitol Guide and Special Services Office

Appropriations, 2002......................................\1\$2,862,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,035,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,035,000

\1\Includes $350,000 in emergency response funds (Public Law 107-117).

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,035,000 for 
     the Capitol Guide and Special Services Office. This provides 
     for 70 FTEs, as currently authorized.

                      Statements of Appropriations

Appropriations, 2002............................................$30,000
Budget estimate, 2003............................................30,000
Committee recommendation.........................................30,000

       The Committee recommends $30,000 for the preparation of 
     detailed statements of appropriations as required by law. 
     This account is used as payment for the preparation of the 
     volumes, ``Statements on Appropriations,'' for the second 
     session of the 107th Congress. These volumes show annual 
     appropriations made, indefinite appropriations, and contracts 
     authorized, along with a chronological history of regular 
     appropriations bills. The volumes are compiled jointly by the 
     Senate and House Committees on Appropriations pursuant to a 
     directive in the Legislative Appropriations Act of June 7, 
     1924.

                             Capitol Police


                                                            Recommended

Salaries...................................................$175,675,000
Expenses.....................................................28,100,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
      Total, Capitol Police.................................203,775,000

       The Committee recommends $203,775,000, an increase of 
     $30,485,000 above the enacted level, for the U.S. Capitol 
     Police. Significant increases are provided to increase the 
     size of the force, increase pay, improve training, and fund 
     new programs aimed at recruitment and retention.
       GAO reporting requirement.--The Fiscal Year 2001 
     Legislative Branch Appropriations Act required GAO to 
     participate in the selection of a Chief Administrative 
     Officer (CAO) for the USCP and monitor the implementation of 
     management improvements in budgeting, financial management, 
     information technology, and human resources. The law required 
     GAO to provide quarterly reports to the Chief of the Capitol 
     Police, Capitol Police Board, and congressional 
     appropriations and oversight committees having jurisdiction 
     over the Capitol Police, through September 30, 2002 on USCP's 
     implementation efforts. Much progress has been made by the 
     CAO to improve overall administrative operations of the 
     Capitol Police. However, there are still some significant 
     deficiencies, including the need for the USCP to update its 
     strategic plan to reflect post-September 11, 2001 changes, 
     and implement an effective administrative management strategy 
     in the agency, particularly with respect to its human 
     resources. Therefore, the Committee direct GAO to continue 
     monitoring the human resource management function of the 
     Capitol Police and provide semi-annual reports to the Capitol 
     Police entities and Committees on Appropriations on progress 
     being made by the USCP toward developing and implementing an 
     effective human resource management strategy. These reports 
     should continue through fiscal year 2004.
       Review of salary, benefits, and working conditions.--The 
     Committee urge the Capitol Police Board to conduct a review 
     of Capitol Police salary, benefits, and working conditions 
     and recommend any modifications which the board considers 
     likely to improve the ability of the U.S. Capitol Police to 
     recruit and retain officers. The review should incorporate an 
     examination of retirement benefits offered to members of the 
     Capitol Police force, including a comparison to the Sky 
     Marshals from the Transportation Security Agency, Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation agents, the National Park Police 
     officers, members of the uniformed division of the Secret 
     service, and other Federal law enforcement officers. The 
     Committee has been informed that the various Federal law 
     enforcement agencies all receive comparable retirement 
     benefits. It is the intent of this Committee that the Capitol 
     Police should continue to receive retirement benefits on 
     terms at least as generous as those of other Federal law 
     enforcement agencies.

                                salaries

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$113,044,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................184,526,000
Committee recommendation....................................175,675,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $175,675,000 
     for the salaries of the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP). The 
     increase of $62,631,000 is needed primarily to increase 
     staffing by 269 FTEs over the fiscal year 2002 approved 
     level, for a total of 1,839 FTEs. Funding is included for 
     cost of living pay increases, comparability pay increases to 
     enhance competitiveness with other law enforcement agencies, 
     and recruitment and retention incentives including the 
     student loan repayment program. The pay raise is expected to 
     total 9.1 percent. The reduction below the request reflects 
     revised projections of pay costs associated with 
     extraordinarily high attrition in fiscal year 2002.
       The amount provided covers salaries, benefits, and overtime 
     costs. Capitol Police personnel are also eligible for 
     hazardous duty pay and comparability pay similar to locality 
     pay adjustments granted other Federal law enforcement 
     personnel in the Washington, DC, area.
       The Committee has added new authority for the USCP to 
     police the Botanic Garden, with an estimated staffing 
     requirement of 29 FTE. The priority for postings remains 
     coverage of 2 officers per door.

                            general expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................\1\$44,146,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................28,100,000
Committee recommendation.....................................28,100,000

\1\Includes $31,000,000 in emergency response fund transfer (Public Law 
107-38).

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $28,100,000 
     for general expenses of the Capitol Police. The amount 
     recommended is needed primarily to support the significant 
     increase in staffing as well as an increase in training. The 
     difference from the request reflects re-estimates of cost 
     projections and emerging needs. Expenses include office 
     supplies and equipment, laundry and dry-cleaning, 
     communications, motor vehicles, uniforms and equipment, 
     investigations, training, and miscellaneous items.

                       Administrative Provisions

       Sec. 1001. The Committee has included a routine provision 
     which allows for funds to be transferred between the 
     ``Salaries'' and ``General expenses'' accounts.
       Sec. 1002. This provision authorizes the USCP to procure 
     severable services in 1 fiscal year that carry into the next 
     year. Executive Branch agencies received this authority under 
     the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act.
       Sec. 1003. This provision authorizes the disposition of 
     surplus or obsolete property of the Capitol Police.
       Sec. 1004. This provision makes technical corrections to 
     current law regarding USCP recruitment and relocation 
     bonuses.
       Sec. 1005. This provision authorizes USCP to recruit 
     individuals without regard to age.
       Sec. 1006. This provision makes technical corrections to 
     Public Law 107-117 relative to retention allowances.
       Sec. 1007. This provision relates to education assistance 
     for employees of the Capitol Police.
       Sec. 1008. In order to enhance recruitment efforts of the 
     Capitol Police, the Committee has included a provision that 
     allows the Capitol Police to appoint employees at a rate of 
     pay at or above step one of the pay grade in which the 
     employee is appointed.
       Sec. 1009. This provision authorizes overtime compensation 
     for officers and members at the rank of lieutenant or higher.
       Sec. 1010. This provision authorizes training programs for 
     employees of the Capitol Police.
       Sec. 1011. This provision authorizes the Chief of the 
     Capitol Police to provide, under certain circumstances, 
     additional compensation for employees with specialty 
     assignments and proficiencies.
       Sec. 1012. The Committee has included a provision, 
     effective as of September 11, 2001, that establishes the 
     limits on premium pay on an annual rather than pay period 
     basis during emergency periods.
       Sec. 1013. Merger of Capitol Police with Library of 
     Congress Police. Over a period of many years, three 
     Legislative Branch police forces evolved on Capitol Hill: the 
     U.S. Capitol Police, Library of Congress, and Government 
     Printing Office. In fiscal year 2001, the Committee directed 
     the General Accounting Office to undertake a review to 
     determine the desirability and feasibility of consolidating 
     these police forces into a single force under the control of 
     the U.S. Capitol Police.

[[Page 929]]

     After reviewing and fully considering the results of GAO's 
     thorough analysis, the Committee has determined that there 
     are significant benefits to be realized by combining the 
     Library of Congress police force with the U.S. Capitol 
     Police. A merger of this nature under a single, unified chain 
     of command would enhance the overall security of Capitol Hill 
     by facilitating better communication and coordination of 
     police activities; providing centralized intelligence 
     gathering, dissemination, and threat assessments; developing 
     consistent responses to emergency situations or threats; 
     allowing for flexibility in staffing officers; and providing 
     additional training and equipment for all officers.
       Given these benefits and the need for increased security on 
     Capitol Hill following the September 11th and anthrax 
     incidents of last year, the Committee is proposing 
     legislation that would make effective a merger of the Library 
     of Congress police force into the U.S. Capitol Police within 
     3 years. Many issues will need to be considered and 
     addressed, such as benefits, pay, retirement, qualification 
     requirements, security systems, and training, to effect this 
     merger. The Committee believes that the Chief of Police will 
     need a period of up to 3 years to develop and implement a 
     plan to address these and other issues to merge the two 
     police forces.
       The Committee encourages USCP to plan to establish a 
     separate Library Division of the USCP to address the specific 
     security needs of the Library.
       Sec. 1014. The Committee has included an administrative 
     provision clarifying the authority of the USCP to police the 
     Botanic Garden.
       Sec. 1015. In the event of an emergency as determined by 
     the Capitol Police Board or a concurrent resolution of 
     Congress, authority is provided to the Chief of Police to 
     appoint, as special officers, other Governmental law 
     enforcement and, where appropriate, military personnel.
       Sec. 1016. This section provides necessary authorities for 
     the Chief of the Capitol Police to be the disbursing officer 
     for the Capitol Police.
       Sec. 1017. Requires promulgation of certain regulations 
     within 60 days after enactment of this Act.

                          OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,059,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,224,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,059,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,059,000 for 
     the salaries and expenses of the Office of Compliance, as 
     authorized by section 305 of Public Law 104-1, the 
     Congressional Accountability Act of 1996.

                      CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$30,780,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................32,390,000
Committee recommendation.....................................32,094,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $32,094,000 
     for the Congressional Budget Office. The amount recommended 
     represents an increase of $1,321,000 over the enacted level 
     to cover all mandatory and price level increases.

                       Administrative Provisions

       Sec. 1101. This provision provides CBO authority that 
     executive branch agencies have to establish an educational 
     program to enhance the abilities and effectiveness of CBO 
     employees through study or work experiences.
       Sec. 1102. This provision reinstates an exemption from an 
     obsolete procurement statute which effectively prohibits 
     modern acquisition methods.

                        ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

       The Committee has recommended a funding level of 
     $334,474,000 and an FTE level of 1,466 for all activities of 
     the Architect of the Capitol. Excluded are House items which 
     are traditionally left for consideration by that body.
       The requested authorized level of full-time equivalent 
     positions of 1,477 has been reduced to 1,466, including 29 
     new FTEs. The annualization of the new positions in the 
     fiscal year 2004 base will bring the total FTE authorization 
     to 1,475. It is also noted that the FTE authorized level 
     included under each appropriation accommodates temporary 
     staff hired by the Construction Management Division for 
     project related work.
       The Architect of the Capitol is directed to observe closely 
     limitations on full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. It is 
     noted, however, that funding was provided for various 
     projects with no commensurate increase in the FTE ceiling. 
     Accordingly, the Committee provides relief from the FTE 
     ceilings for delivery of those projects under the condition 
     that the Committees on Appropraitions are notified prior to 
     the increase in the FTE ceiling.
       The following table shows the request and the Committee 
     recommendation:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Fiscal year
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
                        Appropriation                                2002                              2003
                                                                appropriation   2003 request\1\   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General administration.......................................      $51,371,000      $63,951,000      $59,343,000
Capitol building.............................................       15,194,000       46,789,000       32,094,000
Capitol Grounds..............................................        6,009,000        7,711,000        8,356,000
Senate office buildings......................................       42,126,000       55,103,000       64,871,000
Capitol Power Plant..........................................       52,583,000      143,603,000      102,286,000
Library buildings and grounds, structural and mechanical care       21,753,000       40,284,000       37,521,000
Capitol Police buildings and grounds.........................  ...............  ...............       23,900,000
Emergency response funds (Public Law 107-38).................      106,304,000  ...............  ...............
Botanic Garden...............................................        5,646,000        5,661,000        6,103,000
Capitol visitor center.......................................       70,000,000  ...............  ...............
Congressional Cemetery.......................................        1,250,000  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................      372,236,000      363,102,000      334,474,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Reflects pending budget amendments totaling $13,704,000.

       FTEAC.--The Committee is pleased with the establishment of 
     the Full-Time Equivalent Advisory Committee (FTEAC) in the 
     Architect's office. The FTEAC is intended to provide a forum 
     for the prioritization and alignment of positions within each 
     appropriation and across the agency. The Architect is 
     requested to keep the Committee advised on the progress of 
     the FTEAC.
       Working Reserves.--The Committee encourages the Architect 
     to make better use of available working reserves. Therefore, 
     the Architect is directed to establish accounts within each 
     no-year and each multi-year appropriation under the Architect 
     of the Capitol for the purpose of receipt of reallotments of 
     unobligated funds from completed projects. The funds will be 
     used for contingency purposes as deemed necessary by the 
     Architect with the approvals of the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate. Completion of each project should be certified by the 
     project manager before transferring funds into the 
     contingency account.
       Window Replacement.--The Committee recommends an 
     incremental approach for the window replacement project for 
     blast and bullet resistance for which the Architect of the 
     Capitol proposed $11,400,000 in design dollars across four 
     appropriations. The Committee recommends an amount of 
     $1,200,000 to develop prototypes before proceeding with this 
     very costly project. In view of heightened security concerns 
     and the need to maintain the Capitol's historical appearance, 
     if approved this project will address security requirements 
     and incorporate historical aesthetics.
       Condition Assessments/Master Plan.--The Committee has 
     provided an amount of $500,000 in the Capitol buildings 
     appropriation and an amount of $1,100,000 in the Senate 
     office buildings appropriation for condition assessments of 
     the Capitol complex. The assessment will be conducted in 
     tandem with the development of a master plan for the Capitol 
     complex, and will include the collection of relevant 
     information regarding buildings, inspection and equipment 
     testing of properties and assets, analysis and identification 
     of deficiencies, identification of solutions and costs, a 
     forecast of future renewal requirements, and the development 
     of long-range comprehensive financial plans.
       The Committee has established a new funding line, ``Study, 
     Design, and Condition Assessment,'' within several 
     appropriations to improve response time and flexibility in 
     conducting studies, surveys, assessments, and designs. The 
     Architect of the Capitol is to notify the Committees on 
     Appropriations 21 days prior to moving forward with these 
     projects.

                         General Administration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$51,371,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................63,951,000
Committee recommendation.....................................59,343,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $59,343,000 
     for general administration. The amount provided includes 
     $55,275,000 for the operating budget and $4,068,000 for the 
     capital budget, and will accommodate an

[[Page 930]]

     FTE level of approximately 362 with additional positions 
     targeted to project management and facilities support. 
     Annualization of the additional FTEs in fiscal year 2004 will 
     increase the FTE level to 367. A total of $6,450,000 is made 
     available until September 30, 2007. The Committee has deleted 
     the travel limitations, but directs the Architect to submit a 
     semi-annual report on travel to the Committees.
       The General Administration appropriation was established in 
     fiscal year 2002 for the purpose of consolidating into a 
     single appropriation the funding for salaries and related 
     benefits of the Architect, officers, administrative and 
     support staff, including engineering and architecture 
     employees. Previously, the funding for these items was 
     included in several jurisdictional appropriations under the 
     Architect. This account also provides for administrative 
     items such as agency-wide contractual services; surveys and 
     studies; information technology; and electronics and safety 
     engineering operations.
       The following table displays the budget detail.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Amount         Committee
                                     Item                                          requested      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 OPERATING BUDGET
 
Personal Services.............................................................      $36,898,000      $35,615,000
Rent, Communications, Utilities & Travel......................................        3,599,000        1,279,000
Other Services................................................................       16,782,000       17,977,000
Supplies......................................................................          254,000          254,000
Equipment.....................................................................          150,000          150,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operating Budget..............................................       57,683,000       55,275,000
                                                                               =================================
                        FISCAL YEAR 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET
 
Implementation of Safety Programs.............................................          450,000          450,000
Security Project Support for AOC..............................................          125,000          125,000
Financial Management System (FMS).............................................        1,627,000        1,627,000
Implementation of AOCNET......................................................          500,000          500,000
Computer-Aided Facility Management (CAFM).....................................        1,366,000        1,366,000
Study, Master Schematic Plan for Fort Meade...................................          200,000  ...............
Study, Conduct Energy Survey of Capitol Complex...............................        2,000,000  ...............
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital Budget................................................        6,268,000        4,068,000
                                                                               =================================
      Total, General Administration...........................................       63,951,000       59,343,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Personnel Support System.--The Committee supports and has 
     provided an amount of $1,041,000 for a new personnel system 
     within the total increase of $2,781,000 for information 
     resources. This funding is intended for the Architect to 
     automate its processes and procedures related to recruitment, 
     position classification, and workforce management. However, 
     based on problems encountered by the Library of Congress in 
     implementing a similar system, the Committee recommends the 
     Architect closely monitor the implementation to ensure 
     problems and delays are minimized, and keep the Committee 
     apprised of its progress.
       Financial Management.--The Committee notes the significant 
     accomplishments made by the Architect in the successful 
     implementation of its new financial management system. The 
     AOC financial management organization warrants confidence 
     towards continued progress and the preparation of auditable 
     financial statements at the end of fiscal year 2003. Funding 
     in the amount of $350,000 is being provided to build the 
     policies and procedures to ensure the internal control 
     mechanisms are in place to support this effort as well as 
     improved budget documentation.
       Worker Safety.--The Committee continues to place a high 
     priority on improving worker safety within the Architect of 
     the Capitol operations. While significant improvements have 
     been made in the last year to reduce the worker injury rate, 
     there is more to be done. The Committee expects AOC to be 
     developing and integrating a management process, the benefit 
     of which is that safety becomes an integral operating 
     discipline and overall workplace safety injuries are reduced. 
     The Architect is directed to continue its efforts using 
     outside expertise where necessary to provide management 
     assistance, training, audits, and assistance in safety 
     program implementation. The AOC will keep the Committee 
     informed of the progress of this program.
       Recycling.--The Committee is encouraged by progress in the 
     AOC's recycling program. The Committee directs the Architect 
     to implement and expand the recommendations of the best 
     practices review and develop a pilot project to address 
     electronic equipment waste recycling (not to exceed 
     $500,000). The Committee expects the Architect to provide 
     quarterly reports on the recycling program, including the 
     pilot electronic waste initiative.
       Golden Dollar ``Sacagawea Coin''.--The Committee supports 
     the circulation of the Golden Dollar (Sacagawea) coin. 
     However, the Committee notes with disappointment that several 
     gift shops and restaurant facilities in the U.S. Capitol 
     still do not distribute the coin nearly 2 years after its 
     introduction. The Committee urges the Architect of the 
     Capitol and the Secretary of the Senate to require the use of 
     the coin in the cash drawers of restaurant facilities and 
     gift ships in the U.S. Capitol complex.

                            Capitol Building

Appropriations, 2002.....................................\1\$15,194,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................46,789,000
Committee recommendation.....................................32,094,000

\1\Does not reflect $106,304,000 by transfer in emergency response 
funds (Public Law 107-38).

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $32,094,000 
     for necessary expenses for the maintenance, care and 
     operation of the Capitol. Of this, $19,065,000 is available 
     until September 30, 2007. The amount provided includes 
     $10,886,000 for the operating budget and $21,208,000 for the 
     capital budget. The recommendation is $14,695,000 below the 
     request owing to the deletion of Capitol Police items from 
     this account and the creation of a new account for USCP 
     items. The FTE authorized level is 171, including any 
     temporary construction staff assigned to Capitol projects. 
     The ceiling includes 4 new full-time equivalent positions 
     that will be annualized to 5 in the fiscal year 2004 base to 
     increase the authorized level to 172 FTEs.
       The Committee's recommendation includes $12,000,000 for the 
     upgrade of the air conditioning system for the East Front of 
     the Capitol, which was completed approximately 40 years ago. 
     The amount provided is $2,400,000 more than the original 
     request owing to a revised estimate based on 100 percent 
     design of the project. The recommendation includes $2,000,000 
     for replacing the high voltage switch gear and cables that 
     accelerates out-year plans in order to link this effort to 
     construction contracts with the Capitol Visitor Center.
       The following table displays the budget detail.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Amount         Committee
                                     Item                                          requested      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 OPERATING BUDGET
 
Personal Services.............................................................       $7,796,000       $8,021,000
Other Services................................................................        2,216,000        2,216,000
Supplies......................................................................          483,000          483,000
Equipment.....................................................................          166,000          166,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operating Budget..............................................       10,661,000       10,886,000
                                                                               =================================
                        FISCAL YEAR 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET
 
ADA Requirements..............................................................           75,000           75,000
Replacement of Minton Tile....................................................          385,000          200,000
Roofing Repair, Around House & Senate Chambers................................          160,000          160,000
Elevator/Escalator Modernization Program, CB..................................          500,000          500,000
Door Refinishing/Restoration..................................................          289,000          289,000

[[Page 931]]

 
Chandelier Restoration and Crystal/Globe Replacement..........................          319,000          319,000
Conservation of Wall Paintings................................................          300,000          300,000
Design, Provide Emergency Electrical Service, CB..............................          125,000  ...............
Off-Site Delivery/Screening Center, USCP......................................       22,000,000  ...............
Design, Replace Windows, Capitol..............................................          600,000  ...............
Design, Renovate Outside Air Intake Tunnels...................................          400,000  ...............
Replace High Voltage SWGR & Cables, Capitol...................................        1,000,000        2,000,000
Upgrade Air Conditioning--East Front, Capitol.................................        9,600,000       12,000,000
Study, Historic Structure Report..............................................           75,000  ...............
Study, Design and Condition Assessment........................................  ...............        5,065,000
Computer, Telecom, & Electrical Support.......................................          300,000          300,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital Budget................................................       36,128,000       21,208,000
                                                                               =================================
      Total, Capitol Buildings................................................       46,789,000       32,094,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Capitol Grounds

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,009,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,711,000
Committee recommendation......................................8,356,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $8,356,000 for 
     Capitol Grounds for the care and improvements of the grounds 
     surrounding the Capitol, the Senate and House office 
     buildings, and the Capitol Power Plant. The recommendation 
     includes $6,041,000 in operating funds and $2,315,000 for the 
     capital budget, of which $1,780,000 is to remain available 
     until September 30, 2007.
       The amount recommended is $2,347,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level and $645,000 above the budget request. The 
     FTE authorized level will remain at 69, including any 
     temporary construction staff assigned to projects.
       The recommendation adjusts the operating budget to reflect 
     past obligation trends and grounds requirements which 
     resulted in reductions to exterior pointing and caulking, 
     miscellaneous improvements, and performances on the Capitol 
     grounds, while providing additional funds for general annual 
     repairs, training, and bulk waste disposal. The Committee is 
     not recommending the requested amount of $60,000 for sidewalk 
     replacement given the ongoing construction across the Capitol 
     complex.
       The following table displays the budget detail.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Amount         Committee
                                     Item                                          requested      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 OPERATING BUDGET
 
Personal Services.............................................................       $4,260,000       $4,253,000
Other Services................................................................        1,218,000        1,200,000
Supplies......................................................................          528,000          528,000
Equipment.....................................................................           60,000           60,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operating Budget..............................................        6,066,000        6,041,000
                                                                               =================================
                        FISCAL YEAR 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET
 
Replace Truck.................................................................           80,000           80,000
Wayfinding and ADA-Compliant Signage, CG......................................          425,000          430,000
Sidewalk Replacement..........................................................           60,000  ...............
Maintenance of Outdoor Sculpture: Garfield and Peace..........................           20,000           25,000
Design, Replace, Automate and Expand Irrigation System........................           80,000  ...............
Design, Street and Sidewalk Infrastructure Improvements.......................          250,000  ...............
Study, Design and Condition Assessment........................................  ...............          580,000
Power Requirements............................................................          730,000        1,200,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital Budget................................................        1,645,000        2,315,000
                                                                               =================================
      Total, Capitol Grounds..................................................        7,711,000        8,356,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Senate Office Buildings

Appropriations, 2002........................................$42,126,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................55,103,000
Committee recommendation.....................................64,871,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $64,871,000 
     for maintenance of the Senate office buildings. The 
     appropriation includes $43,163,000 for the operating budget 
     and $21,708,000 for the capital budget, of which $21,600,000 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2007.
       The recommendation is $22,745,000 above the enacted level 
     for fiscal year 2002 and $9,768,000 above the budget request, 
     primarily due to the replenishment of fiscal year 2002 
     reprogrammed funds for higher priority and immediate 
     requirements. The FTE authorized level is 555 FTEs, including 
     any temporary construction staff assigned to Senate projects. 
     The recommendation includes 4 new full-time equivalent 
     positions that will be annualized to 5 in the fiscal year 
     2004 base to increase the ceiling to 556 FTEs.
       The Committee, after reviewing the financial statements of 
     the Senate restaurants, recommends a funding level of 
     $1,095,000 which is above the requested amount to meet 
     financial obligations. Additionally, the Committee has added 
     $30,000 to support the combined waste recycling program.
       The following table displays the budget detail.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Amount         Committee
                                     Item                                          requested      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 OPERATING BUDGET
 
Personal Services.............................................................      $26,754,000      $26,542,000
Rent, Communications, Utilities & Travel......................................        7,781,000        7,781,000
Other Services................................................................        5,065,000        5,645,000
Supplies......................................................................        1,300,000        1,300,000
Equipment.....................................................................        1,895,000        1,895,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operating Budget..............................................       42,795,000       43,163,000
                                                                               =================================
                        FISCAL YEAR 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET
 
Upgrade Emergency Lighting, RSOB..............................................           50,000  ...............
Kitchen Exhaust and Kitchen Redesign, Webster Hall............................          108,000          108,000
Replace Windows, SOB..........................................................        5,300,000  ...............
Renovate Restrooms (ADA), HSOB and DSOB.......................................        1,600,000        2,100,000
Bus Ducts & Switchgear Replacement, HSOB......................................        1,950,000        1,950,000
Repair Waterproofing Under RSOB South Steps...................................        1,800,000        1,800,000
Mechanical Renovations, DSOB..................................................  ...............          940,000
Study, Design and Condition Assessment........................................  ...............        1,750,000
Minor Construction............................................................  ...............       10,000,000
Modernize Elevators, HSOB.....................................................        1,500,000        3,060,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
Subtotal, Capital Budget......................................................       12,308,000       21,708,000
                                                                               =================================

[[Page 932]]

 
      Total, Senate Office Buildings..........................................       55,103,000       64,871,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Capitol Power Plant

Appropriations, 2002........................................$52,583,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................143,603,000
Committee recommendation....................................102,286,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $102,286,000 
     for the operations of the Capitol Power Plant. This is 
     supplemented by $4,400,000 in reimbursements. Of the amount 
     provided, $61,739,000 shall remain available until September 
     30, 2007. The recommendation includes $39,967,000 for the 
     operating budget and $62,319,000 for the capital budget.
       The FTE authorized level will remain at 94, including any 
     temporary construction staff assigned to projects.
       The Power Plant provides heat, light, power, and air-
     conditioning for the Capitol, Senate and House office 
     buildings, and the Library of Congress buildings; heat, 
     light, and power for the Botanic Garden and the Senate and 
     House Garages; light for the Capitol Grounds' street, park, 
     and floodlighting system; steam heat for the Government 
     Printing Office and Washington City Post Office, also known 
     as Postal Square; and steam heat and air-conditioning for the 
     Union Station complex, Folger Shakespeare Library, the 
     Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, and the U.S. 
     Supreme Court Building on a reimbursable basis.
       The recommended budget would increase by $49,703,000 over 
     the enacted level primarily owing to three major capital 
     projects. The amount recommended includes $41,000,000 for the 
     expansion of the west refrigeration plant which is critically 
     needed due to the aging equipment in the east refrigeration 
     plant which will be de-commissioned when the west 
     refrigeration plant is expanded, and the need for additional 
     capacity. Without this project, the Capitol complex would be 
     facing a critical shortfall in chilled water capacity and the 
     plant would not have the ability to serve the campus with 
     reliable chilled water. Also, the east refrigeration plant 
     uses R-12 refrigerant, an ozone depleting substance which 
     will be banned from use in the near future. The recommended 
     funding is for the construction of the extension and 
     installation of three chillers with supporting auxiliaries. 
     These funds are made available until September 30, 2007.
       In addition, the capital budget includes $10,289,000 for 
     the repair of the South Capitol Street steam line which has 
     deteriorated and must be rebuilt to provide a safe, reliable 
     tunnel for steam; and $8,500,000 for the repair of the 
     Constitution Avenue tunnel in order to correct life safety 
     deficiencies. These funds are also made available until 
     September 30, 2007.
       Within the operating budget, approximately 90 percent of 
     the recommended amount is for the purchase of electricity 
     from the local private utility, payment to the government of 
     the District of Columbia for the provision of water and sewer 
     services, and the procurement of boiler fuel, as displayed in 
     the following table.


                Fiscal year 2003 estimated utility costs

Purchase of electrical energy...............................$23,350,000
Purchase of natural gas.......................................4,500,000
Purchase of steam...............................................434,000
Purchase of chilled water.......................................380,000
Purchase of coal..............................................2,550,000
Purchase of oil...............................................1,707,000
Water and sewer payments......................................3,200,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total....................................................36,121,000

       The balance of this appropriation supports a work force to 
     operate and maintain the Power Plant.
       The following table displays the budget detail.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                    Item                                      Amount requested   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      FISCAL YEAR 2003 OPERATING BUDGET
 
Personal Services...........................................................       $6,076,000        $6,057,000
Rent, Communications, Utilities & Travel....................................       31,866,000        31,866,000
Other Services..............................................................        1,444,000         1,488,000
Supplies....................................................................        5,037,000         4,956,000
Reimbursement...............................................................       (4,400,000)       (4,400,000)
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operating Budget............................................       40,023,000        39,967,000
                                                                             ===================================
                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET
 
Implement Emergency Shoring & Repairs to Tunnels............................          100,000           100,000
West Refrigeration Plant Expansion..........................................       81,800,000        41,000,000
Install Dual, Low NOx Burners, Boilers 6 & 7................................          400,000           400,000
Update CAD Drawings for CPP.................................................           80,000            80,000
Design, Fire Alarm/Protection System Upgrades, Boiler Plant CPP.............          150,000   ................
Design, Egress Improvements, CPP............................................          150,000   ................
Repair South Capitol Street Steam Line......................................       11,000,000        10,289,000
Repair Constitution Avenue Tunnel...........................................        8,500,000         8,500,000
Central Steam/Chilled Water Metering Upgrades, Capitol Complex..............          100,000   ................
Study, Design and Condition Assessment......................................  ................          450,000
Procure Emergency Generator.................................................        1,300,000         1,500,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital Budget..............................................      103,580,000        62,319,000
                                                                             ===================================
      Total, Capitol Power Plant............................................      143,603,000       102,997,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Library Buildings and Grounds

Appropriations, 2002........................................$21,753,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................40,284,000
Committee recommendation.....................................37,521,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $37,521,000 
     for the care and maintenance of the Library buildings and 
     grounds by the Architect of the Capitol, of which $5,500,000 
     shall remain available until expended and $18,614,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2007. The recommendation 
     includes $11,754,000 for the operating budget and $25,767,000 
     for the capital budget, including $5,500,000 for the Audio-
     Visual Conservation Center, the final installation of funding 
     for this project.
       The following table displays the budget detail.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Amount         Committee
                                     Item                                          requested      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 OPERATING BUDGET
 
Personal Services.............................................................       $8,965,000       $9,012,000
Other Services................................................................        1,882,000        1,874,000
Supplies......................................................................          614,000          614,000
Equipment.....................................................................          191,000          189,000
Land and Structures...........................................................           65,000           65,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operating Budget..............................................       11,717,000       11,754,000
                                                                               =================================
                        FISCAL YEAR 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET
 
Replace Partition Supports, JMMB..............................................         $300,000         $300,000
Replace Compact Stack Safety, JMMB............................................          300,000          300,000
Repair Life Safety Deficiencies...............................................        1,000,000        1,000,000
ADA Requirements, LB&G........................................................          100,000          100,000
Replace Sidewalks, TJB & JAB..................................................          100,000          100,000

[[Page 933]]

 
Restore Decorative Painting, TJB & JAB........................................          100,000          100,000
Audio Visual Conservation Center, Culpeper, VA................................        5,500,000        5,500,000
LOC Room & Partition Modifications............................................          500,000          500,000
Preservations Environmental Monitoring........................................          100,000          100,000
Additional Sprinklers, JMMB...................................................        1,383,000        1,383,000
Secondary Containment for Fuel Oil Tanks, JMMB................................          200,000  ...............
Upgrade Emergency Generators, JAB & TJB.......................................          300,000          300,000
Design, Replace Windows, LOC..................................................        1,600,000  ...............
Repair Roof Under East Parking Lot, TJB.......................................        2,180,000        2,180,000
Survey of Library Buildings & Equipment.......................................        1,000,000  ...............
Study, Copyright Deposit Facility, Fort Meade.................................          100,000  ...............
Study, Design and Condition Assessment........................................        2,405,000        2,905,000
Modernize 4 Elevators.........................................................          980,000          980,000
Design & Construct Book Storage Module #2, Fort Meade.........................        9,566,000        9,566,000
NW Curtain, HVAC..............................................................          453,000          453,000
Design, Mod. to Ground Floor West Main Pavilion, TJB Visitor Center...........          400,000  ...............
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital Budget................................................    \1\28,567,000       25,767,000
                                                                               =================================
      Total, Library Buildings and Grounds....................................       40,284,000       37,521,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes pending Budget Amendment totaling $13,404,000.

       The recommendation is $15,768,000 above the enacted amount 
     for fiscal year 2002 and $2,763,000 below the budget request, 
     including the pending budget amendment. The FTE ceiling is 
     153, including any temporary construction staff assigned to 
     projects. The ceiling includes 3 new full-time equivalent 
     positions that will be annualized to 4 in the fiscal year 
     2004 base and will increase the ceiling to 154 FTEs.
       The Committee's recommendation provides significant 
     increases in the funding for capital projects at the Library 
     of Congress to include additional sprinklers for the Madison 
     Building, roof repairs for the east parking lot, Jefferson 
     Building elevator modernization, air conditioning for the NW 
     curtain, a study and design for a copyright deposit facility, 
     and the design of book storage modules #3 and #4 at Fort 
     Meade. The amount provided also includes $9,566,000 for the 
     design and construction of book storage Module #2 at Fort 
     Meade. The Committee expects this high-priority project will 
     be completed as expeditiously as possible. Given the 
     significant increase, the Architect needs to continue to 
     expand on services that can be provided by other Government 
     agencies.

                  Capitol Police Buildings and Grounds

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation....................................$23,900,000

       The Committee has created a new appropriation account for 
     Capitol Police Buildings and Grounds. The amount recommended, 
     $23,900,000, includes $22,000,000 for an off-site delivery 
     facility for the USCP; $1,500,000 in design funding for a 
     tactical training facility; and $400,000 for lease of a 
     vehicle maintenance facility.
       The Committee considers a new off-site delivery facility to 
     be a high priority need, and the Committee fully expects the 
     study to be completed in early fiscal year 2003.
       USCP master plan.--The Committee is disappointed about the 
     slow progress of the AOC and USCP in developing a 
     comprehensive master plan for the Capitol Police. The 
     Committee recognizes that the Capitol Police have additional 
     space requirements owing to significant deficiencies in 
     existing space, new training requirements, a growing force, 
     and an enhanced security posture. While requirements and an 
     operational scenario have been identified, the AOC and USCP 
     have failed to provide a comprehensive plan to address these 
     needs. The Committee directs AOC and USCP to provide the 
     comprehensive plan including identification of specific 
     properties which will best meet the needs within 15 days of 
     enactment of this Act. The plan should also include a 
     delineation of priorities, cost estimates, and a full 
     explanation of the recommendations.

                             Botanic Garden

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,646,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,661,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,103,000

       The Committee recommends $6,103,000 for salaries and 
     expenses of the Botanic Garden. This includes $4,646,000 in 
     the operating budget and $1,457,000 in the capital budget, of 
     which $120,000 is to remain available until September 30, 
     2007.
       The recommendation is $457,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and $442,000 above the budget request, 
     including the pending budget amendment. The FTE authorized 
     level is 55, including any temporary construction staff 
     assigned to projects. The recommendation includes 4 new full-
     time equivalent positions that will be annualized to 5 in the 
     fiscal year 2004 base to increase the ceiling to 56 FTEs.
       The Committee is pleased with the enthusiastic response by 
     the public to the Botanic Garden and the newly established 
     outreach program. The Committee is providing $300,000 as 
     requested in a pending budget amendment to expand partnership 
     and educational opportunities such as with the Missouri 
     Botanical Garden.
       The Committee recognizes that the garden is in the early 
     stages of the new operation and further resources are 
     required. In this respect the recommendation provides 
     additional funds for general annual repairs including 
     improved locks, shade curtain repair, and vestibule 
     modifications; as well as increased custodial and mowing 
     services. The Committee's recommendation supports the capital 
     improvements for interpretive illustrations in the 
     conservatory garden court, and exhibits, banners and audio 
     tours for the west gallery of the Conservatory.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Amount         Committee
                                     Item                                          requested      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       FISCAL YEAR 2003 OPERATING BUDGET
 
Personal Services.............................................................       $3,386,000       $3,488,000
Rent, Communications, Utilities & Travel......................................           22,000           22,000
Other Services................................................................          545,000          713,000
Supplies......................................................................          383,000          383,000
Equipment.....................................................................           40,000           40,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operating Budget..............................................        4,376,000        4,646,000
                                                                               =================================
                        FISCAL YEAR 2003 CAPITAL BUDGET
 
Vehicle Replacement, BG.......................................................           43,000           43,000
West Gallery Fabric, Audio Tour And Banners...................................          545,000          652,000
Fire Alarm System Upgrades for ADA, DC Village................................           25,000           25,000
Shade Curtain Replacement.....................................................           22,000           22,000
Roof Replacement, BG Production Facility......................................          150,000  ...............
CAFM Data Capture--USBG.......................................................           50,000           50,000
Partnerships..................................................................          300,000          300,000
Study, Design and Condition Assessment........................................  ...............          120,000
Interpretative Illustrations Conservatory Garden Court........................          150,000          225,000
Book on History of Botanic Garden.............................................  ...............           20,000
                                                                               ---------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital Budget................................................        1,285,000        1,457,000
                                                                               =================================
      Total, Botanic Garden...................................................        5,661,000        6,103,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 934]]

                       Administrative Provisions

       Sec. 1201. This provision was carried last year and 
     permanently increases the limitation on small purchases and 
     contracts under simplified acquisition procedures.
       Sec. 1202. Streamlined Acquisitioning. This section 
     provides authority to the Architect of the Capitol to enter 
     into multiyear contracts to the same extent as executive 
     agencies.
       Sec. 1203-1206. AOC Restructuring. The Architect of the 
     Capitol (AOC) faces many complex challenges that have been 
     exacerbated by the events of September 11, 2001 and the 
     Anthrax incidents on Capitol Hill. The Committee commends the 
     Architect and the dedicated employees of the AOC for their 
     tireless, professional services during these times of crisis. 
     The Architect and his employees responded to the fullest in 
     meeting the uncertainties and challenges facing Capitol Hill 
     and deserve the recognition, gratitude, and commendation of 
     the Congress, staff and the many American citizens they 
     serve. In this context and growing out of the many challenges 
     currently facing the AOC, the Committee has noted a need to 
     strengthen AOC's management capabilities to address 
     effectively its principal focus areas, including improving 
     the agency's strategic direction and business programs, 
     processes, and systems; attracting, developing, and retaining 
     a diverse and capable workforce; improving overall facilities 
     management of the national treasures under its jurisdiction; 
     and improving project management capabilities to address an 
     ever growing number of critical capital projects.
       To this end, the Committee has included language which 
     establishes a Deputy Architect position, who would also act 
     as the Chief Operating Officer and would be responsible for 
     long-term strategic planning as well as developing annual 
     performance plans covering each of the general goals and 
     objectives in the strategic plan. This individual should have 
     skills in strategic planning, performance management, 
     strategic human capital management, worker safety, customer 
     satisfaction, and service quality. This individual would also 
     be responsible for proposing organizational changes 
     (including new positions) needed to carry out the Office of 
     the Architect of the Capitol's mission and strategic and 
     annual performance goals.
       The AOC is directed to consult with and seek advice from 
     the Comptroller General or his designee in the selection of 
     the Deputy Architect. The Deputy Architect is directed to 
     seek consultation and advice from the Comptroller General in 
     performing the responsibilities under this section.
       The bill also requires the Architect and Deputy Architect 
     to enter into an annual performance agreement that sets forth 
     measurable individual goals linked to the organizational 
     goals in the AOC's annual performance plan for the Deputy 
     Architect in key operational areas. The agreement shall be 
     subject to review and renegotiation on an annual basis and a 
     copy of the agreement shall be provided to the relevant 
     Committees of the House and Senate. In addition, the Deputy 
     Architect is to submit to the Architect and the relevant 
     Committees in the House and Senate an annual performance 
     report. This report shall contain an evaluation of the extent 
     to which the AOC met the goals and objectives identified in 
     the annual performance plan for the preceding year and an 
     explanation of the results achieved during the preceding year 
     relative to the established goals. This report shall also 
     include the evaluation rating of the performance of the 
     Deputy Architect including the amounts of bonus compensation 
     awarded to the Deputy.
       Sec. 1207. This section clarifies a provision carried in 
     section 4 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act of 
     2001.
       Sec. 1208. The bill includes a provision that updates the 
     1922 description of the division of labor between the 
     Architect of the Capitol and the Librarian of Congress with 
     respect to Library buildings and grounds, and, to provide 
     flexibility in accomplishing necessary work, authorizes the 
     agencies to reallocate facilities projects between themselves 
     and to transfer project funding (appropriations, gift and/or 
     trust funds). The Committee directs the Architect and the 
     Librarian to enter into a memorandum of understanding that 
     sets forth their mutual understanding of the scope of work 
     that may be transferred between them, the conditions under 
     which work and funds will be transferred, and the process for 
     managing such projects. The memorandum shall be established 
     by March 31, 2003, and shall include a process for expediting 
     relocation of floor-to-ceiling partitions in Library 
     buildings and related painting and electrical work.

                          LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002:\1\
  Salaries and expenses....................................$336,307,000
  Authority to spend receipts................................-6,850,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Net, salaries and expenses..............................329,457,000
                                                       ================

Budget estimate, 2003:
  Salaries and expenses.....................................357,121,000
  Authority to spend receipts................................-6,850,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Net, salaries and expenses..............................350,271,000
                                                       ================

Committee recommendation:
  Salaries and expenses.....................................358,474,000
  Authority to spend receipts................................-6,850,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Net, salaries and expenses..............................351,624,000

\1\Includes $29,615,000 by transfer from emergency response fund 
(Public Law 107-38).

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $358,474,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the Library of Congress and 
     approves authority to spend receipts of $6,850,000 in fiscal 
     year 2003. This is $1,353,000 above the request and 
     $22,167,000 above the enacted level.
       The Committee recommends:
       --an additional $4,000,000 for the last year of the Joining 
         Hands Across America program;
       --the transfer of $6,836,000 for furniture and furnishings, 
         owing to the discontinuation of that account so there may 
         be a more accurate accounting of program costs;
       --a reduction of $3,918,000 from personnel costs, 
         reflecting a more accurate projection of the cost of new 
         positions;
       --a reduction of $1,174,000 to reflect revised CSRS 
         contribution cost projections;
       --an additional $882,000 for the Integrated Library System 
         project;
       --an additional $1,000,000 for the central financial 
         management system;
       --$500,000 for activities related to the Louisiana Purchase 
         Bicentennial celebration;
       --an additional $200,000 for the Lewis and Clark 
         Bicentennial exhibition. These funds will go to Southern 
         Illinois University to develop a permanent commemoration 
         of the Lewis and Clark expedition and its time in 
         Illinois, including an exhibit to be located in Cairo, 
         Illinois and digitization of documents and records 
         relating to the expedition. Funds will be transferred 
         upon Library of Congress approval of a project 
         description submitted by the University;
       --an additional $527,000 for police pay raises; and
       --$2,500,000 for new shelving at the Culpeper storage 
         facility.
       The Committee has not included $5,000,000 for the purchase 
     of library materials.
       The Committee fully supports the Veterans History project 
     ($476,000) and has included funding for outreach with the 
     States. The bill includes language providing $989,000 to 
     support the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial exhibition.
       Mail costs.--The Committee is concerned with the cost of 
     new mail and package handling protocols which have resulted 
     from the bioterrorism events last fall. While the Committee 
     fully supports all means necessary to ensure the safety of 
     mail and packages, the Committee directs the Library to 
     continue to seek the most cost-effective means of doing so.
       Retail operations.--The Committee continues to be 
     interested in the concept of generating revenue for certain 
     needs of the Library through retail ventures. According to 
     the General Accounting Office, the Library needs to develop 
     fundamental policies, procedures and plans for developing its 
     retail operations. The Committee directs the Library to 
     develop a plan to achieve its goal of generating profits from 
     its retail activities, including a determination of the range 
     of products that potentially could be sold, whether such 
     retail activities would sell products at no profit or even at 
     a loss for purposes of promoting certain Library events or 
     activities, and if greater emphasis should be placed on the 
     most profitable products or expanding product lines and 
     markets. The Library, as part of this effort, needs to 
     prepare basic business plans for its current and future 
     retail operations, develop accounting procedures to collect 
     and analyze cost and profitability information for the retail 
     activities, and conduct marketing studies to identify markets 
     and products to help achieve its retail goals. The Committee 
     expects to receive a report on these activities prior to 
     hearings on the fiscal year 2004 budget request.

                            Copyright Office

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002:
  Salaries and expenses.....................................$40,896,000
  Authority to spend receipts...............................-27,864,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Net, salaries and expenses...............................13,032,000
                                                       ================

Budget estimate, 2003:
  Salaries and expenses......................................44,321,000
  Authority to spend receipts...............................-29,527,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Net, salaries and expenses...............................14,794,000
                                                       ================

Committee recommendation:
  Salaries and expenses......................................39,226,000
  Authority to spend receipts................................29,512,000
                                                       ================

    Net, salaries and expenses................................9,714,000


[[Page 935]]

       The Committee recommends the direct appropriation of 
     $9,714,000 for the Copyright Office and approves authority to 
     spend receipts of $29,512,000 in fiscal year 2003, for a 
     total of $39,226,000. The Committee's recommendation reflects 
     the transfer of $742,000 from the furniture and furnishings 
     account, which has been discontinued, and a reduction of 
     $187,000 to reflect the CSRS agency rate reduction.
       The Copyright Office received an additional $7,500,000 from 
     the Fiscal Year 2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206) to 
     offset the loss of copyright registration receipts during 
     fiscal year 2002. The fiscal year 2003 recommendation 
     reflects a reduction in net appropriations of $5,650,000 
     because the full funding was not required.

                     Congressional Research Service

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$81,454,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................87,646,000
Committee recommendation.....................................86,952,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $86,952,000 
     for the Congressional Research Service. The amount 
     recommended is an increase of $5,498,000 over the fiscal year 
     2002 level. Approximately $4,362,000 of this increase is 
     needed for mandatory cost-of-living and other pay and 
     inflation-related increases. An additional $711,000 is for 
     new personnel in the areas of terrorism and homeland 
     security, and aging issues. A total of $425,000 is associated 
     with the transfer from the furniture and furnishings account, 
     which has been discontinued in an effort to better account 
     for program costs throughout the Library. The decrease of 
     $694,000 below the request reflects a more accurate 
     projection of salary costs associated with new personnel.

             Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$49,788,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................51,020,000
Committee recommendation.....................................50,963,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $50,963,000 
     for salaries and expenses for Books for the Blind and 
     Physically Handicapped. This is an increase of $1,175,000 
     over the fiscal year 2002 level needed to accommodate 
     mandatory pay and price level increases. The change from the 
     budget request reflects the amended CSRS agency contribution.
       This appropriation supports a National Reading Program for 
     blind and physically handicapped citizens. Books and 
     magazines in braille and various recorded formats are 
     produced by the National Library Services for the Blind and 
     Physically Handicapped for distribution through a network of 
     State and locally supported libraries. At present, 57 
     regional libraries in 49 States, the District of Columbia, 
     the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and Guam house and circulate 
     books and magazines to eligible readers. Seventy-nine 
     subregional libraries in 17 States assist at the local public 
     library level; 53 libraries and 4 cooperating agencies 
     distribute sound reproducers. Two multistate centers, under 
     contract to the National Library Service, store and 
     distribute books and other materials in their geographical 
     regions. The Librarian has estimated a readership of 750,000 
     individuals in fiscal year 2002.
       The Committee has included bill language making available 
     $1,000,000 for the National Federation of the Blind NEWSLINE 
     service to help defray the telecommunications costs 
     associated with the dissemination of audio information 
     (including newspapers) to eligible individuals when such 
     information is distributed from a multi-state center with 
     centralized reader registration and serving a minimum of 20 
     States. This is a one-time appropriation for this item.

                       Administrative Provisions

       Secs. 1301-1302. The Committee has included two routine 
     administrative provisions carried in prior years.
       Sec. 1303. The Committee has included an administrative 
     provision extending by 2 years the time by which funds must 
     be matched by outside sources for the National Digital 
     Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program.
       Sec. 1304. This provision makes technical corrections to 
     Public Law 106-173 regarding the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial 
     Commission.

                       GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

                   Congressional Printing and Binding

Appropriations, 2002........................................$81,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................90,143,000
Committee recommendation.....................................90,143,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $90,143,000. 
     The increase of $9,143,000 over the enacted level is 
     attributable to covering the fiscal year 2001 shortfall in 
     this account ($5,875,000) as well as mandatory pay and price 
     level increases.
       The following table compares the component categories 
     within this account for fiscal year 2002. The Committee has 
     not recommended separate amounts for each activity in order 
     to give the GPO the flexibility to meet changing 
     requirements.

                                       CONGRESSIONAL PRINTING AND BINDING
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Appropriations                    Recommended
                                                                       2002       Requested 2003       2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional Record Program....................................     $20,147,000     $20,373,000
Miscellaneous publications......................................       4,340,000       4,515,000
Miscellaneous printing and binding..............................      16,388,000      16,760,000
Details to Congress.............................................       2,193,000       2,295,000
Document envelopes and document franks..........................       1,240,000       1,040,000
Business and committee calendars................................       2,697,000       2,275,000
Bills, resolutions, and amendments..............................       8,800,000       7,387,000
Committee reports...............................................       3,362,000       3,440,000
Documents.......................................................       2,394,000       2,520,000
Hearings........................................................      17,871,000      21,266,000
Committee prints................................................       1,568,000       2,397,000
Funding for 2001 orders.........................................  ..............       5,875,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................      81,000,000      90,143,000     $90,143,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       GAO Review.--The Committee recognizes GPO is entering a new 
     era and is at the forefront of needing to confront several 
     major challenges. The longstanding structure of centralized 
     printing and dissemination within the Federal Government is 
     facing several challenges. The administration and executive 
     branch departments and agencies recently have challenged the 
     basic statutory premise of GPO doing all printing for the 
     Federal Government. In addition, technology advances during 
     the past decade have significantly changed the state of 
     printing and information dissemination--changes that need to 
     be considered as the future of printing and publishing within 
     the Federal Government is contemplated. Decisions about these 
     and other issues over the next few years will have a 
     significant effect on the costs of printing and public access 
     to Federal Government publications, which is a basic right of 
     every American citizen which must be maintained.
       The Committee believes that a comprehensive and critical 
     assessment of printing, publishing, copying, and 
     disseminating information within the Federal Government is 
     needed. Such an assessment would provide the Congress and new 
     Public Printer with useful information that will be needed to 
     formulate a long-term strategic plan for the GPO and to 
     develop effective, efficient, and economical means for 
     printing and disseminating Federal Government information.
       Therefore, the Committee directs the General Accounting 
     Office (GAO) to conduct a comprehensive review and assessment 
     of the Government Printing Office. GAO shall report its 
     findings and recommendations no later than December 1, 2003, 
     so that the Committee may consider GAO's findings and 
     recommendations in deliberating the fiscal year 2005 
     appropriations for the legislative branch.

                 Office of Superintendent of Documents

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$33,639,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................32,302,000
Committee recommendation.....................................29,661,000

\1\Includes $4,000,000 by transfer from emergency response fund (Public 
Law 107-38).

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $29,661,000, a 
     decrease of $2,641,000 below the request level. This provides 
     for mandatory pay and price level increases.
       This appropriation provides for salaries and expenses 
     associated with the distribution of Government documents to 
     depository and international exchange libraries, the 
     cataloging and indexing of Government publications, and the 
     distribution of publications authorized by law at the request 
     of Members of Congress and other Government agencies.

                             revolving fund

       The Committee bill continues the limitations on reception 
     and representation expenses and costs of attendance at 
     meetings. Funds for replacement of the air-conditioning 
     system and lighting improvements were included in the pending 
     fiscal year 2001 supplemental.

                       GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002....................................\1\$429,444,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................454,802,000
Committee recommendation....................................451,134,000

\1\Reflects $7,600,000 by transfer from emergency response fund (Public 
Law 107-117).

       The Committee recommends funding of $451,134,000 for 
     salaries and expenses of the General Accounting Office. 
     Additionally, $3,000,000 is authorized in offsetting 
     collections derived from rent receipts and reimbursements for 
     conducting financial audits of Government corporations, for a 
     total of $454,134,000, which will support an FTE level of 
     3,269 FTEs. The amount recommended, together with collections 
     will cover mandatory pay and price level increases, and 
     reflects the revised CSRS contribution cost projections.
       Technology Assessment.--In fiscal year 2002, the Congress 
     authorized the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct a 
     pilot technology assessment program and to report on the 
     results of the pilot program and the desirability of 
     maintaining a technology assessment capability in the 
     legislative branch. An independent evaluation of the pilot 
     program found that the pilot program has provided some useful 
     information for the

[[Page 936]]

     Congress on a high-priority technology-related concern. In 
     order to maintain this technology assessment capability 
     within the legislative branch the Committee recommends 
     $1,000,000 to permit GAO to conduct a minimum of three 
     additional studies in fiscal year 2003.

    PAYMENT TO THE FOREIGN LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT CENTER TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................13,000,000

       The Committee recommends $13,000,000 as a payment to the 
     Foreign Leadership Development Center Trust Fund for the 
     Center for Foreign Leadership Development. The Center for 
     Russian Leadership Development was established on December 
     21, 2000 (Public Law 106-554) as a legislative branch entity. 
     This bill includes legislation (section 1401) changing the 
     name and expanding the mission of the Russian Leadership 
     Program to include Newly Independent States of the former 
     Soviet Union including the Baltic States. The mission of the 
     Center is to enable emerging political leaders of Russia and 
     Newly Independent States at all levels of government to gain 
     significant, first-hand exposure to the American free market 
     economic system and the operation of American democratic 
     institutions through visits to comparable governments and 
     communities in the United States. Up to 70 percent of the 
     appropriation may be available for the Russian component of 
     the program.

                      TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Included are several routine general provisions carried 
     annually in the bill (secs. 301-309), as follows:
       Section 201 bans the use of appropriated funds for service 
     and maintenance of private vehicles, except under such 
     regulations as may be promulgated by the House Administration 
     Committee and the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, 
     respectively.
       Section 202 limits the availability for obligation of 
     appropriation to the fiscal year for which it is expressly 
     provided in the bill accompanying this report.
       Section 203 provides that any pay rate and title 
     designation for a staff position created in this Act, and not 
     specifically established by the Legislative Pay Act of 1929, 
     is to be made permanent law by this Act. Further, any pay 
     rate and title change for a position provided for in the 1929 
     Act is to be made permanent law by this act and any changes 
     in the official expenses of Members, officers, and 
     committees, and in the clerk hire of the House and Senate are 
     to be made permanent law by this Act.
       Section 204 bans the use of funds for contracts unless such 
     contracts are matters of public record and are available for 
     public inspection.
       Section 205 appropriates such sums as may be necessary for 
     the payment of settlements and awards pursuant to Public Law 
     104-1.
       Section 206 authorizes legislative branch entities 
     participating in the Legislative Branch Financial Managers 
     Council [LBFMC] to finance the costs of the LBFMC.
       Section 207 extends for 1 year the availability of funds 
     for the Senate art collection.
       Section 208 authorizes the Architect of the Capitol to 
     maintain the landscape features in an area not otherwise 
     under its jurisdiction.
       Sec. 209. U.S.-China Economic and Security Review 
     Commission. A general provision has been included providing 
     $1,800,000 for this commission.
       The U.S.-China Commission was authorized by Public Law 106-
     398 and established in October in 2000 to monitor, 
     investigate and report to Congress on the national security 
     implications of the bilateral economic relationship with the 
     Peoples Republic of China.
       Sec. 210. A general provision has been included providing 
     $300,000 for the John C. Stennis Center for Public Service 
     Development. The Committee continues to support the excellent 
     work done by the Stennis Center in the promotion of public 
     service, and through programs that promote an understanding 
     of the Federal Government. Since its establishment by 
     Congress in 1988, the Stennis Center has attracted young 
     people in careers in public service, provided training for 
     leaders in or likely to be in public service, and offered 
     development opportunities for senior Congressional staff. Due 
     to a recent ruling by the Department of Treasury, the fund 
     established for the Center's operation must now be invested 
     in securities that provide a lower rate of return. Because of 
     this action, the Center's operating budget will be 
     substantially reduced. To help in this funding transition and 
     to maintain current programs, the Committee has provided 
     $300,000 to assist the Center in addressing this 
     unanticipated budget shortfall.
       Sec. 211. This provision allows funding of $250,000 for 
     title II of the Congressional Award Act.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
     general appropriations bills identify, with particularity, 
     each Committee amendment to the House bill ``which proposes 
     an item of appropriation which is not made to carry out the 
     provisions of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an 
     act or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.''
       The Committee has recommended no such funding.

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or^)
              Item                      2002             Budget        House allowance      Committee    ----------------------------------------------------
                                    appropriation   estimate        deg.         recommendation         2002             Budget            House
                                                                                                            appropriation   estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
             TITLE I
 
             SENATE
 
     Expense Allowances and
         Representation
 
Expense allowances:
    Vice President..............               10                10                20               +10               +10
    President Pro Tempore of the               10                10                20               +10               +10
     Senate.....................
    Majority Leader of the                     10                10                20               +10               +10
     Senate.....................
    Minority Leader of the                     10                10                20               +10               +10
     Senate.....................
    Majority Whip of the Senate.                5                 5                10                +5                +5
    Minority Whip of the Senate.                5                 5                10                +5                +5
    Chairman of the Majority                    3                 3                 5                +2                +2
     Conference Committee.......
    Chairman of the Minority                    3                 3                 5                +2                +2
     Conference Committee.......
    Chairman of the Majority                    3                 3                 5                +2                +2
     Policy Committee...........
    Chairman of the Minority                    3                 3                 5                +2                +2
     Policy Committee...........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, expense                        62                62               120               +58               +58
       allowances...............
Representation allowances for                  30                30                30   ................  ................
 the Majority and Minority
 Leaders........................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Expense allowances                92                92               150               +58               +58
       and representation.......
 
Salaries, Officers and Employees
 
Office of the Vice President....            1,867             1,949             1,949               +82   ................
Office of the President Pro                   473               518               518               +45   ................
 Tempore........................
Offices of the Majority and                 2,868             3,094             3,094              +226   ................
 Minority Leaders...............

[[Page 937]]

 
Offices of the Majority and                 1,912             2,042             2,042              +130   ................
 Minority Whips.................
Committee on Appropriations.....           10,825            11,266            11,266              +441   ................
Conference committees...........            2,500             2,610             2,610              +110   ................
Offices of the Secretaries of                 618               648               648               +30   ................
 the Conference of the Majority
 and the Conference of the
 Minority.......................
Policy Committees...............            2,550             2,724             2,724              +174   ................
Office of the Chaplain..........              301               315               315               +14   ................
Office of the Secretary.........           15,424            17,079            17,079            +1,655   ................
Office of the Sergeant at Arms             39,082            45,941            43,161            +4,079            ^2,780
 and Doorkeeper.................
Offices of the Secretaries for              1,350             1,410             1,410               +60   ................
 the Majority and Minority......
Agency contributions and related           24,269            30,075            30,075            +5,806   ................
 expenses.......................
Outlays.........................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, salaries, officers           104,039           119,671           116,891           +12,852            ^2,780
       and employees............
 
    Office of the Legislative
      Counsel of the Senate
 
Salaries and expenses...........            4,306             4,581             4,581              +275   ................
 
 Office of Senate Legal Counsel
 
Salaries and expenses...........            1,109             1,176             1,176               +67   ................
Expense Allowances of the                      12                12                12   ................  ................
 Secretary of the Senate,
 Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
 of the Senate, and Secretaries
 for the Majority and Minority
 of the Senate: Expenses
 allowances.....................
 
   Contingent Expenses of the
             Senate
 
Inquiries and investigations....          107,264           109,450           109,450            +2,186   ................
Expenses of United States Senate              520               520               520   ................  ................
 Caucus on International
 Narcotics Control..............
Secretary of the Senate.........            8,571             7,077             7,077            ^1,494   ................
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper            95,904           117,133           114,423           +18,519            ^2,710
 of the Senate..................
    Emergency supplemental......           34,500   ................  ................          ^34,500   ................
Miscellaneous items.............           14,274            19,409            18,513            +4,239              ^896
Senators' Official Personnel and          270,494           303,879           294,545           +24,051            ^9,334
 Office Expense Account.........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Contingent Expenses          531,527           557,468           544,528           +13,001           ^12,940
       of the Senate............
 
       Official Mail Costs
 
Expenses........................              300               300               300   ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, contingent expenses          531,827           557,768           544,828           +13,001           ^12,940
       of the Senate............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Senate.............          641,385           683,300           667,638           +26,253           ^15,662
                                 =======================================================================================================================
           JOINT ITEMS
 
Joint Economic Committee........            3,424             3,658             3,658              +234   ................
Joint Committee on Taxation.....            6,733             7,323             7,323              +590   ................
 
     Office of the Attending
            Physician
 
Medical supplies, equipment,                1,865             1,947             3,000            +1,135            +1,053
 expenses, and allowances.......
Capitol Guide Service and                   2,512             3,035             3,035              +523   ................
 Special Services Office........
    By Transfer--Legislative                  350   ................  ................             ^350   ................
     Branch Emergency Response
     Fund (Public Law 107-117)..
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total, Capitol Guide                2,862             3,035             3,035              +173   ................
         Service and
         SpecialServices Office.
 
Statements of Appropriations....               30                30                30   ................  ................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Joint items........           14,914            15,993            17,046            +2,132            +1,053
 
         Capitol Police
 
Salaries:
    Sergeant at Arms of the                55,239   ................  ................          ^55,239   ................
     House of Representatives...
    Sergeant at Arms and                   57,805   ................  ................          ^57,805   ................
     Doorkeeper of the Senate...
    Capitol Police..............  ................          184,526           175,675          +175,675            ^8,851
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, salaries........          113,044           184,526           175,675           +62,631            ^8,851
 
General expenses................           13,146            28,100            28,100           +14,954   ................
    By Transfer--Legislative               31,000   ................  ................          ^31,000   ................
     Branch Emergency Response
     Fund (Public Law 107-117)..
        2002 Supplemental                  16,100   ................  ................          ^16,100   ................
         (Public Law 107-206)...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, General                44,146            28,100            28,100           ^16,046   ................
           expenses.............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
          Total, Capitol Police.          173,290           212,626           203,775           +30,485            ^8,851
 
      OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
 
Salaries and expenses...........            2,059             2,224             2,059   ................             ^165
 
   CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
 
Salaries and expenses...........           30,780            32,390            32,101            +1,321              ^289
 
    ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
 
  Capitol Buildings and Grounds
 
General administration..........           51,371            63,951            59,343            +7,972            ^4,608
Capitol building................           15,194            46,789            32,094           +16,900           ^14,695
    By Transfer--Legislative              106,304   ................  ................         ^106,304   ................
     Branch Emergency Response
     Fund (Public Law 107-117)..
Capitol grounds.................            6,009             7,711             8,356            +2,347              +645
Senate office buildings.........           42,126            55,103            64,871           +22,745            +9,768
 
Capitol Power Plant.............           56,983           148,003           106,686           +49,703           ^41,317
    Offsetting collections......           ^4,400            ^4,400            ^4,400   ................  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Net subtotal, Capitol                52,583           143,603           102,286           +49,703           ^41,317
       Power Plant..............
 
Library Buildings and Grounds...           21,753            40,284            37,521           +15,768            ^2,763
Capitol Police Buildings and      ................  ................           23,900           +23,900           +23,900
 grounds........................
Botanic Garden, salaries and                5,646             5,661             6,103              +457              +442
 expenses.......................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Architect of the             300,986           363,102           334,474           +33,488           ^28,628
       Capitol..................
 

[[Page 938]]

 
UNITED STATES CAPITOL HISTORICAL
             SOCIETY
 
Grant--By Transfer--Legislative             1,000   ................  ................           ^1,000   ................
 Branch Emergency Response Fund
 (Public Law 107-117)...........
                                 =======================================================================================================================
       LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
 
Salaries and expenses...........          306,692           357,121           358,474           +51,782            +1,353
    Authority to spend receipts.           ^6,850            ^6,850            ^6,850   ................  ................
    By Transfer--Legislative               29,615   ................  ................          ^29,615   ................
     Branch Emergency Response
     Fund (Public Law 107-117)..
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Subtotal, Salaries and            329,457           350,271           351,624           +22,167            +1,353
         expenses...............
 
        Copyright Office
 
Copyright Office, salaries and             40,896            44,321            39,226            ^1,670            ^5,095
 expenses.......................
    Authority to spend receipts.          ^27,864           ^29,527           ^29,512            ^1,648               +15
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Copyright Office           13,032            14,794             9,714            ^3,318            ^5,080
 
    2002 Supplemental (Public               7,500   ................  ................           ^7,500   ................
     Law 107-206)...............
 
Congressional Research Service,            81,454            87,646            86,952            +5,498              ^694
 salaries and expenses..........
Books for the blind and                    49,788            51,020            50,963            +1,175               ^57
 physically handicapped,
 salaries and expenses..........
Furniture and furnishings.......            7,932             8,003   ................           ^7,932            ^8,003
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Library of Congress          489,163           511,734           499,253           +10,090           ^12,481
 
    ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
 
     Capitol Visitors Center
 
Capitol Visitors Center.........           70,000   ................  ................          ^70,000   ................
 
     Congressional Cemetery
 
Congressional Cemetery..........            1,250   ................  ................           ^1,250   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Architect of the              71,250   ................  ................          ^71,250   ................
       Capitol..................
 
   GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
 
Congressional printing and                 81,000            90,143            90,143            +9,143   ................
 binding........................
Office of Superintendent of                29,639            32,302            29,661               +22            ^2,641
 Documents, salaries and
 expenses.......................
 
   Government Printing Office
         Revolving Fund
 
By Transfer--Legislative Branch             4,000   ................  ................           ^4,000   ................
 Emergency Response Fund (Public
 Law 107-117)...................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Government Printing          114,639           122,445           119,804            +5,165            ^2,641
       Office...................
 
    GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
 
Salaries and expenses...........          424,345           457,802           454,134           +29,789            ^3,668
    Offsetting collections......           ^2,501            ^3,000            ^3,000              ^499   ................
    By Transfer--Legislative                7,600   ................  ................           ^7,600   ................
     Branch Emergency Response
     Fund (Public Law 107-117)..
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total, General                    429,444           454,802           451,134           +21,690            ^3,668
         Accounting Office......
 
  CENTER FOR FOREIGN LEADERSHIP
           DEVELOPMENT
 
Payment to the Foreign                      8,000            10,000            13,000            +5,000            +3,000
 Leadership Development Center
 Trust Fund.....................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, title I............        2,276,910         2,408,616         2,340,284           +63,374           ^68,332
                                 =======================================================================================================================
            TITLE II
 
       GENERAL PROVISIONS
 
United States-China Trade Review  ................  ................            1,800            +1,800            +1,800
 Commission.....................
Stennis Center for Public         ................  ................              300              +300              +300
 Service........................
Congressional Arts Awards.......  ................  ................              250              +250              +250
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, General    ................  ................            2,350            +2,350            +2,350
       Provisions...............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Grand total...............        2,276,910         2,408,616         2,342,634           +65,724           ^65,982
                                 =======================================================================================================================
             TITLE I
 
Senate..........................          641,385           683,300           667,638           +26,253           ^15,662
Joint Items.....................           14,914            15,993            17,046            +2,132            +1,053
Capitol Police Board............          173,290           212,626           203,775           +30,485            ^8,851
Office of Compliance............            2,059             2,224             2,059   ................             ^165
Congressional Budget Office.....           30,780            32,390            32,101            +1,321              ^289
Architect of the Capitol........          300,986           363,102           334,474           +33,488           ^28,628
Library of Congress.............          489,163           511,734           499,253           +10,090           ^12,481
United States Historical Society            1,000   ................  ................           ^1,000   ................
 Grant..........................
Architect of the Capitol........           71,250   ................  ................          ^71,250   ................
Government Printing Office......          114,639           122,445           119,804            +5,165            ^2,641
General Accounting Office.......          429,444           454,802           451,134           +21,690            ^3,668
Center for Foreign Leadership               8,000            10,000            13,000            +5,000            +3,000
 Development....................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, title I............        2,276,910         2,408,616         2,340,284           +63,374           ^68,332
                                 =======================================================================================================================
  TITLE II--GENERAL PROVISIONS
 
United States-China Trade Review  ................  ................            1,800            +1,800            +1,800
 Commission.....................
Stennis Center for Public         ................  ................              300              +300              +300
 Service........................
Congressional Arts Awards.......  ................  ................              250              +250              +250
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, title II, General    ................  ................            2,350            +2,350            +2,350
       Provisions...............
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Grand total...............        2,276,910         2,408,616         2,342,634           +65,724           ^65,982
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 939]]

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 
                                  2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

    Mr. Shelby, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for the Department of Transportation 
     and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2003, and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and 
     recommends that the bill do pass.


  Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2003

Amount of bill as reported to Senate....................$22,202,638,000
Amount of budget estimates, 2003.........................20,799,680,000
Fiscal year 2002 enacted.................................18,900,670,000

  TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY PROVIDED--GENERAL FUNDS AND TRUST FUNDS

       In addition to the appropriation of $22,202,638,000 in new 
     budget authority for fiscal year 2003, large amounts of 
     contract authority are provided by law, the obligation limits 
     for which are contained in the annual appropriations bill. 
     The principal items in this category are the trust funded 
     programs for Federal-aid highways, for mass transit, and for 
     airport development grants. For fiscal year 2003, estimated 
     obligation limitations and exempt obligations total 
     $42,478,231,000.

                     PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

       During fiscal year 2003, for the purposes of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
     99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained 
     in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and 
     activity'' shall mean any item for which a dollar amount is 
     contained in appropriations acts (including joint resolutions 
     providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports 
     of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or 
     accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory 
     statements of the committee of conference. This definition 
     shall apply to all programs for which new budget 
     (obligational) authority is provided, as well as to 
     discretionary grants and discretionary grant allocations made 
     through either bill or report language. In addition, the 
     percentage reductions made pursuant to a sequestration order 
     to funds appropriated for facilities and equipment, Federal 
     Aviation Administration, and for acquisition, construction, 
     and improvements, Coast Guard, shall be applied equally to 
     each budget item that is listed under said accounts in the 
     budget justifications submitted to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations as modified by subsequent 
     appropriations acts and accompanying committee reports, 
     conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of the 
     committee of conference.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$67,778,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\.....................................92,460,000
Committee recommendation.....................................83,069,000

\1\Does not reflect reduction of $488,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $162,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes $3,640,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals, of which $149,000 is OST 
share of TASC accruals.

       Section 3 of the Department of Transportation Act of 
     October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-670) provides for 
     establishment of the Office of the Secretary of 
     Transportation [OST]. The Office of the Secretary is composed 
     of the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary immediate offices, 
     the Office of the General Counsel, and five assistant 
     secretarial offices for transportation policy, aviation and 
     international affairs, budget and programs, governmental 
     affairs, and administration. These secretarial offices have 
     policy development and central supervisory and coordinating 
     functions related to the overall planning and direction of 
     the Department of Transportation, including staff assistance 
     and general management supervision of the counterpart offices 
     in the operating administrations of the Department.
       The Committee recommends a total of $83,069,000 for the 
     Office of the Secretary of Transportation including $60,000 
     for reception and representation expenses.
       The following table summarizes the Committee's 
     recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate:

                                            (In thousands of dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                                                                 --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                       2002            2003       recommendation
                                                                    enacted\1\      estimate\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary..........  ..............           4,411  ..............
Immediate Office of the Secretary...............................           1,929  ..............           2,201
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary........................             619  ..............             799
Office of the Executive Secretariat.............................           1,204  ..............           1,390
Board of Contract Appeals.......................................             507             611             611
Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization..........           1,240           1,304           1,304
Office of Intelligence and Security.............................           1,321  ..............  ..............
Office of the Chief Information Officer.........................           5,991          15,987          11,487
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs......           2,282           2,453           2,282
Office of the General Counsel...................................          13,275          15,657          15,507
Office of the Under Secretary for Transportation Policy.........  ..............          12,453          11,123
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International           7,421  ..............  ..............
 Affairs........................................................
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy.....           3,058  ..............  ..............
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs.......           7,668           8,375           8,375
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration............          18,890          29,285          26,070
Assistant to the Secretary and Director of Public Affairs.......           1,723           1,926           1,920
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................          67,128          92,460          83,069
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Reflects reduction of $650,000 pursuant to section 349 of Public Law 107-87 and section 1106 of Public Law
  107-117..
\2\Excludes $3,640,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals.


[[Page 940]]

                   Immediate Office of the Secretary

       The Committee recommends $2,201,000 for fiscal year 2003 
     for the Immediate Office of the Secretary. The Immediate 
     Office of the Secretary has the primary responsibility to 
     provide overall planning, direction, and control of the 
     Department.


                Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary

       The Committee has recommended a total of $799,000 for the 
     Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary which has the 
     primary responsibility of assisting the Secretary in the 
     overall planning and direction of the Department. The amount 
     provided is $180,000 more than the comparable fiscal year 
     2002 appropriated level.


                     Office of the General Counsel

       The Committee recommends $15,507,000 for fiscal year 2003 
     for the Office of the General Counsel. The Office of the 
     General Counsel provides legal services to the Office of the 
     Secretary including the conduct of aviation regulatory 
     proceedings and aviation consumer activities and coordinates 
     and reviews the legal work in the chief counsels' offices of 
     the operating administrations. The General Counsel is the 
     chief legal officer of the Department of Transportation and 
     the final authority within the Department on all legal 
     questions. The Committee approves the agency's request for an 
     increase of $553,000 to be used for the Department's 
     ``Accessibility for All America'' initiative. These resources 
     will assist the Department in carrying out the requirements 
     in the Air Carrier Access Act of 1986 (ACAA) and Section 707 
     of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for 
     the 21st Century (AIR-21).


                OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLICY

       The position of the Under Secretary of Transportation for 
     Policy in the Department was established by section 215 of 
     the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 and 
     consolidated the Offices of Policy, Aviation and 
     International Affairs, and Intermodalism. The Under Secretary 
     for Policy is the chief policy officer of the Department and 
     is responsible to the Secretary for the analysis, 
     development, and review of policies and plans for domestic 
     and international transportation. The Office administers the 
     economic regulatory functions regarding the airline industry 
     and is responsible for international aviation programs, the 
     essential air service program, airline fitness licensing, 
     acquisitions, international route awards, computerized 
     reservation systems, and special investigations such as 
     airline delays.
       For fiscal year 2003, the Committee recommendation includes 
     $11,123,000 for the Office of the Under Secretary for Policy, 
     but does not concur with the request to fund the Office of 
     Intermodalism in the Office of the Secretary accounts. As in 
     past years, the Committee recommends funding for that office 
     to be provided within the Federal Highway Administration's 
     limitation on administrative expenses. Within the funds 
     provided for the Under Secretary for Policy, the Committee 
     provides the following allocation:

Aviation and International Affairs..........................$7,923,000 
Transportation Policy........................................3,200,000 
Intermodalism...............................................(1,261,000)

       Tier Matching Based on Fiscal Capability.--At present, 
     Federal grant programs administered by the Federal Highway 
     Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, and Federal 
     Transit Administration require an identical match of all 
     communities without regard to their financial circumstances. 
     Some have asserted that this policy places a disproportionate 
     burden on lower-income jurisdictions and prevents these 
     jurisdictions from fully participating in the very programs 
     necessary to improve conditions. The Committee takes no 
     position on this assertion. However, for the purpose of 
     information gathering, the Committee separately requests the 
     FHWA, FAA, and FTA to each provide reports, covering the 
     programs within each administration, to the Committee by 
     March 15, 2003 which address this contention. Should the 
     agencies believe that contention has merit, they may as part 
     of these reports, propose a tiered matching system for non-
     Federal contributions based upon the fiscal capability of the 
     grantee and which does not increase, over the existing grant 
     programs, each program's cumulative financial burden on each 
     administration.


       Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs

       The Committee recommends a total of $8,375,000 for the 
     Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs. 
     The amount provided is the same as the budget request and is 
     $647,000 more than the comparable fiscal year 2002 
     appropriated level. The Assistant Secretary for Budget and 
     Programs is the principal staff advisor to the Secretary on 
     the development, review, presentation, and execution of the 
     Department's budget resource requirements, and on the 
     evaluation and oversight of the Department's programs. The 
     primary responsibilities of this office are to ensure the 
     effective preparation and presentation of sound and adequate 
     budget estimates for the Department, to ensure the 
     consistency of the Department's budget execution with the 
     action and advice of the Congress and the Office of 
     Management and Budget, to evaluate the program proposals for 
     consistency with the Secretary's stated objectives, and to 
     advise the Secretary of program and legislative changes 
     necessary to improve program effectiveness.
       The Committee directs the Office of the Secretary to report 
     monthly on the status of all outstanding reports and 
     reporting requirements, including how delinquent 
     congressionally mandated or requested reports are and an 
     estimated date for delivery. The Committee expects that the 
     Department will constitute this responsibility in the Office 
     of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs.


       Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs

       The Committee recommends $2,282,000 for the Office of the 
     Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs which advises 
     the Secretary on all congressional and intergovernmental 
     activities and on all departmental legislative initiatives 
     and other relationships with Members of Congress. The amount 
     provided is the same as the comparable fiscal year 2002 
     appropriated level. The Assistant Secretary promotes 
     effective communication with other Federal agencies and 
     regional Department officials, and with State and local 
     governments and national organizations for development of 
     departmental programs; and ensures that consumer preferences, 
     awareness, and needs are brought into the decision-making 
     process.


          Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration

       The Committee recommends $26,070,000 for the Office of the 
     Assistant Secretary for Administration which includes the 
     Office of the Secretary portion of rent. The Assistant 
     Secretary for Administration is responsible for establishing 
     policies and procedures, setting guidelines, working with the 
     Operating Administrations to improve the effectiveness and 
     efficiency of the Department in human resource management, 
     security and administrative management, real and personal 
     property management, and acquisition and grants management. 
     The amount provided above the comparable fiscal year 2002 
     appropriated level is intended to compensate for some or all 
     of the following requested adjustments:

Increased security investigations..............................+$40,000
Protection services for the Secretary..........................+150,000
HQ building security barriers..................................+300,000

       The Committee has deferred consideration of the requests 
     for secure video conferencing equipment until the issues 
     surrounding the transition of certain DOT agencies to the new 
     Department of Homeland Security are resolved. The Committee 
     has not provided funding for a security survey for the new 
     headquarters building since funding is not provided for the 
     new headquarters building.


                        Office of Public Affairs

       The Committee recommends $1,920,000 for the Office of 
     Public Affairs which is the principal advisor to the 
     Secretary and other senior departmental officials and news 
     media on public affairs questions. The Office issues news 
     releases, articles, fact sheets, briefing materials, 
     publications, and audiovisual materials. It also provides 
     information to the Secretary on opinions and reactions of the 
     public and news media on transportation programs and issues. 
     The amount provided is $197,000 more than the comparable 
     fiscal year 2002 appropriated level.


                         Executive Secretariat

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,390,000 for 
     the expenses of the Executive Secretariat. The Executive 
     Secretariat assists the Secretary and Deputy Secretary in 
     carrying out their management functions and responsibilities 
     by controlling and coordinating internal and external written 
     materials. The amount provided is a 15 percent increase above 
     the comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated level.


                       Board of Contract Appeals

       The primary responsibility of the Board of Contract Appeals 
     is to provide an independent forum for the trial and 
     adjudication of all claims by, or against, a contractor 
     relating to a contract of any element of the Department, as 
     mandated by the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. 601. 
     The Committee has provided $611,000 for the Board of Contract 
     Appeals Board. The amount provided is the same as the amount 
     requested.


         Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization

       The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
     has primary responsibility for providing policy direction for 
     small and disadvantaged business participation in the 
     Department's procurement and grant programs, and effective 
     execution of the functions and duties under sections 8 and 15 
     of the Small Business Act, as amended. The Committee 
     recommends $1,304,000, the full amount requested.


                Office of the Chief Information Officer

       The Committee recommends $11,487,000 for the Office of the 
     Chief Information Officer which serves as the principal 
     adviser to the Secretary on matters involving information 
     resources and information systems management. The amount 
     provided is $5,346,000 more

[[Page 941]]

     than the comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated level. The 
     Committee believes that the additional funds are sufficient 
     to address the Department's most critical information 
     technology security initiatives.

                         Office of Civil Rights

Appropriations, 2002\1\......................................$8,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\......................................8,700,000
Committee recommendation......................................8,700,000

\1\Does not reflect reduction of $60,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $70,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117..
\2\Excludes $470,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the 
     Secretary on civil rights and equal employment opportunity 
     matters, formulating civil rights policies and procedures for 
     the operating administrations, investigating claims that 
     small businesses were denied certification or improperly 
     certified as disadvantaged business enterprises, and 
     overseeing the Department's conduct of its civil rights 
     responsibilities and making final determinations on civil 
     rights complaints. In addition, the Civil Rights Office is 
     responsible for enforcing laws and regulations which prohibit 
     discrimination in federally operated and federally assisted 
     transportation programs. The Committee has provided a funding 
     level of $8,700,000 for the Office of Civil Rights, the full 
     amount requested.

                       New Headquarters Building

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$25,000,000
Committee recommendation...............................................

       The administration requested $25,000,000 for the new 
     Department of Transportation headquarters project to 
     consolidate all of the department's headquarters operating 
     administration functions (except FAA and the United States 
     Coast Guard), from various locations into a state-of-the-art 
     efficient leased buildings within the central employment area 
     of the District of Columbia.
       The Committee believes that providing funding for this 
     building is premature at this time, given the uncertainty 
     surrounding the transition of certain DOT functions to the 
     newly established Department of Homeland Security and the 
     extraordinary investments that the Transportation Security 
     Administration has already made in the existing DOT building.

           Transportation Planning, Research, and Development

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$11,993,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\.....................................10,700,000
Committee recommendation.....................................21,000,000

\1\Does not reflect reduction of $87,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $313,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes $135,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       The Office of the Secretary performs those research 
     activities and studies which can more effectively or 
     appropriately be conducted at the departmental level. This 
     research effort supports the planning, research and 
     development activities needed to assist the Secretary in the 
     formulation of national transportation policies. The program 
     is carried out primarily through contracts with other Federal 
     agencies, educational institutions, nonprofit research 
     organizations, and private firms. The Committee recommends 
     $21,000,000 for transportation planning, research, and 
     development, $9,007,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and $10,300,000 more than the President's 
     budget request.

        Project Name                                             Amount

Bypass Mail System Computer Software & Hardware Upgrades, AK...$500,000
Circumpolar Infrastructure Task Force, Arctic Council & Northern Forum, 
  AK............................................................500,000
Delaware Memorial Bridge Collision Avoidance Project, DE......1,000,000
DOT's Privacy Practies Third Party Evaluation.................1,000,000
Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium Fuel Cell, CT...........2,000,000
Office for Infrastructure Transp. & Logistics, AL.............1,000,000
Strategic Freight Transportation Analysis, WA.................1,500,000
UAB Fuel Cell/Hybrid Electric Research Program, AL............1,000,000
WestStart's Vehicular Flywheel Project, WA....................1,500,000

              Transportation Administrative Service Center

Limitation, 2002\1\\2\.....................................$125,323,000
Budget estimate, 2003\3\....................................131,779,000
Committee recommendation....................................131,779,000

\1\Does not reflect reduction of $5,000,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $4,300,000 pursuant to section 1106 
of Public Law 107-117.
\2\Does not reflect $12,100,000 additional obligation limitation 
pursuant to H.R. 4775.
\3\Proposed without limitations. Includes DOT only.

       The Transportation Administrative Service Center [TASC] 
     provides a business operation fund for DOT to provide a wide 
     range of administrative services to the Department and other 
     customers. Services are financed through customer 
     reimbursements. During the budget formulation phase TASC 
     provides customers with estimates based on historical usage, 
     adjusted for new or changed requirements. TASC is also 
     responsive to newly emerging customer requirements that may 
     be identified as the program is executed. Customer estimates 
     are updated mid-year during the execution phase to provide 
     customers with more current information. TASC services are 
     delivered to customers through an organizational structure of 
     individual business practices providing related services or 
     products. This arrangement allows TASC to achieve economies 
     of scale, resulting in savings for TASC customers. TASC 
     customers also benefit from expertise developed in service 
     areas that are used in the Federal sector, such as transit 
     benefit distribution and technology acquisition. TASC 
     operates under a full cost recovery concept, which 
     incorporates distribution of overhead and indirect cost. TASC 
     services include:
       --Functions formerly in DOT's working capital fund [WCF];
       --Office of the Secretary [OST] personnel, procurement and 
         information technology support operations;
       --Systems development staff;
       --Operations of the consolidated departmental dockets 
         facilities; and
       --Certain departmental services and administrative 
         operations, such as human resources management programs, 
         transit fare subsidy payments, and employee wellness 
         including substance awareness and testing.

         Small Community Air Service Development Pilot Program

Appropriations, 2002........................................$20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................20,000,000

       The Committee bill includes $20,000,000, within funds 
     provided for FAA's airport improvement program, for the Small 
     Community Air Service Development Pilot Program authorized by 
     section 203 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and 
     Reform Act for the 21st Century. The program is designed to 
     improve air service to underutilized airports in small and 
     rural communities. The total number of communities or groups 
     of communities that can participate in the program is limited 
     to no more than 4 from any one State and no more than 40 
     overall. The program gives priority to communities that have 
     high air fares, will contribute a local share of the cost, 
     will establish a public-private partnership to facilitate 
     airline service, and where assistance will provide benefits 
     to a broad segment of the traveling public.

        Essential Air Service and Rural Airport Improvement Fund

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Approriations   Mandatory\3\    AIP transfer        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\.........................  \2\$13,000,000     $50,000,000  ..............     $63,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................  ..............      30,000,000     $43,000,000     113,000,000
Committee recommendation........................      65,000,000      50,000,000  ..............     115,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not include $50,000,000 from payments to Air Carriers (A&ATF) provided in the Emergency Supplemental
  Act, 2002, Public Law 107-117.
\2\Payments to Air Carriers (Airport and Airway Trust Fund).
\3\From overflight fees.

       The Essential Air Service [EAS] and Rural Airport 
     Improvement Program provides funds directly to commuter/
     regional airlines to provide air service to small communities 
     that otherwise would not receive air service and for rural 
     airport improvement as provided by the 1996 Federal Aviation 
     Reauthorization Act.
       The Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 authorizes 
     user fees for flights that fly over, but do not land in, the 
     United States. The first $50,000,000 of each year's fees were 
     to go directly to carry out the Essential Air Service Program 
     and, to the extent not used for essential air service, to 
     improve rural airport safety. If $50,000,000 in fees is not 
     available, than the funds must be made available from 
     appropriations otherwise made available to the FAA 
     Administrator.

[[Page 942]]

       For fiscal year 2003, the Administration has proposed to 
     transfer $83,000,000 from the grants-in-aid for airports 
     program (AIP) for the costs of the EAS program. The Committee 
     has rejected this request as it would strip almost the entire 
     amount of increased funds available in fiscal year 2003 for 
     investments in airport capacity and safety and security 
     projects. The Administration is also proposing bill language 
     to allow the Secretary to take whatever actions are necessary 
     to keep the 2003 program within the proposed $113,000,000. 
     The budget also proposed capping the per passenger subsidy at 
     $275 for points greater than 210 miles, with the exception of 
     service to communities in Alaska. The Committee does not 
     concur with either proposal and has instead provided adequate 
     sums to provide service to all current and likely eligible 
     points. The Committee notes that there is anticipated to be 
     an estimated $13,000,000 in carryover funds brought forward 
     from fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2003. Together with 
     these resources, program funding under the Committee 
     recommendation should equal $128,000,000 in fiscal year 2003.
       The following table reflects the points currently receiving 
     service and the annual rates as of February 1, 2002 in the 
     continental United States and Hawaii.

                                    EAS SUBSIDY RATES AS OF FEBRUARY 1, 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Average daily
                                              enplanements at                                         Total
                                              EAS point (year   Annual subsidy    Subsidy per       passengers
             States/communities                    ending      rates (February     passenger       (year ending
                                               September 30,       1, 2002)                       September 30,
                                                   2001)                                              2001)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA: Muscle Shoals......................             22.5       $1,073,257           $76.05           14,113
ARIZONA:
    Kingman.................................              5.1          541,502           170.87            3,169
    Page....................................            (\1\)        1,251,977  ...............  ...............
    Prescott................................             14.0          541,502            61.80             8762
    Show Low................................            (\1\)          410,080  ...............  ...............
ARKANSAS:
    El Dorado/Camden........................              4.1          825,569           317.89            2,597
    Harrison................................              8.6        1,125,591           208.06            5,410
    Hot Springs.............................              8.4        1,125,591           214.77            5,241
    Jonesboro...............................              7.7          825,569           170.85            4,832
CALIFORNIA:
    Crescent City...........................             43.5          314,865            11.57           27,205
    Merced..................................             13.3          949,458           113.99            8,329
COLORADO:
    Alamosa.................................             14.7          925,045           100.29            9,224
    Cortez..................................             28.8          403,311            22.35           18,044
    Pueblo..................................              8.8          527,185            95.83            5,501
HAWAII:
    Hana....................................             12.2          574,500            75.36            7,623
    Kamuela.................................              6.0          424,559           112.62            3,770
    Kalaupapa...............................              5.2          272,807            83.45            3,269
ILLINOIS: Marion/Herrin.....................             36.1          794,031            35.11           22,618
IOWA: Burlington............................             39.2          929,082            37.85           24,547
KANSAS:
    Dodge City..............................             13.5          564,422            66.86            8,442
    Garden City.............................             32.2          897,960            44.58           20,141
    Great Bend..............................              3.9          216,074            87.98            2,456
    Hays....................................             24.8        1,152,945            74.18           15,543
    LIberal/Guymon..........................             10.5        1,083,289           165.14            6,560
    Topeka..................................              6.2          621,872           161.07            3,861
KENTUCKY: Owensboro.........................             21.5          888,863            66.03           13,461
MAINE:
    Augusta/Waterville......................             13.7          634,145            73.76            8,597
    Bar Harbor..............................             40.8          634,145            24.82           25,545
    Presque Isle............................             59.6        1,082,408            29.03           37,284
    Rockland................................             23.4          634,145            43.38           14,620
MICHIGAN:
    Iron/Ashland............................              6.5          544,269           134.49            4,047
    Iron Mountain/Kingsford.................             28.6          473,599            26.41           17,933
    Manistee................................              4.4          542,168           197.15            2,750
MISSOURI:
    Cape Girardeau..........................             22.3          430,925            30.87           13,958
    Fort Leonard Wood.......................             27.1          573,725            33.79           16,979
    Kirksville..............................              6.3          732,363           186.59            3,925
MONTANA:
    Glasgow.................................              7.0          707,462           160.60            4,405
    Glendive................................              3.1          707,462           367.13            1,927
    Havre...................................              3.7          707,462           308.13            2,296
    Lewistown...............................              2.8          707,462           398.35            1,776
    Miles City..............................              3.9          707,462           291.38            2,428
    Sidney..................................              8.6          707,462           131.89            5,364
    Wolf Point..............................              5.8          707,462           193.35            3,659
NEBRASKA:
    Alliance................................              2.8          785,175           449.96            1,745
    Chadron.................................              5.1          785,175           244.83            3,207
    Kearney.................................             25.0          839,487            53.71           15,629
    McCook..................................              7.6        1,325,289           279.48            4,742
    Norfolk.................................              4.8          531,735           175.78            3,025
    North Platte............................             24.1          106,006             7.04           15,056
NEVADA: Ely.................................               /1          976,533
NEW MEXICO:
    Alamogordo/Holloman.....................              6.2          923,789           238.40            3,875
    Clovis..................................              8.8        1,118,197           202.28            5,528
    Gallup..................................              3.2          691,080           347.10            1,991
    Silver City/Hurley/Deming...............              8.3          935,667           179.69            5,207
NEW YORK:
    Massena.................................              9.0          371,835            65.87            5,645
    Ogdensburg..............................              7.6          371,835            77.72            4,784
    Saranac Lake............................              9.1          631,353           111.06            5,685
    Utica...................................              3.7        1,133,415           495.59            2,287
    Watertown...............................             10.7          371,835            55.33            6,720
NORTH DAKOTA:
    Devils Lake.............................              8.5          793,867           149.17            5,322
    Dickinson...............................             12.6          590,153            74.86            7,883
    Jamestown...............................              9.4          793,867           134.30            5,911
OKLAHOMA:
    Enid....................................             12.1          972,122           128.15            7,586
    Ponca City..............................             11.7          972,122           132.23            7,352
PENNSYLVANIA: Oil City/Franklin.............             15.2          510,261            53.49            9,540
PUERTO RICO: Ponce..........................             19.8          337,551            27.28           12,372
SOUTH DAKOTA:
    Brookings...............................              3.4          849,386           397.09            2,139
    Huron...................................              5.8          394,585           109.58            3,601
TENNESSEE: Jackson..........................             25.3        1,151,993            72.68           15,850
TEXAS: Brownwood............................              6.8          865,886           202.88            4,268
UTAH:
    Cedar City..............................             30.3          679,450            35.80           18,978

[[Page 943]]

 
    Moab....................................               /1          971,444
    Vernal..................................            (\1\)        1,102,967  ...............  ...............
VERMONT: Rutland............................              9.8          634,145           102.98            6,158
WASHINGTON: Ephrata/Moses Lake..............             32.7          479,859            23.48           20,439
WEST VIRGINIA:
    Beckley.................................              9.0          857,530           152.07            5,639
    Princeton/Bluefield.....................              7.5          857,530           181.64            4,721
WISCONSIN: Oshkosh..........................              8.7          460,392            84.86            5,425
WYOMING:
    Laramie.................................             33.8          297,633            14.07           21,149
    Rock Springs............................             31.3          465,023            23.72           19,605
    Worland.................................              9.5          353,345            59.73            5,916
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Less than full year data.

               Minority Business Resource Center Program

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$900,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................900,000
Committee recommendation........................................900,000

       Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
     [OSDBU]/Minority Business Resource Center [MBRC].--The OSDBU/
     MBRC provides assistance in obtaining short-term working 
     capital and bonding for disadvantaged, minority, and women-
     owned businesses [DBE/MBE/WBE's]. In fiscal year 2001, the 
     short-term lending program was converted from a direct loan 
     program to a guaranteed loan program. In fiscal year 2003, 
     the program will continue to focus on providing working 
     capital to DBE/MBE/WBE's for transportation-related projects 
     in order to strengthen their competitive and productive 
     capabilities.
       Since fiscal year 1993, the short-term lending program has 
     been a separate line item appropriation, which segregated 
     such activities in response to changes made by the Federal 
     Credit Reform Act of 1990. The limitation on guaranteed loans 
     under the Minority Business Resource Center is at the 
     administration's requested level of $18,367,000.
       Of the funds appropriated, $500,000 covers the subsidy 
     costs; and, $400,000 is for administrative expenses to carry 
     out the Guaranteed Loan Program.

                       Minority Business Outreach

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,000,000

       This appropriation provides contractual support to assist 
     small, women-owned, Native American, and other disadvantaged 
     business firms in securing contracts and subcontracts arising 
     out of projects that involve Federal spending. It also 
     provides support to historically black and Hispanic colleges. 
     Separate funding is requested by the administration since 
     this program provides grants and contract assistance that 
     serves DOT-wide goals and not just OST purposes.


                           General Provisions

       Rebates, refunds, and incentive payments.--The Department 
     receives funds from various Government programs at different 
     time intervals (that is, weekly, monthly, quarterly). For 
     example, under the General Services Administration's Travel 
     Management Center [TMC] Program, rebate checks received from 
     the travel contractor are distributed monthly to each element 
     of the Department in proportion to net domestic airline sales 
     arranged by the contractor. Past expenditures have to be 
     analyzed to determine the proper sources to refund which can 
     be a time-consuming process. The staff time and cost 
     associated with the precise accounting for each such refund 
     is prohibitive. To alleviate the need to specifically 
     identify the source for each repayment the Committee has 
     included language (sec. 326), as requested, that allows a 
     fair and sensible allocation of the rebates and miscellaneous 
     other funds.

                                                             CHANGES IN FISCAL YEAR 2002 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS
                                                                                    (In thousands of dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Public Law 107-87 DOT Appropriations Act                          Public Law 107-117 Emergency
                                                         ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------              Supp.                    Net
                                                           Approprations                                  Sec. 329                               --------------------------------  appropriation
                         Account                                and        Sec. 349 TASC    Sec. 318       Amtrak       Sec. 330      Sec. 350                                    and obligation
                                                            obligations      reduction      recession      Reform     Misc. hwy GF     Border     Sec. 1106 TASC    Chapter 11      limitation
                                                            limitation                                     Council      projects      Crossing       reduction
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary:
    Salaries and expenses...............................         67,778            -488   ............  ............  ............          -162  ..............  ..............         67,128
    Transportation planning, research, and development..         11,993             -87   ............  ............  ............  ............           -313   ..............         11,593
    Minority business resources center..................            900   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............            900
    Minority business outreach..........................          3,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............          3,000
    Office of civil rights..............................          8,500             -60   ............  ............  ............  ............            -70   ..............          8,370
    Essential air service/payments to air carriers......         13,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        [50,000]         63,000
    Essential air service (transfer of fees from FAA)...        [50,000]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        [50,000]
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        105,171            -635   ............  ............  ............  ............           -545          50,000         153,991
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Transportation Security Administration:
    Transportation Security Administration\1\...........  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         94,800          94,800
    Transportation Security Administration (fees).......     [1,250,000]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............     [1,250,000]
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
U.S. Coast Guard:
    Operating Expenses..................................      3,382,000            -791   ............  ............  ............  ............           -680         209,150       3,589,679
    Acquisition, construction, and improvements.........        636,354            -158   ............  ............  ............  ............           -136   ..............        636,060
    Environmental compliance and restoration............         16,927              -5   ............  ............  ............  ............             -4   ..............         16,918
    Alteration of bridges...............................         15,466   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         15,466
    Retired pay.........................................        876,346   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        876,346
    Reserve training....................................         83,194             -22   ............  ............  ............  ............            -19   ..............         83,153
    Research, development, test, and evaluation.........         20,222              -3   ............  ............  ............  ............             -3   ..............         20,216
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................      5,030,509            -979   ............  ............  ............  ............           -842         209,150       5,237,838
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Aviation Administration:
    Operations..........................................      6,886,000          -1,516   ............  ............  ............  ............         -1,304         200,000       7,083,180
    Facilities and equipment............................      2,914,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        108,500       3,022,500
    Facilities and equipment, rescission of py BA.......        -15,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        -15,000
    Research, engineering, and development..............        195,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         50,000         245,000
    Grants-in-aid for airports (obligation limitation)..      3,300,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............      3,300,000
    Grants-in-aid for airports (rescission of contra)...       -301,720   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............       -301,720
    Grants-in-aid for airports (TF appropriations)......  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        175,000         175,000
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
      Subtotal..........................................     12,978,280          -1,516   ............  ............  ............  ............         -1,304         533,500      13,508,960
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Highway Administration:
    Limitation on administrative expenses...............       [311,000]          [-452]  ............  ............  ............  ............          [-389]  ..............       [310,159]
    Federal-aid highways (obligation limitation)\2\.....     31,799,104   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............     31,799,104
    Emergency relief (CA)...............................       [100,000]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............       [100,000]

[[Page 944]]

 
    Emergency relief (TF approp)........................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         75,000          75,000
    Exempt obligations..................................        965,308   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        965,308
    Appalachian Development Highway System..............        200,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        200,000
    State infrastructure banks, rescission of py BA.....         -5,750   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         -5,750
    Miscellaneous appropriations (GF)...................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............       144,000  ............  ..............          4,300         148,300
    Miscellaneous highway projects (TF).................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        100,000         100,000
    Value Pricing and TIFIA, rescission of CA...........        -52,973   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        -52,973
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................     32,905,689           [-452]  ............  ............       144,000  ............          [-389]        179,300      33,228,989
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration:
    National motor carrier safety program (obligation)..        205,896   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        205,896
    Motor carrier safety (limitation on administration).        110,000             -85   ............  ............  ............  ............            -73   ..............        109,842
    Border Enforcement (TF).............................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............        25,866  ..............  ..............         25,866
    Limitation on admin. expenses, rescission of CA.....         -6,665   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         -6,665
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        309,231             -85   ............  ............  ............        25,866            -73   ..............        334,939
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
    Operations and Research, General Fund...............        127,780            -536   ............  ............  ............  ............           -461   ..............        126,783
    Operations and Research, Trust Fund (obligation)....         72,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         72,000
    National driver registration........................          2,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............          2,000
    Highway safety grants...............................        223,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        223,000
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        424,780            -536   ............  ............  ............  ............           -461   ..............        423,783
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Railroad Administration:
    Safety and operations...............................        110,857            -175   ............  ............  ............  ............           -150           6,000         116,532
    Research and development............................         29,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         29,000
    Next generation high speed rail.....................         32,300   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         32,300
    Alaska railroad rehabilitation......................         20,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         20,000
    Grants to Nat'l RR Passenger Corp...................        521,476   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        100,000         621,476
    Pennsylania Station redevelopment...................         20,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         20,000
    Amtrak reform council...............................  ..............  ..............  ............           225  ............  ............  ..............  ..............            225
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        733,633            -175   ............           225  ............  ............           -150         106,000         839,533
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Transit Administration:
    Administrative expenses (approps and oblig limit)...         67,000           [-208]  ............  ............  ............  ............          [-179]  ..............         67,000
    Formula grants (approps and oblig limitation)\3\....      3,542,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         23,500       3,565,500
    Univ. transporation research (approps and oblig)....          6,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............          6,000
    Transit planning and research (approps and oblig)...        116,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        116,000
    Capital investment grants (approps and oblig lim)...      2,891,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        100,000       2,991,000
    Capital investment grants (Trust Fund approps)......  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    Job access (approps and oblig limitation)...........        125,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        125,000
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................      6,747,000           [-208]  ............  ............  ............  ............          [-179]        123,500       6,870,500
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corp:
    Operations and maintenance..........................         13,345             -11   ............  ............  ............  ............            -10   ..............         13,324
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Research and Special Programs Administration:
    Research and special programs.......................         37,279            -113   ............  ............  ............  ............            -97           2,500          39,569
    Pipeline safety.....................................         58,250             -74   ............  ............  ............  ............            -64   ..............         58,112
    Emergency preparedness grants.......................         14,300   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         14,300
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        109,829            -187   ............  ............  ............  ............           -161           2,500         111,981
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Bureau of Transportation Statistics\4\..................        [31,000]          [-103]  ............  ............  ............  ............           [-89]  ..............        [30,808]
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Office of the Inspector General: Salaries and                    50,614            -108   ............  ............  ............  ............            -93           1,300          51,713
 expenses\5\............................................
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Surface Transportation Board:
    Salaries and expenses...............................         18,457              -5   ............  ............  ............  ............             -4   ..............         18,448
    Salaries and expenses (fees)........................           [950]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............           [950]
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
      Total, Department of Transportation (excluding         59,426,538          -4,237   ............           225       144,000        25,866         -3,643       1,300,050      60,888,799
       Maritime Administration).........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not include reallocation of Public Law 107-38 funds of $760 million from FEMA to TSA.
\2\Net of transfer of RABA to FMCSA.
\3\Reflects $50 million BA transfer from formula grants to capital discretionary.
\4\BTS funding included within Federal-aid highways.
\5\Does not include $5.5 million reimbursable from FHWA and FTA.

                 TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION


                  Summary of fiscal year 2003 Program

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Offsetting
                                        Appropriation      Collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\\2\..........    $1,250,000,000    $1,250,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...............     5,346,000,000     2,347,000,000
Committee recommendation............     5,346,000,000     2,347,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not include: (1) an additional $780,000,000 in supplemental
  funding provided to FAA for, among other things, security within the
  aircraft, explosives detection systems, and designated pilot and
  demonstration projects; (2) $298,000,000 in appropriated funding
  provided to FAA for functions now performed by TSA, including the
  transfer of the Civil Aviation Security organization, research and
  development, and explosives detection systems; and, (3) $93,000,000
  provided for port security grants.
\2\Does not $2.85,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 to support TSA
  operations.

       The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was 
     established on November 19, 2001, with the enactment of the 
     Aviation and Transportation Security Act (Act) into law. The 
     Act created TSA within the Department of Transportation and 
     identified a series of objectives and authorities under which 
     TSA would improve security across all modes of transportation 
     for the American public. As called for in the Act, TSA is 
     charged with ensuring security across the U.S. transportation 
     system. TSA's mission is to protect the Nation's 
     transportation systems by safeguarding the freedom of 
     movement of people and commerce. TSA will be responsible for 
     providing security to the Nation's transportation systems 
     including aviation, railways, highways, pipelines, and 
     waterways. The Act for the first time made overall aviation 
     security a direct Federal responsibility.
       The Committee recommends $5,346,000,000 for the activities 
     of the Transportation Security Administration for fiscal year 
     2003. The amount provided is the same as the budget request.
       Challenges for the Transportation Security Administration 
     (TSA).--The deadlines imposed by the Aviation and 
     Transportation Security Act posed an extraordinarily 
     challenge for any Federal agency to meet, even one that has 
     been up and running for several decades. That said, the 
     Committee has not been satisfied with the agency's 
     performance to date, especially in the manner in which the 
     agency has communicated with the Committee and

[[Page 945]]

     the general public. Budget materials provided by the agency 
     to the Committee have been substantially revised several 
     times and have lacked the level of specificity and clarity 
     that is necessary for the Committee to conduct proper 
     oversight and allocate taxpayer funds. Even more importantly, 
     the agency's posture with its public stakeholders has been 
     characterized by arrogance and disregard of the public's 
     views. This is particularly troubling given the fact that the 
     agency's core mission is to reassure the public as to the 
     safety of the Nation's transportation system. The Committee 
     hopes and expects that the recent change in leadership at the 
     agency will signal a new day in the way the agency interacts 
     with the Committee and the general public.
       Programs, Projects and Activities (PPAs).--As discussed 
     above, the Committee has struggled to ascertain the TSA's 
     spending plans based on the budget documentation submitted by 
     the agency. The statement of managers accompanying the 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2002 noted 
     that, at present, there are no clearly defined Programs, 
     Projects, and Activities (PPA's) established for the TSA's 
     budget. The Committee anxiously awaits the TSA's submission 
     of proposed PPA's so that the Committee can better understand 
     and review the agency's spending priorities. Until the agency 
     and the Committee agree on defined PPA's for the TSA budget, 
     the Committee cannot articulate its funding recommendation in 
     the context of adjustments to the President's Budget. As 
     such, the following table displays the minimum amounts 
     provided by the Committee for the following activities.

Modification of Airports to Install Checked Baggage Explosive Detection 
  Systems Including Trace Detection Systems................$250,000,000
Procurement of Explosive Detection Systems and Trace Dete\1\124,000,000
Intercity Bus Security Initiative............................15,000,000
Operation Safe Commerce......................................30,000,000
Security Research............................................25,000,000
Grants to Port Authorities for Security Enhancements........100,000,000

\1\Includes transfer of $55,000,000 from FAA facilities and equipment.

       Modification of Airports to Install EDS and ETD Systems.--
     In reviewing the TSA's belated budget justification, the 
     Committee was dismayed to learn that no additional funds have 
     been budgeted for fiscal year 2003 for airport modifications 
     necessary to install Explosive Detection Systems (EDS) and 
     Explosive Trace Detection (ETD) systems. To comply with the 
     ATSA December 31st deadline, the TSA has installed massive 
     amounts of explosive detection equipment in the Nation's 
     airports to screen all checked baggage for explosives. By the 
     agency's own admission, however, many of the measures that 
     were necessary to install and operate this equipment on such 
     a short timeline presents a considerable inconvenience to 
     airline passengers, air carriers, airport managers and 
     airport-based venders. In many instances, for the lack of 
     time and money to install explosive detection systems as part 
     of the airport's central baggage processing system, explosive 
     detection equipment was installed in terminal space currently 
     used by airline passengers. In other instances, the TSA has 
     adopted the use of canine teams, bag match, and other 
     detection methods on a temporary basis until certified 
     explosive detection machines can be installed and manned.
       The Committee is not prepared to allow this less-than-
     satisfactory situation to persist for a number of years while 
     the agency pursues the development of next-generation 
     explosive detection technologies. As such the Committee has 
     provided $250,000,000 for fiscal year 2003 for the purpose of 
     improving upon the interim deployment plans that were 
     necessary to comply with the December 31 deadline. The 
     Committee expects these funds to be used to retrofit those 
     airports that will face the greatest difficulty in minimizing 
     the inconvenience of air passengers in complying with the 
     December 31 deadline.
       Credentialing and screening of aviation workers.--The 
     statement of managers accompanying the second Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2002 expressed a number of 
     concerns regarding TSA's planned deployment of its 
     transportation worker identity card (TWIC) initiative. The 
     Committee of Conference to that bill went on to prohibit the 
     TSA from obligating any funds for this initiative until the 
     agency reports to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations on the concerns cited in the statement of 
     managers and the agency receives written reprogramming 
     approval from both Committees. In developing his 
     reprogramming request, the Committee expects the Under 
     Secretary to be particularly attentive to the immediate need 
     for improved credentialing to allow for the expeditious and 
     seamless movement of airline and airport employees. The fact 
     that airline and airport workers have already undergone 
     background investigations should facilitate this effort. The 
     Committee expects the Under Secretary to promptly develop a 
     credentialing system that is accepted throughout the airport 
     network and is supported by a centralized database so that 
     access limitations can be communicated promptly throughout 
     the system. With regard to security screening, it is 
     imperative that TSA develop a new screening process for 
     airline and airport employees. This process should be 
     conducted at separate portals from the screening of 
     passengers and should be tailored to the minimal security 
     risk posed by aviation employees. The TSA's current screening 
     methods for aviation employees diverts limited security 
     resources away from the real risks to the air transportation 
     system and needlessly creates delays for workers providing 
     time-critical aviation services on behalf of the traveling 
     public. The Committee believes that TSA would benefit from 
     the appointment of a taskforce to assist in the development 
     of this new credentialing and screening system. Such a 
     taskforce should include representatives from airlines, 
     airports, and aviation labor. The Committee will carefully 
     review the Under Secretary's reprogramming requests to 
     determine the extent of his responsiveness to the Committee's 
     stated concerns and directives in this area.
       Intercity Bus Security.--The Committee has provided an 
     additional $15,000,000 for the TSA's continued efforts in the 
     area of improving security in the intercity bus industry. 
     These funds will better insure the security of millions of 
     passengers that use the nation's intercity bus network.
       Motor Carrier Security Program.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $20,000,000 for grants for an 
     industry-wide trucking security program. The level of funding 
     is consistent with the request that was included in the 
     President's fiscal year 2003 budget amendments.
       Operation Safe Commerce.--The Committee has provided 
     $30,000,000 for the continued deployment of Operation Safe 
     Commerce. These funds shall be subject to the same terms and 
     conditions as articulated in the Committee report 
     accompanying the fiscal year 2002 Supplemental Appropriations 
     Bill. The amount provided is $2,000,000 more than the amount 
     provided for fiscal year 2002.
       Security Research.--TSA will conduct research and 
     development activities in an effort to improve current 
     security technology. This research will be targeted toward 
     methodologies of detecting potential chemical, biological or 
     similar threats and devices that could be released on an 
     aircraft or within an airport.
       Pilot projects.--The Committee has provided funding in 
     previous appropriations acts for the TSA to conduct pilot 
     projects to demonstrate and evaluate promising security 
     technologies and concepts. Pilot projects provide useful data 
     and practical experience regarding the effect of innovative 
     approaches and technology in improving aviation security. As 
     the newest large hub airport, Denver International Airport 
     (DIA) is well-suited as a location for testing new security 
     systems, and the Committee encourages the Under Secretary to 
     consider DIA as a candidate for conducting pilot projects, 
     including tests of new explosive detection equipment.
       Security Research Centers.--The FAA has established strong 
     collaborative research efforts with universities and private 
     industry, and this beneficial arrangement has helped advanced 
     a variety of aviation interests. The Committee believes that 
     the Under Secretary could achieve similar benefits in the 
     area of transportation security by establishing similar 
     alliances. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Under 
     Secretary, as the TSA continues to refine its research and 
     development program, to utilize expertise at the following 
     institutions: Center for Industrial Competitiveness at the 
     University of Massachusetts-Lowell; National Institute for 
     Advanced Transportation Technology at the University of 
     Idaho; State University System of Florida's Consortium for 
     Intermodal Transportation Safety and Security; Aviation 
     Institute at the University of Nebraska at Omaha; and, the 
     Center of Excellence for Aviation Security.
       Automated Surveillance System.--The Committee encourages 
     the Under Secretary to develop airport checkpoint security 
     and process management initiative at the Wichita Mid-
     Continent Airport that links video technology with advanced 
     software for real-time identification of security risks and 
     can alert appropriate security personnel.
       Remote baggage screening.--The Committee encourages the 
     Under Secretary to develop a pilot project at Anchorage 
     International Airport that will evaluate the potential of a 
     rapid baggage movement system to screen checked luggage for 
     explosives at an off-site facility.
       Grants to Port Authorities for Security Enhancements.--The 
     Committee has provided $100,000,000 for port security grants 
     in fiscal year 2003. These grants will be competitively 
     awarded by the Under Secretary for the purpose of assessing 
     and improving security at the Nation's seaports. While a 
     total of $218,000,000 was made available for this activity 
     between the first and second Supplemental Appropriations Acts 
     for 2002, the Department of Transportation's solicitation for 
     applications demonstrated an initial demand for these grants 
     of almost $700,000,000. Funds provided in fiscal year 2003 
     will help meet this demand.

[[Page 946]]

       Integrated Port Security Pilot Projects.--The Committee is 
     supportive of a series of integrated port security pilot 
     projects that involve information sharing between the busiest 
     container and cruise ship ports in the southeastern United 
     States. In distributing funds under the port security grant 
     program for fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003, the 
     Committee encourages the Under Secretary to positively 
     consider applications for such an integrated set of pilot 
     projects. Elements of these pilot projects might include the 
     improvement of surveillance systems, the use of smart cards 
     and biometric technology, vehicular traffic control, cargo 
     inspection, improved communications infrastructure and 
     information systems infrastructure, as well as passenger and 
     baggage screening for cruise ship passengers.
       Fitness for Duty Requirements.--The Committee is concerned 
     that the Under Secretary has not as yet implemented the new 
     requirement imposed by the Aviation and Transportation 
     Security Act that airport security screeners demonstrate 
     daily their fitness-for-duty without impairment due to 
     fatigue, medications, drug use or alcohol. The Committee 
     strongly recommends that the Under Secretary make expedited 
     use of currently available fitness-for-duty technology to 
     assess daily the alertness of airport security and provides 
     $250,000 specifically to implement a 1-year pilot project at 
     the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.
       Air Marshall air-ground communications.--Funding was 
     provided in fiscal year 2002 for procurement of air-ground 
     communications systems for Federal air marshals. The 
     Committee expects the Under Secretary to proceed 
     expeditiously with this procurement and begin installation of 
     such systems on major commercial passenger aircraft as soon 
     as possible.

                            U.S. COAST GUARD

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2002 Program

       The U.S. Coast Guard, as it is known today, was established 
     on January 28, 1915, through the merger of the Revenue Cutter 
     Service and the Lifesaving Service. In 1939, the U.S. 
     Lighthouse Service was transferred to the Coast Guard, 
     followed by the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation in 
     1942. The Coast Guard has as its primary responsibilities the 
     enforcement of all applicable Federal laws on the high seas 
     and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; 
     promotion of safety of life and property at sea; assistance 
     to navigation; protection of the marine environment; and 
     maintenance of a state of readiness to function as a 
     specialized service in the Navy in time of war (14 U.S.C. 1, 
     2).
       The Committee recommends a total program level of 
     $6,118,978,000 for the activities of the Coast Guard in 
     fiscal year 2003. This represents an increase of 
     $1,088,469,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
     following table summarizes the Committee's recommendations:


                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                           Program                                   2002             2003        recommendation
                                                                enacted\1\\3\     estimate\5\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating expenses\2\........................................       $3,780,150       $4,153,456       $4,318,456
Acquisition, construction, and improvements\4\...............          702,354          725,000          752,000
Environmental compliance and restoration.....................           16,927           17,000           17,000
Alteration of bridges........................................           15,466  ...............           14,000
Retired pay..................................................          876,346          889,000          889,000
Reserve training.............................................           83,194           86,522           86,522
Research, development, test, and evaluation..................           20,222           22,000           22,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................        5,494,659        5,892,978        6,118,978
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes reduction of $1,471,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and 107-117.
\2\Includes funding for national security activities of the Coast Guard scored against budget function 050
  (defense discretionary) as follows: fiscal year 2002 enacted amount includes $440,000,000 in defense
  discretionary funding; fiscal year 2003 estimate includes $340,000,000 and fiscal year 2003 Committee
  recommendation includes $340,000,000.
\3\Excludes $209,150,000 in Emergency Supplemental Appropriations pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\4\Excludes $66,000,000 in supplemental appropriations pursuant to Public Law 107-206.
\5\Excludes $22,284,000 in civilian and $293,858,000 in military accruals. Excludes $165,000,000 in new user fee
  revenue.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                New user fee
                                               General            Trust            revenue            Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\\2\\5\...........    $3,357,055,000       $24,945,000  ................    $3,382,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\3\................     4,129,126,000        25,000,000      $165,000,000     4,318,456,000
Committee recommendation\4\.............     4,293,456,000        25,000,000  ................     4,318,456,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes $440,000,000 for national security activities scored against budget function 050 (defense).
\2\Excludes reduction of $1,471,000 rescission pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 107-117.
\3\Includes $340,000,000 for national security activities scored against budget function 050 (defense).
\4\Includes $340,000,000 for national security activities including drug interdiction scored against budget
  function 050 (defense).
\5\Excludes $209,150,000 in Emergency Supplemental Appropriations pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

                           operating expenses

       The ``Operating expenses'' appropriation provides funds for 
     the operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels, 
     aircraft, and shore units strategically located along the 
     coasts and inland waterways of the United States and in 
     selected areas overseas.
       The program activities of this appropriation fall into the 
     following categories:
       Search and rescue.--One of its earliest and most 
     traditional missions, the Coast Guard maintains a nationwide 
     system of boats, aircraft, cutters, and rescue coordination 
     centers on 24-hour alert.
       Aids to navigation.--To help mariners determine their 
     location and avoid accidents, the Coast Guard maintains a 
     network of manned and unmanned aids to navigation along our 
     coasts and on our inland waterways, and operates radio 
     stations in the United States and abroad to serve the needs 
     of the armed services and marine and air commerce.
       Marine safety.--The Coast Guard insures compliance with 
     Federal statutes and regulations designed to improve safety 
     in the merchant marine industry and operates a recreational 
     boating safety program.
       Marine environmental protection.--The primary objectives of 
     this program are to minimize the dangers of marine pollution 
     and to assure the safety of U.S. ports and waterways.
       Enforcement of laws and treaties.--The Coast Guard is the 
     principal maritime enforcement agency with regard to Federal 
     laws on the navigable waters of the United States and the 
     high seas, including fisheries, drug smuggling, illegal 
     immigration, and hijacking of vessels.
       Ice operations.--In the Arctic and Antarctic, Coast Guard 
     icebreakers escort supply ships, support research activities 
     and Department of Defense operations, survey uncharted 
     waters, and collect scientific data. The Coast Guard also 
     assists commercial vessels through ice-covered waters.
       Defense readiness.--During peacetime the Coast Guard 
     maintains an effective state of military preparedness to 
     operate as a service in the Navy in time of war or national 
     emergency at the direction of the President. As such the 
     Coast Guard has primary responsibility for the security of 
     ports, waterways, and navigable waters up to 200 miles 
     offshore.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommendation for Coast Guard operating 
     expenses is $4,318,456,000, including $25,000,000 from the 
     oil spill liability trust fund and $340,000,000 from function 
     050 for the Coast Guard's defense-related activities 
     including drug interdiction.
       Mission Emphasis.--The Coast Guard responded to the 
     terrorist attacks of last September in an unprecedented and 
     dramatic manner. In doing so, they refocused nearly all of 
     their personnel and redirected most of their cutters, boats 
     and aircraft on domestic maritime security. While the Coast 
     Guard has on a number of occasions been required to rapidly 
     shift its mission emphasis, the extent of the shift to 
     domestic security that followed the events of September 11th 
     was certainly unprecedented in the history of the Coast 
     Guard. The Committee believes that the Coast Guard acted with 
     extraordinary professionalism and heroism during this period 
     of rapid transformation. At the same time, the Committee has 
     concerns regarding the Coast Guard's ability to once again 
     achieve mission balance and adequately address its other 
     critical missions--missions including Search and Rescue, Drug 
     and Migrant Interdiction, the maintenance of Aids to 
     Navigation and ensuring the safety and integrity of our 
     domestic fishing grounds.
       As part of the Committee's annual hearing regarding the 
     Coast Guard's budget request, the DOT Inspector General 
     reported that the service deployed 59 percent of its 
     resources

[[Page 947]]

     on port safety and security missions immediately following 
     September 11th. Those resources included the Coast Guard's 
     core Search and Rescue vessels, some of which were 
     repositioned far away from their optimal location for 
     conducting their Search and Rescue mission. Indeed, the IG 
     noted that the Coast Guard's small boat stations experienced 
     a 50 percent increase in operating hours as they sought to 
     perform all of their new port security responsibilities at 
     the same time they were seeking to maintain an effective 
     Search and Rescue program.
       The information provided below illustrates exactly how the 
     Coast Guard directed its mission emphasis over the last year. 
     It depicts an overall increase in operating hours in the 
     first quarter of fiscal year 2002 reflecting the rapid 
     response to the terrorist attacks. That surge began to level 
     off in the third quarter of fiscal year 2002 as the Coast 
     Guard sought to return to a more balanced level of effort 
     across its missions. A review of the data for the third 
     quarter of fiscal year 2002--the most recent quarter for 
     which data is available--reveals that many of the missions 
     that suffered the greatest diminution of effort following 
     September 11th have not yet returned to their baseline level. 
     Indeed, the Committee is greatly concerned that the agencies 
     new emphasis on security, as articulated in its fiscal year 
     2003 budget request, means that the Coast Guard has no 
     intention of restoring missions like drug interdiction and 
     fisheries enforcement to their pre-September 11th levels.
     
     
     

[[Page 948]]

     

       The Committee does not question the need for a more robust 
     homeland security focus on the part of the Coast Guard. Even 
     so, the Committee is disappointed that, at a time when the 
     Administration is requesting an historic and well deserved 
     funding increase for the Coast Guard, almost the entire 
     increase is devoted to expanded homeland defense efforts. 
     Indeed, the documentation accompanying this budget request 
     confirms the agency's intention to continue to de-emphasize 
     its non-homeland defense missions while its budget grows. The 
     Committee does not agree that, at a time when the Coast 
     Guard's operating budget is growing by double-digit 
     percentages, the taxpayer should be content with a diminished 
     effort in the areas of marine safety, marine environmental 
     protection, drug interdiction and fisheries enforcement.
       In order to address this concern, the Committee is granting 
     the Commandant the flexibility to redress this imbalance. The 
     Committee fully funds the $21,724,000 sought for Maritime 
     Search and Rescue improvements--budget category IV F--and 
     disallows funding for budget category IV G since this item is 
     not consistent with the Coast Guard's Ports and Waterways 
     Safety Systems (PAWSS) strategy. With the more than 
     $450,000,000 in additional funding provided in this 
     appropriation to operate new facilities and commence or 
     enhance new initiatives, the Committee expects the Commandant 
     to launch his highest priority initiatives for homeland 
     defense while leaving himself sufficient resources to return 
     his non-homeland security missions to their pre-September 
     11th levels.
       The Committee directs the Commandant to submit a detailed 
     report as to how he will achieve this objective as part of 
     his budget submission for fiscal year 2004. This report 
     should include a detailed revised distribution of fiscal year 
     2003 resources in comparison to the line items initially 
     requested in the fiscal year 2003 budget request. In order to 
     monitor the Commandant's progress toward this goal, the 
     Committee directs the Commandant to submit quarterly reports 
     to the Committee detailing the resource hours achieved by 
     mission. This report should also include district-by-district 
     data for aircraft, cutter, and boat hours by mission area. 
     The report should also compare this data to the comparable 
     data for the eight quarters that preceded September 11, 2001. 
     These reports will be submitted using the same deadlines and 
     restrictions pertaining to the agency's Quarterly Acquisition 
     Reports.
       The Committee recognizes that the integrity of the Coast 
     Guard's mission hour data has been compromised in the past 
     due to inconsistencies in unit's reporting practices in the 
     field. The Committee commends the Commandant's efforts to 
     date to improve the accuracy of this data and requests that 
     the DOT Inspector General periodically monitor the reporting 
     of this data as well as the accuracy of the quarterly mission 
     hour reports to be submitted to the Committee.
       Flag Officer Billets.--The Committee has provided 
     sufficient funds for the retention of 37 flag billets in 
     fiscal year 2003, which is 3 more than the number requested 
     in the Coast Guard's budget request and which reflects the 
     actual number of flag officers. The Committee notes that the 
     number of flag officer billets has grown steadily in the last 
     few years even though the Coast Guard has consistently had 
     the lowest ratio of officers to flag officers and enlisted 
     personnel to flag officers of any of the military services. 
     The Committee recognizes that an even higher level of flag 
     officer billets may be authorized. However, the Committee is 
     concerned that the budget justifications submitted to the 
     Committee have not accurately reflected the number of flag 
     officers requested for the budget year. Specifically, the 
     budget justification for fiscal year 2000 identified an 
     expectation for one additional flag billet in the budget 
     year. With the arrival of the 2001 budget request, the 
     Committee discovered that the service added two additional 
     flag billets in fiscal year 2000. Similarly, the 2002 budget 
     request did not identify any growth in the number of flag 
     officers for that year. With the arrival of the budget 
     request for 2003, the Committee discovered that the service 
     had indeed added another flag officer in 2002. The Committee 
     expects the Coast Guard to address the imbalance inherent to 
     the flag officer-to-billet ratio and to ensure that the 
     budget justification for fiscal year 2004 reflects an 
     accurate, appropriate, and sustainable level.
       Navigational Assistance Services Fees.--For the second 
     consecutive year, the Administration had proposed the 
     initiation of new Navigational Assistance Service fees. The 
     effect of this proposal is to lower the actual appropriation 
     requirement for Coast Guard operating expenses in fiscal year 
     2003 by $165,000,000 by requiring the users of Coast Guard 
     services to cover those costs. The Committee has, again, 
     rejected this approach and provided sufficient appropriations 
     to cover all of the Coast Guard's needs.
       Marine Fire and Safety Association.--The Committee remains 
     supportive of efforts by the Marine Fire and Safety 
     Association (MFSA) to provide specialized firefighting 
     training and maintain an oil spill response contingency plan 
     for the Columbia River. The Committee encourages the 
     Secretary to provide funding for MFSA consistent with the 
     authorization and directs the Secretary to provide $312,000 
     to continue efforts by the nonprofit organization comprised 
     of numerous fire departments on both sides of the Columbia 
     River. The funding will be utilized to provide specialized 
     communications, firefighting training and equipment, and to 
     implement the oil spill response contingency plan for the 
     Columbia River.
       Great Lakes Pilotage.--The Committee is informed that the 
     Great Lakes ports collectively petitioned the Coast Guard in 
     July 2001 to publish for public comment a proposed plan to 
     streamline and modernize the pilotage system on the Great 
     Lakes. The Committee is concerned that the Coast Guard has 
     not acted on this petition. The Committee urges the Coast 
     Guard to seek public comment on this issue.
       AMSEA.--The Committee recommends $350,000 to be available 
     only to continue this marine safety training program that 
     trains fishermen and children in cold water safety 
     techniques.
       Oil spill prevention, 13th District.--Within the amount 
     provided, the Committee has provided $1,600,000 for enhanced 
     oil spill prevention activities in the waters of Washington 
     State. These additional funds shall be under the sole control 
     of the Captain of the Port-Puget Sound and will be in 
     addition to any and all funds that would normally be 
     allocated for marine environmental protection activities to 
     that unit under the President's budget request. The Captain 
     of the Port-Puget Sound is the Federal official solely 
     responsible for preventing the accidental release of oil from 
     tankers entering the Straits

[[Page 949]]

     of Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound. As such, the Committee 
     expects the Captain of the Port to use his professional 
     judgment in allocating these funds to measures that he 
     believes will best protect these waters. Such measures could 
     include a cost sharing arrangement with the State of 
     Washington for the hiring of a rescue tug at Neah Bay. 
     However, these funds could be allocated to alternative 
     measures if, in the view of the Captain of the Port, such 
     alternative measures will provide a superior level of 
     protection. The Committee expects the Commandant to forward 
     to the Committee a spend plan for these funds once the 
     Captain of the Port has decided on the appropriate approach 
     to enhancing environmental protection in his area of 
     operation.
       Station Indian River Inlet Staffing.--The Committee is 
     aware that a staffing shortage may exist at Coast Guard 
     Station Indian River Inlet following the addition of new 
     security requirements. The station, which is currently 
     staffed by nine personnel, acts as the gateway to the ports 
     of Wilmington, Delaware and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The 
     men and women at this station maintain a safe and secure 
     waterway for vessels traveling to these ports. They also 
     provide waterside security for the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, 
     bridges over navigational waters, oil refineries and tourist 
     attractions along the Delaware River, Delaware Bay and 
     Delaware's Atlantic Coast. As such, the Commandant is 
     directed to evaluate the staffing levels at this station to 
     determine if additional staffing is necessary.
       Coastwise Endorsements.--More than 5 years after Congress 
     enacted section 113(d) of the Coast Guard Authorization Act 
     of 1996 (now codified at 46 U.S.C. 12106(e)), the Agency has 
     yet to promulgate regulations implementing the provision. The 
     Committee is concerned that the resulting lack of Federal 
     direction could allow control over U.S. coastwise vessels by 
     foreign companies who may use tax and other advantages to 
     compete unfairly with U.S. companies in domestic commerce. 
     The Congressional intent in 1996, which has not changed in 
     enacting section 113(d), was to provide U.S.-based coastwise 
     vessel operators with broadened sources of investment 
     capital. At no time did Congress intend that section 113(d) 
     be interpreted as a means of undermining the integrity of the 
     Jones Act and related Maritime Cabotage laws. Until the rule 
     implementing subsection 12106(e) is published in final form, 
     the Committee expects the Coast Guard to ensure that any 
     application approved under this provision is fully consistent 
     with the intent of Congress as stated in the 1996 Conference 
     Report.
       Datum marker buoys (DMBs).--The Committee allowance 
     includes not less than $1,000,000 for the continued 
     procurement of Datum Marker Buoys.
       Maritime Electro-Optical Infrared (EO/IR) Handheld and 
     Fixed Sensors.--Within the funds provided, the Committee 
     provides $5,000,000 for Maritime Electro-Optical Sensors. Of 
     this amount, $3,000,000 shall be derived from budget category 
     IV G and $2,000,000 from the additional funds provided. These 
     sensors are on cutters, patrol boats, as well as for Marine 
     Safety Offices and Marine Safety and Security Teams. They 
     will assist in both the maritime safety and security mission 
     goals by enabling Coast Guard personnel to conduct maritime 
     operations safely and effectively at night and in adverse 
     weather conditions.
       Coast Guard Yard.--The Committee recognizes the Coast Guard 
     Yard at Curtis Bay, Maryland is a critical component of the 
     Coast Guard's core logistics capability that directly 
     supports fleet readiness. The Committee further recognizes 
     that the yard has been a vital part of the Coast Guard's 
     readiness infrastructure for more than 100 years and believes 
     that sufficient industrial work should be assigned to the 
     Yard on a competitive basis to maintain this capability.

              Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      General          Trust           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\.........................................    $616,354,000     $20,000,000   $636,354,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\........................................     705,000,000      20,000,000    725,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................     732,000,000      20,000,000    752,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes reduction of $294,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and 107-117.
\2\Excludes $1,266,000 in civilian and $9,580,000 in military accurals.

       This appropriation provides for the major acquisition, 
     construction, and improvement of vessels, aircraft, shore 
     units, and aids to navigation operated and maintained by the 
     Coast Guard. Currently, the Coast Guard has in operation 
     approximately 250 cutters, ranging in size from 65-foot tugs 
     to a 420-foot polar icebreaker, more than 2,000 boats, and an 
     inventory of more than 200 helicopters and fixed-wing 
     aircraft. The Coast Guard also operates approximately 600 
     stations, support and supply centers, communications 
     facilities, and other shore units. The Coast Guard maintains 
     over 48,000 navigational aids--buoys, fixed aids, 
     lighthouses, and radio navigational stations.

                        committee recommendation

       The recommended bill provides $752,000,000 for acquisition, 
     construction, and improvements, including $20,000,000 from 
     the oil spill liability trust fund. This represents an 
     increase of $115,646,000 (18 percent) above last year's 
     enacted level and is the same as the budget request.
       The following table summarizes the Committee's programmatic 
     recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003     Committee
                                                               enacted\1\\2\       estimate       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels....................................................      $89,640,000       $13,600,000       $25,600,000
Integrated Deepwater Systems Program.......................      320,190,000       500,000,000       480,000,000
Aircraft...................................................        9,500,000   ................  ...............
Other equipment............................................       79,293,000       117,700,000       132,700,000
Shore facilities and aids to navigation....................       73,100,000        28,700,000        48,700,000
Personnel and related support..............................       64,631,000        65,000,000        65,000,000
                                                            ----------------------------------------------------
      Total................................................      636,354,000       725,000,000       752,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes reduction of $294,000 rescission pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 108-117.
\2\Excludes $328,000,000 in supplemental emergency appropriations.

       The following table compares the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level, the fiscal year 2003 estimate, and the recommended 
     level by program, project, and activity.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Fiscal year
                          Program name                           --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                   2002 enacted    2003 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels:
    Survey and design--cutters and boats........................        $500,000        $400,000        $400,000
    Seagoing buoytenders (WLB) replacement......................      68,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Polar class reliability improvement (RIP)...................       4,490,000       2,200,000       2,200,000
    41 foot utility boat replacement............................      12,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    85 foot fast patrol craft...................................       4,650,000  ..............  ..............
    87 foot coastal patrol boats................................  ..............  ..............      12,000,000
    Alex Haley conversion.......................................  ..............       3,000,000       3,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal vessels..........................................      89,640,000      13,600,000      25,600,000
                                                                 ===============================================
Integrated Deepwater Systems program (IDS):
    Aircraft....................................................      35,700,000     138,200,000     135,200,000
    Surface ships...............................................      36,700,000     215,700,000     212,700,000
    C4ISR.......................................................     106,500,000  ..............  ..............
    Logistics...................................................      71,200,000      71,600,000      66,600,000
    Other contracts.............................................      39,800,000      43,500,000      36,500,000
    Government Program Management...............................      30,300,000      31,000,000      29,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal IDS..............................................     320,200,000     500,000,000     480,000,000
Aircraft:
    Aviation parts and support..................................       9,000,000  ..............  ..............
    C130J system provisioning and training analyses.............         500,000  ..............  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal aircraft.........................................       9,500,000  ..............  ..............
                                                                 ===============================================
Other Equipment:
    Ports and Waterways Safety Systems (PAWSS)..................       6,000,000       5,000,000       5,000,000
    Marine information for safety & law enforcement.............       7,450,000  ..............  ..............

[[Page 950]]

 
    National distress system modernization......................      42,000,000      90,000,000      90,000,000
    Defense message system implementation.......................       1,500,000       2,100,000       2,100,000
    Commercial satellite communication..........................       1,500,000  ..............  ..............
    Global maritime distress and safety system..................       2,200,000       2,200,000       2,200,000
    Search and rescue capabilities..............................       1,320,000  ..............  ..............
    Thirteenth district microwave modernization.................         800,000       3,000,000       3,000,000
    Hawaii Rainbow communications system........................       3,100,000       3,000,000       3,000,000
    High frequency recapitalizaion & modernization..............       2,000,000       2,000,000       2,000,000
    Prince William Sound Microwave wide-area....................  ..............       1,000,000       1,000,000
    Security surveillance and protection........................  ..............  ..............      15,000,000
    Command center readiness/infrastructure.....................         727,000  ..............  ..............
    P-250 pump replacement......................................       2,046,000  ..............  ..............
    Configuration management--phase II..........................       3,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Self-contained breathing apparatus..........................       1,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Maritime electro-optical sensors............................       4,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Ice detecting radar--Cordova, AK............................         650,000  ..............  ..............
    Maritime domain awareness information.......................  ..............       9,400,000       9,400,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal other equipment..................................      79,293,000     117,700,000     132,700,000
                                                                 ===============================================
Shore Facilities & aids to navigation:
    Survey and design--shore projects...........................       4,000,000       2,500,000       2,500,000
    Minor AC&I shore construction projects......................       4,000,000       4,900,000       4,900,000
    Housing.....................................................      13,500,000       7,000,000       7,000,000
    Waterways ATON projects.....................................       5,500,000       4,900,000       4,900,000
    Rebuild Station Port Huron, MI..............................       3,100,000  ..............  ..............
    Consolidate warehouse--CG Yard, MD..........................      12,600,000  ..............  ..............
    Construct new station--Brunswick, GA........................       3,600,000  ..............  ..............
    Replace utilities, ISC building Number 8--Boston, MA........       1,600,000  ..............  ..............
    Construct engineering bldg, ISC Honolulu, HI................       7,200,000  ..............  ..............
    Consolidate Kodiak aviation support--Kodiak, AK.............       5,700,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Reconstruct north wall, Escanaba Municipal dock.............         300,000  ..............  ..............
    Rebuild ISC Seattle Pier 36--Phase I........................      10,000,000  ..............      16,000,000
    CG Marine safety & rescue station, Chicago, IL..............       2,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Vessel pier facility, Cordova, AK...........................  ..............  ..............       4,000,000
    Station Manistee, MI construction...........................  ..............       5,400,000       5,400,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal shore facilities.................................      73,100,000      28,700,000      48,700,000
                                                                 ===============================================
Personnel and Related Support:
    Direct personnel costs......................................      63,931,000      64,500,000      64,500,000
    Core acquisition costs......................................         700,000         500,000         500,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal personnel and related support....................      64,631,000      65,000,000      65,000,000
                                                                 ===============================================
      Total appropriation.......................................     636,354,000     725,000,000     752,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                vessels

       Response Boat Small.--The Committee notes that the Coast 
     Guard is procuring a new standard small boat to provide the 
     lower range capability of its shore-based response system. 
     These Response Boats will be procured under an indefinite 
     delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract for a period of 
     seven years, with an initial purchase quantity of 100 boats 
     and a maximum quantity of 700. The Committee notes with 
     concern, however, that the Coast Guard in the FRP has 
     specified a specific design technology for the outboard 
     motors that will power the Response Boat Small fleet.
       It has been reported to the Committee that the decision on 
     the specified engine technology may have been based on an 
     out-of-date survey. The Committee, however, is more concerned 
     that a Coast Guard FRP would still limit competition by 
     mandating a specific engine technology rather than use a 
     performance-based specification to maximize competition while 
     ensuring all basic requirements are met this far into the era 
     of procurement reform.
       Accordingly, prior to exercising any options beyond the 
     purchase of the first 100 boats, the Coast Guard may modify 
     the contract to be either a pure performance-based 
     specification or to specifically allow both direct injection 
     and four-stroke engines to be considered by boat 
     manufacturers as long as they meet the requisite performance 
     and environmental criteria and such a change is merited based 
     on the results of the most recent internal Coast Guard study.
       Coastal Patrol Boats.--The Committee believes that Coastal 
     Patrol Boats are an essential part of the Coast Guard's 
     homeland defense in our ports, waterways, and territorial 
     waters. The Committee is aware that the Coast Guard has 
     identified the need for additional Coast Patrol Boats. In 
     order to address one of the Coast Guard's most pressing 
     capital needs and to prevent a fiscal year 2003 production 
     line gap, the Committee has provided $12,000,000 for on-going 
     procurement efforts.


                  INTEGRATED DEEPWATER SYSTEMS PROGRAM

       The Committee has provided $480,000,000 for the Integrated 
     Deepwater Systems (IDS) program, which is $159,800,000 or 50 
     percent more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
     $20,000,000 less the budget request.


      NATIONAL DISTRESS AND RESPONSE SYSTEM MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

       The Committee recommends $90,000,000 requested for the 
     modernization of the National Distress and Response System 
     (NDRS), which is effectively the maritime 911 system for 
     mariners in distress.

                            other equipment

       The Committee provided $132,700,000 for Other Equipment 
     which is the same as the budget request.
       Improved security surveillance and protection.--The 
     Committee recommends $15,000,000 only for the Coast Guard to 
     develop and acquire equipment that will improve security 
     surveillance and perimeter protection capabilities in the 
     Nation's ports, waterways, and coastal zones. The Committee 
     believes that this program has the promise not only of 
     improving the Coast Guard's ability to respond to terrorist 
     threats but also of minimizing the possibility that Coast 
     Guard assets and personnel will be diverted from traditional 
     missions to homeland security missions. The Committee further 
     directs that these funds shall be executed as an integral 
     component of its modernization effort to meet emerging 
     maritime threats.

                shore facilities and aids to navigation

       Minor AC&I Shore Construction Projects.--The Committee 
     recommends $4,900,000 for Minor AC&I shore constructions 
     projects, which is the same as the budget request. Within the 
     funds provided, $400,000 is provided for construction of 
     engineering building at U.S. Coast Guard Station Portsmouth 
     Harbor in New Castle, New Hampshire.
       Rebuild ISC Seattle Pier 36--Phase I.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes an additional $16,000,000 for costs 
     associated with repairing and rebuilding the Coast Guard's 
     Integrated Support Center at Pier 36 in Seattle. Now that a 
     decision has been made not to move the Integrated Support 
     Center to an alternative site, the Committee believes it is 
     time to move out rapidly to replace the aging infrastructure 
     at pier 36 and give the Coast Guard personnel that work there 
     a safe and appropriate working environment. The Committee 
     directs the Commandant to submit an anticipated spend plan 
     and construction schedule for this initiative prior to 
     conference committee action on this bill.


                             bill language

       Capital investment plan.--The bill maintains the 
     requirement for the Coast Guard to submit a 5-year capital 
     investment plan with initial submission of the President's 
     budget request. This requirement was first established in 
     fiscal year 2001.
       Disposal of real property.--The bill maintains the 
     provision enacted in fiscal year 2001 crediting to this 
     appropriation proceeds from the sale or lease of the Coast 
     Guard's surplus real property and providing that such 
     receipts are available for obligation only for the national 
     distress and response system modernization program.

                Environmental Compliance and Restoration

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$16,927,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\.....................................17,000,000

[[Page 951]]

Committee recommendation.....................................17,000,000

\1\Excludes reduction of $9,000 pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 107-
117.
\2\Excludes $218,000 in civilian and $68,000 in military accruals.

       The Environmental Compliance and Restoration account 
     provides funds to address environmental problems at former 
     and current Coast Guard units as required by applicable 
     Federal, State, and local environmental laws and regulations. 
     Planned expenditures for these funds include major upgrades 
     to petroleum and regulated-substance storage tanks, 
     restoration of contaminated ground water and soils, 
     remediation efforts at hazardous substance disposal sites, 
     and initial site surveys and actions necessary to bring Coast 
     Guard shore facilities and vessels into compliance with 
     environmental laws and regulations.
       The recommended bill provides $17,000,000 for environmental 
     compliance and restoration. The recommendation is the same as 
     the budget request.

                         Alteration of Bridges


                          (highway trust fund)

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,466,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................14,000,000

       The ``Alteration of bridges'' appropriation provides funds 
     for the Coast Guard's share of the cost of altering or 
     removing bridges obstructive to navigation. Under the 
     provisions of the Truman-Hobbs Act of June 21, 1940, as 
     amended (33 U.S.C. 511 et seq.), the Coast Guard, as the 
     Federal Government's agent, is required to share with owners 
     the cost of altering railroad and publicly owned highway 
     bridges which obstruct the free movement of navigation on 
     navigable waters of the United States in accordance with the 
     formula established in 33 U.S.C. 516. Alteration of 
     obstructive highway bridges is eligible for funding from the 
     Federal-Aid Highways program.
       The Committee has provided an appropriation from the 
     highway trust fund of $14,000,000 for the alteration of 
     bridges, which is the same as the budget request.
       The Committee recommendation is to be distributed as 
     follows:


                                                              Committee
        Bridge and Location                              recommendation
Chelsea Street Bridge Project, Boston, MA.................$2,000,000.00
EJ&E Railroad Bridge, Morris, IL...........................1,000,000.00
Fourteen Mile CSX Railroad Bridge, Mobile, AL..............5,000,000.00
John F. Limehouse Bridge, Charleston, SC...................1,500,000.00
Florida Avenue Bridge, New Orleans, LA.....................4,500,000.00
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total.................................................14,000,000.00

       EJ&E Bridge.--The Committee is concerned about the 
     alteration of the EJ&E railroad bridge near Morris, Illinois. 
     To date, the Committee has provided more than $6,500,000 for 
     this important bridge project in fiscal years 2000, 2001, and 
     2002. It is the Committee's understanding that design and 
     engineering work has been completed. The Committee provides 
     $1,000,000 for this bridge project and directs the Coast 
     Guard to initiate construction on this project.

                              Retired Pay

Appropriations, 2002 (mandatory)...........................$876,346,000
Budget estimate, 2003 (mandatory)......................................
Committee recommendation (mandatory)........................889,000,000

       The ``Retired pay'' appropriation provides for retired pay 
     of military personnel of the Coast Guard and Coast Guard 
     Reserve, members of the former Lighthouse Service, and for 
     annuities payable to beneficiaries of retired military 
     personnel under the retired serviceman's family protection 
     plan (10 U.S.C. 1431-1446) and survivor benefit plan (10 
     U.S.C. 1447-1455), payments for career status bonuses under 
     the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, 
     and for payments for medical care of retired personnel and 
     their dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act.

                  Coast Guard Military Retirement Fund

Appropriations, 2002 (mandatory).......................................
Budget estimate, 2003 (mandatory)..........................$889,000,000
Committee recommendation (mandatory)...................................

       The Administration proposed legislation in October 2001, to 
     accrue fully the retirement costs of Coast Guard military 
     personnel (as well as the Public Health Service and National 
     Oceanic and Atmospheric administration Commissioned Corps). 
     The account will make payments to current retirees, receive 
     the accrual payments from Coast Guard accounts for current 
     active duty members, and receive a payment for unfunded 
     liabilities of Coast Guard personnel.
       The program also provides for retired pay of military 
     personnel of the Coast Guard Reserve, members of the former 
     Lighthouse Service, and for annuities payable to the 
     beneficiaries of retired military personnel under the retired 
     Serviceman's family protection plan (10 U.S.C. 1431-46) and 
     the survivor benefit plans (10 U.S.C. 1447-55); payments for 
     career status bonuses under the National Defense 
     Authorization Act; and payments for medical care of retired 
     personnel and their dependents under the Dependents Medical 
     Care Act (10 U.S.C., ch. 55).
       As discussed earlier in this report, the Committee has not 
     appropriated funds based on the administration's proposed 
     legislation as no action has been taken to enact this 
     proposal by the Committee of jurisdiction.

                            Reserve Training

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$83,194,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\.....................................86,522,000
Committee recommendation.....................................86,522,000

\1\Excludes reduction of $41,000 pursuant Public Laws 107-87 and 107-
117.
\2\Excludes $303,000 civilian and $26,000,000 military accruals.

       Under the provisions of 14 U.S.C. 145, the Secretary of 
     Transportation is required to adequately support the 
     development and training of a Reserve force to ensure that 
     the Coast Guard will be sufficiently organized, manned, and 
     equipped to fully perform its wartime missions. The purpose 
     of the Reserve training program is to provide trained units 
     and qualified persons for active duty in the Coast Guard in 
     time of war or national emergency, or at such other times as 
     the national security requires. Coast Guard reservists must 
     also train for mobilization assignments that are unique to 
     the Coast Guard in times of war, such as port security 
     operations associated with the Coast Guard's Maritime Defense 
     Zone [MDZ] mission, and deployable port security units 
     associated with the international Defense Operations mission.
       The recommended bill includes $86,522,000 for reserve 
     training, which is the budget request.

              Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      General          Trust           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\.........................................     $16,730,000      $3,492,000     $20,222,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\........................................      18,500,000       3,500,000      22,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      18,500,000       3,500,000      22,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes reduction of $6,000 pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 107-117.
\2\Excludes $328,000 and $778,000 military accurals.

       The Coast Guard's Research and Development Program seeks to 
     improve the tools and techniques with which Coast Guard 
     carries out its varied operational missions and to increase 
     the knowledge base upon which it depends to fulfill its 
     regulatory responsibilities.
       The recommended bill provides a funding level of 
     $22,000,000 for research and development projects, which is 
     with the budget request. Of this amount $3,500,000 is to be 
     derived from the oil spill liability trust fund. This 
     recommendation is consistent with the budget request.
       Engineered Wood Composites Technology.--The Committee is 
     aware of engineered wood composites technology developed by 
     the University of Maine. Engineered Wood Composites are 
     designed to reduce maintenance cost and extend the useful 
     life of waterfront structures. A total of $3,000,000 is 
     provided within the funds made available to support the 
     continued development, demonstration and evaluation of 
     engineered wood composites at Coast Guard facilities 
     including the U.S. Coast Guard Stations in Jonesport and 
     Southwest Harbor ME.
       Spectral Imaging Technology.--Within the funds provided, 
     $2,500,000 is included for a pilot project to test automatic 
     Search and Rescue Spectral Imaging technology for Coast Guard 
     C-130 at Kalaeloa, Hawaii.
       Shipboard Fire Safety.--Within the funds provided, the 
     Committee recommendation includes $250,000 to accelerate 
     research related to the life safety hazards inherent in high-
     density vessel occupancy at the U.S. Coast Guard Fire Safety 
     and Test Detachment in Mobile, AL in coordination with the 
     University of South Alabama.
       Maritime Domain Awareness Information.--The Committee is 
     aware of the need to improve maritime domain awareness and 
     encourages the Coast Guard to investigate designing and 
     installing a Maritime Domain Awareness Surveillance System 
     demonstration project in an effort to improve port security.
       Meteorological and Marine Observation Systems.--Within the 
     funds provided, $250,000 is included for a prototype 
     observation system in the Lower Chesapeake Bay. The Committee 
     believes that such a system will improve short-and long-term 
     predictions of phenomenon facilitating safe and efficient 
     maritime operations.

                              Boat Safety


                     (aquatic resources trust fund)

Appropriations, 2002 (mandatory)............................$64,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 (mandatory)............................64,000,000
Committee recommendation (mandatory).........................64,000,000

       This account provides financial assistance for a 
     coordinated National Recreational Boating Safety Program for 
     the several States. Title 46, United States Code, section 
     13106, establishes a ``Boat safety'' account from which the 
     Secretary may allocate and distribute matching funds to 
     assist in the development, administration, and financing of

[[Page 952]]

     qualifying State programs. The ``Boat safety'' account 
     consists of amounts transferred from the highway trust fund 
     which are derived from the motorboat fuel tax (18.4 cents per 
     gallon).
       The Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century 
     provides $64,000,000 of mandatory funding from the ``Aquatic 
     Resources Trust fund'' annually for this program. Of this 
     amount, $59,000,000 is provided for grants to States and 
     $5,000,000 for Coast Guard administration. The President's 
     budget requests no discretionary appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2003.


                           general provisions

       Vessel traffic safety fairway, Santa Barbara/San 
     Francisco.--The bill retains a general provision (sec. 312) 
     that would prohibit funds to plan, finalize, or implement 
     regulations that would establish a vessel traffic safety 
     fairway less than 5 miles wide between the Santa Barbara 
     traffic separation scheme and the San Francisco traffic 
     separation scheme. On April 27, 1989, the Department 
     published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would narrow 
     the originally proposed 5-mile-wide fairway to two 1-mile-
     wide fairways separated by a 2-mile-wide area where off-shore 
     oil rigs could be built if Lease Sale 119 goes forward. Under 
     this revised proposal, vessels would be routed in close 
     proximity to oil rigs because the 2-mile-wide non-fairway 
     corridor could contain drilling rigs at the edge of the 
     fairways. The Committee is concerned that this rule, if 
     implemented, could increase the threat of offshore oil 
     accidents off the California coast. Accordingly, the bill 
     continues the language prohibiting the implementation of this 
     regulation.
       Quarterly acquisition reports.--The bill retains a general 
     provision (sec. 341) requiring that the Coast Guard submit a 
     quarterly report regarding the status of major acquisition 
     programs.

                    FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

       The Federal Aviation Administration traces its origins to 
     the Air Commerce Act of 1926, but more recently to the 
     Federal Aviation Act of 1958 which established the 
     independent Federal Aviation Agency from functions which had 
     resided in the Airways Modernization Board, the Civil 
     Aeronautics Administration, and parts of the Civil 
     Aeronautics Board. FAA became an administration of the 
     Department of Transportation on April 1, 1967, pursuant to 
     the Department of Transportation Act (October 15, 1966).
       The total recommended program level for the FAA for fiscal 
     year 2003 amounts to $13,552,225,000, which is $219,658,000 
     more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The following 
     table summarizes the Committee's recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Fiscal year--
                                                                     ----------------------------    Committee
                               Program                                    2002       2003 budget  recommendation
                                                                       enacted\1\     estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations..........................................................     6,893,567     7,077,203      7,047,203
    General fund appropriation......................................     1,112,481     3,277,925      3,247,925
    Trust fund appropriation........................................     5,773,519     3,799,278      3,799,278
    Aviation user fees..............................................         7,567  ............  ..............
Facilities and equipment............................................     2,914,000     2,981,022      2,981,022
Research, engineering, and development..............................       195,000       124,000        124,000
Grants-in-Aid for Airports..........................................     3,300,000     3,400,000      3,400,000
                                                                     -------------------------------------------
      Total available budget resources..............................    13,302,567    13,582,225     13,552,225
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect rescissions and reductions pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and 107-117, nor supplemental
  appropriations pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accurals.

                               Operations

Appropriations, 2002\1\..................................$6,886,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................7,077,203,000
Committee recommendation..................................7,047,203,000

\1\Does not reflect TASC reductions of $2,820,000 pursuant to Public 
Law 107-87 and Public Law 107-117, nor supplemental appropriations of 
$200,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117 or $7,567,000 in aviation 
user fees.
\2\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       FAA's ``Operations'' appropriation provides funds for the 
     operation, maintenance, communications, and logistic support 
     of the air traffic control and navigation systems and 
     activities. It also covers the administration and management 
     of the regulatory, commercial space, medical, engineering, 
     and development programs.
       The bill includes $3,799,278,000 for the operations 
     activities of the Federal Aviation Administration from the 
     airport and airway trust fund. The balance of the operations 
     appropriation will come from the general fund.
       As in past years, FAA is directed to report immediately to 
     the Committees on Appropriations in the event resources are 
     insufficient to operate a safe and effective air traffic 
     control system.
       The following table summarizes the Committee's 
     recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate:


                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2002 program      2003 budget       Committee
                                                                  level\1\        estimate\2\    recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air traffic services........................................        5,446,872        5,697,537         5,662,037
Aviation regulation and certification.......................          767,649          833,967           839,467
Civil aviation security.....................................          149,605  ................  ...............
Research and acquisitions...................................          195,559          207,600           207,600
Commercial space transportation.............................           12,416           12,325            12,325
Regional coordination.......................................           85,735           82,192            82,192
Human resources.............................................           69,282           80,260            80,260
Financial services..........................................           50,178           48,782            48,782
Staff offices...............................................          108,704           84,890            84,890
Information Services........................................  ...............           29,650            29,650
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................................        6,886,000        7,077,203         7,047,203
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect TASC reductions of $2,820,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and Public Law 107-117, nor
  supplemental appropriations of $200,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       Contract tower program.--The Committee continues to support 
     the contract tower program and the cost-sharing program as a 
     cost-effective way to enhance air traffic safety at smaller 
     airports. The Committee's recommendation includes $78,000,000 
     to fund the existing contract tower program, the remaining 
     eligible non-Federal towers not currently operated by the 
     FAA, and other non- towered airports eligible for the 
     program. In addition to these resources, the Committee has 
     provided $6,000,000 for the contract tower cost-sharing 
     program.
       Medallion Program.--The Committee recommendation includes 
     $1,500,000 to continue support for this Government and 
     industry cooperative program to improve rural air safety in 
     Alaska. The Medallion program has been overwhelmed with 
     applications, and this funding will allow an expansion of the 
     program beyond its original operating plan.
       Alien Species Action Plan (ASAP).--The Committee provides 
     $3,000,000 out of available funds to continue the 
     implementation of the Alien Species Action Plan which was 
     adopted by the FAA as part of its August 26, 1998 Record of 
     Decision approving certain improvements at Kahului Airport on 
     the Island of Maui. These funds will be used to complete 
     capital projects that were started in fiscal year 2002 and 
     continue the operational requirements imposed by the ASAP.
       National airspace redesign.--Of the funds provided for the 
     activity, $8,500,000 shall be for the NY/NJ Airspace Redesign 
     effort and shall not be reprogrammed by the FAA for other 
     activities, including airspace redesign activities outside 
     the NY/NJ metro area. As the FAA moves forward with its 
     redesign program in the New York/New Jersey and Philadelphia 
     area, the Committee encourages the FAA, where appropriate, to 
     consider air noise impacts as part of the redesign effort.
       Spaceport licensing procedures.--The Committee is aware 
     that the State of Oklahoma has a variety of locations that 
     are ideal for orbital launches due to low population density 
     and existing infrastructure. As such, the State of Oklahoma 
     has been working to develop a spaceport. The Committee 
     strongly encourages the FAA Administrator to provide the 
     necessary technical assistance and financial resources to 
     assist with the licensing procedures for this potential 
     spaceport.
       Non-precision GPS approaches.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $5,000,000 to

[[Page 953]]

     continue with the work associated with increasing the number 
     of non-precision GPS instrument approaches developed and 
     published for airports that are not Part 139 certificated. Of 
     these funds, $1,500,000 is only for the Office of Regulation 
     and Certification (AVR) to develop advisory materials and 
     policy guidelines for the general aviation community.
       Inspector technical training.--In March, 2002, the FAA 
     released the results of a study which evaluated the 
     commercial airplane certification process. One of the major 
     findings of the study is that the FAA, airlines and aircraft 
     manufacturers have not adequately communicated important 
     safety information within and among their organizations. The 
     study also concluded that proper training and adequate hands-
     on experience are essential to ensure that safety inspectors 
     identify potential safety hazards. The Committee has provided 
     $4,000,000 more than the President's request to provide 
     additional technical training for FAA's aviation safety 
     inspectors as the agency moves forward with the 
     implementation of its Operational Evolution Plan (OEP). 
     Specifically, the additional funding will provide necessary 
     training for inspectors in order to properly certify pilots 
     and aircraft in the Reduced Vertical Separation Minimums. The 
     Committee also encourages the FAA to develop a plan to 
     improve the coordination and communication process between 
     the FAA's flight standards and aircraft certification 
     offices.

                        Facilities and Equipment


                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 2002\1\..................................$2,914,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,981,022,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,981,022,000

\1\Does not reflect $108,500,000 of supplemental appropriations 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117 or rescission of $15,000,000 of 
unobligated balances pursuant to Public Law 107-87.
\2\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       Under the ``Facilities and equipment'' appropriation, 
     safety, capacity and efficiency of the Federal airway system 
     are improved by the procurement and installation of new 
     equipment and the construction and modernization of 
     facilities to keep pace with aeronautical activity and in 
     accordance with the Federal Aviation Administration's 
     comprehensive capital investment plan [CIP], formerly called 
     the national airspace system [NAS] plan.
       The Federal Aviation Administration's most recent estimate 
     is that it will spend approximately $41,901,000,000 on the 
     Air Traffic Control Modernization effort from 1981 through 
     2004.
       The bill includes an appropriation of $2,981,022,000 for 
     the facilities and equipment of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration. The Committee's recommended distributions of 
     the funds for each of the major accounts are as follows:

                                            FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee
                         Program name                            2002 enacted    2003 estimate    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity 1, Improve Aviation Safety:
    Reduce Commercial Aviation Fatalities:
        Terminal Business Unit...............................     $160,355,000     $141,000,000     $161,300,000
        Aviation Weather Services Improvements...............       22,520,000       23,440,000       23,440,000
        Low Level Windshear Alert System (LLWAS)--Upgrade....        1,533,000        1,600,000        1,600,000
        Aviation Safety Analysis System (ASAS)...............       22,100,000       21,700,000       21,700,000
        Integrated Flight Quality Assurance..................        2,000,000          500,000          500,000
        Safety Performance Analysis System (SPAS)............        2,100,000        2,100,000        2,100,000
        Performance Enhancement Systems (PENS)...............        2,500,000        2,600,000        2,600,000
        Aviation Weather Services Improvements (CWIS)........        5,000,000  ...............  ...............
    Reduce General Aviation Fatalities: Safe Flight 21.......       39,300,000       29,800,000       32,800,000
    Other Aviation Safety Programs:
        Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping......       55,991,000       41,100,000       41,600,000
        Aircraft Related Equipment Program...................        7,500,000       16,000,000       16,000,000
        National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center                1,800,000        2,000,000        2,000,000
         (NASDAC)............................................
        Explosive Detection Technology.......................       97,500,000      121,500,000       55,000,000
        Aircraft Fleet Modernization.........................        1,500,000  ...............  ...............
        Volcano Monitoring...................................        2,000,000  ...............        3,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 1..................................      423,699,000      403,340,000      363,640,000
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 2, Improve the Efficiency of the Air Traffic Control
 System:
    Increase the Number of Flights Handled by Airports:
        Terminal Business Unit...............................      490,518,059      551,035,496      534,601,496
        Aeronautical Data Link (ADL) Applications............       38,113,200       33,200,000       29,700,000
        Free Flight Phase 2..................................       69,900,000      106,200,000       96,200,000
        Air Traffic Management (ATM).........................       49,300,000       13,000,000       13,000,000
        Free Flight Phase 1..................................      122,570,000       39,900,000       39,900,000
        Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS)............       13,280,000       12,100,000       12,100,000
    Improve Routing Efficiency for Flights En Route:
        Next Generation VHF Air/Ground Communications System        34,950,000       71,100,000       71,100,000
         (NEXCOM)............................................
        En Route Automation Program..........................       46,200,000       71,050,000       75,250,000
        Weather and Radar Processor (WARP)...................       24,171,000       13,600,000       13,600,000
        Long Range Radar Sustainment.........................  ...............  ...............        7,500,000
    Improve Overall NAS Efficiency:
        Air Traffic Operations Management System (ATOMS).....        1,000,000        1,100,000        1,100,000
        NAS Management Automation Program (NASMAP)...........        1,100,000        1,900,000        1,900,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 2..................................      891,102,259      914,185,496      895,951,496
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 3, Increase Capacity of the NAS:
    Increase Capability of En Route Systems to Handle
     Flights:
        Navigation and Landing Aids..........................      272,589,200      249,800,000      295,735,000
        Oceanic Automation System............................       88,100,000       87,400,000       76,349,000
        Gulf of Mexico Offshore Program......................        6,900,000        2,300,000        2,300,000
        Voice Switching and Control System (VSCS)............       16,000,000       14,000,000       14,000,000
        Transponder Landing System...........................        6,000,000  ...............       12,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 3..................................      389,589,200      353,500,000      400,384,000
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 4, Improve Reliability of the NAS:
    Replace Terminal Equipment to Prevent Decreased
     Performance:
        Guam CERAP--Relocate.................................        6,400,000        5,000,000        5,000,000
        Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR)/Enhanced           20,000,000        6,200,000       17,200,000
         Terminal Voice Switch...............................
        Airport Cable Loop Systems--Sustained Support........        4,000,000        4,000,000        5,500,000
    Replace En Route Equipment to Prevent Decreased
     Performance:
        En Route Automation Program..........................      155,863,000      142,800,000      147,500,000
        ARTCC Building Improvements/Plant Improvements.......       44,000,000       40,200,000       40,200,000
        Air Traffic Management (ATM).........................       24,500,000       24,500,000       24,500,000
    Replace Supporting Systems that Impact Overall NAS
     Performance:
        Critical Telecommunications Support..................        1,900,000        1,000,000        1,000,000
        FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI)..........       39,000,000       46,600,000       46,600,000
        Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure.............       30,700,000       22,800,000       22,800,000
        Voice Recorder Replacement Program (VRRP)............        6,000,000        3,300,000        3,300,000
        NAS Infrastructure Management System (NIMS)..........       16,000,000       29,100,000       29,100,000
        Flight Service Station (FSS) Modernization...........        4,700,000        5,700,000        5,700,000
        FSAS Operational and Supportability Implementation          33,943,000       19,710,000       19,710,000
         System (OASIS)......................................
        Weather Message Switching Center Replacement (WMSCR).        2,500,000        2,000,000        2,000,000
        Flight Service Station Switch Modernization..........       10,000,000       13,200,000       13,200,000
        Alaskan NAS Interfacility Communications System              4,000,000        2,900,000        4,000,000
         (ANICS).............................................
        Electrical Power Systems--Sustain/Support............       54,200,000       50,700,000       50,700,000
        NAS Recovery Communications (RCOM)...................        4,800,000        9,400,000        9,400,000
        Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Modernization.....       12,000,000       11,700,000       11,700,000
        Frequency and Spectrum Engineering...................        3,000,000        2,600,000        2,600,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------

[[Page 954]]

 
          Total, Activity 4..................................      453,006,000      443,410,000      461,710,000
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 5, Improve the Efficiency of Mission Support:
    Increase Efficiency of Investment Management:
        NAS Improvement of System Support Laboratory.........        2,300,000        2,700,000        2,700,000
        Technical Center Facilities..........................       10,250,000       12,000,000       12,000,000
        William J. Hughes Technical Center Infrastructure            2,900,000        3,000,000        3,000,000
         Sustainment.........................................
        En Route Communications and Control Facilities               1,540,280        1,057,953        1,307,953
         Improvements........................................
        DOD/FAA Facilities Transfer..........................        2,800,000        1,200,000        3,200,000
        Terminal Communications--Improve.....................          936,700        1,249,299        1,249,299
        Flight Service Facilities Improvement................        1,202,100        1,223,235        1,223,235
        Navigation and Landing Aids--Improve.................        2,525,361        5,034,017        5,034,017
        FAA Buildings and Equipment..........................       11,700,000       11,000,000       11,000,000
        Air Navigational Aids and ATC Facilities (Local              2,000,000        2,100,000        2,100,000
         Projects)...........................................
        Computer Aided Engineering and Graphics (CAEG)               2,600,000        2,800,000        2,800,000
         Modernization.......................................
        Information Technology Integration...................        1,500,000        1,600,000        1,600,000
        Operational Data Management System (ODMS)............        3,000,000       10,300,000       10,300,000
        Logistics Support Systems and Facilities (LSSF)......        5,000,000        9,300,000        5,000,000
        Test Equipment--Maintenance Support for Replacement..          900,000        1,700,000        1,700,000
        Facility Security Risk Management....................       22,400,000       37,300,000       37,300,000
        Information Security.................................       13,600,000       13,291,000       13,291,000
        Distance Learning....................................        1,300,000        1,300,000        1,300,000
        National Airspace System (NAS) Training Facilities...  ...............        2,300,000        2,300,000
        System Engineering and Development Support...........       26,300,000       25,800,000       25,800,000
        Program Support Leases...............................       35,500,000       38,400,000       38,400,000
        Logistics Support Services (LSS).....................        7,200,000        7,500,000        7,500,000
        Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center--Leases............       14,600,000       14,600,000       14,600,000
        In-Plant NAS Contract Support Services...............        2,800,000        2,900,000        2,900,000
        Transition Engineering Support.......................       38,300,000       39,000,000       37,000,000
        FAA Corporate Systems Architecture...................        1,000,000        1,000,000        1,000,000
        Technical Support Services Contract (TSSC)...........       45,800,000       46,700,000       44,700,000
        Resource Tracking Program (RTP)......................        4,000,000        3,700,000        2,500,000
        Center for Advanced Aviation System Development......       81,543,000       81,364,000       81,364,000
        Operational Evolution Plan (OEP).....................        1,000,000        1,000,000        1,000,000
    Minimize Environmental Impact of Aviation Facilities:
        NAS Facilities OSHA and Environmental Standards             28,400,000       32,600,000       32,600,000
         Compliance..........................................
        Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Monitoring.........        9,300,000        8,500,000        8,500,000
        Hazardous Materials Management.......................       21,700,000       20,500,000       20,500,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 5..................................      404,897,441      444,019,504      436,769,504
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 6, Personnel Compensation, Benefits and Travel:
    Personnel and Related Expenses...........................      377,100,000      422,567,000      422,567,000
    Account-wide adjustment..................................      -25,393,900  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, All Activities..................................    2,914,000,000    2,981,022,000    2,981,022,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        IMPROVE AVIATION SAFETY

       Safety and Security Activities.--The Committee recommends 
     $6,000,000 for additional aviation safety and security 
     activities within FAA's terminal business unit in activity 
     one. Within the funds provided, the Committee provides 
     $500,000 for specialized training to fight and prevent 
     aircraft fires at the Rocky Mountain Emergency Services 
     Training Center; $500,000 for aviation security systems 
     upgrades at Daniel Webster College; and, $5,000,000 to an 
     aviation security and science center at Embry-Riddle 
     Aeronautical University.
       Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping.--The 
     Committee provides $41,600,000 for the advanced development 
     and prototyping program which is $500,000 more than the 
     President's budget request. The Committee is aware of a 
     potentially cost effective technology called the Runway 
     Obstruction Warning System (ROWS). The Committee has included 
     $500,000 to further test and develop this technology at the 
     Gulfport-Biloxi Airport. Also included within the funds 
     provided is $2,000,000 for the airfield improvement program 
     authorized under section 905 of Public Law 106-181. The 
     recommended funding level includes $5,500,000 to continue the 
     wind profiling and weather research activities at Juneau, 
     Alaska.
       Explosives Detection Technology.--The administration's 
     budget for FAA ``Facilities and Equipment'' includes 
     $124,000,000 for Explosives Detection Technology of which 
     $2,500,000 is for personnel and support costs. Funds for 
     Explosive Detection Technology were provided in fiscal year 
     2002 under both the Department of Transportation and 
     Department of Defense Appropriations bills. Requested funds 
     for fiscal year 2003 will be used for the deployment of FAA 
     certified Explosive Detection Systems as well as Threat Image 
     Projection Systems, Explosive Trace Detection Devices and 
     Computer-Based Training Platforms. Though this funding has 
     been requested within the FAA budget, the administration's 
     budget request assumes that these funds will be transferred 
     to the Transportation Security Administration. The Committee 
     has fully funded the request for explosive detection 
     technology by providing $55,000,000 under ``Facilities and 
     Equipment'' to transfer to the Transportation Security 
     Administration (TSA) and providing the balance of $69,000,000 
     directly to TSA. The Committee anticipates future requests 
     for explosive detection technology and believes that 
     management of this acquisition program and future funding 
     requests should be tranferred to the TSA which assumed 
     responsibility for providing, installing, and operating bomb 
     screening devices at the nation's airports under the Aviation 
     and Transportation Security Act.
       Safe Flight 21.--The Committee recommends $32,800,000 for 
     Safe Flight 21, which is $3,000,000 more than the budget 
     request. The Committee is encouraged by the success of the 
     Capstone initiative and has provided additional funding to 
     accelerate deployment of the Capstone infrastructure in 
     Southeastern Alaska. The Committee continues to believe that 
     Safe Flight 21 technologies show promise of reducing runway 
     incursions. As the program proceeds, attention should be 
     given to how this program could promote safer ground traffic 
     at airports and how ADS-B and other technologies could be 
     used to address the runway incursion problem.
       Volcano Monitor.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $3,000,000 to extend the aviation safety benefits of the 
     seismic monitoring network to remote areas.
       Airport Surface Detection Equipment (ASDE-X).--The 
     Committee provides $104,600,000 for the Airport Surface 
     Detection Equipment (ASDE-X) program. The amount provided is 
     $14,300,000 more than the administration's request. The ASDE-
     X program will improve runway safety and prevent runway 
     incursion accidents by improving airport controller 
     situational awareness. This is achieved by providing visual 
     representation of the traffic situation on the airport 
     surface to the controller in the form of aircraft position 
     information, flight call signs, and by alerting controllers 
     through aural and visual alarms that a potential accident may 
     occur. The amount provided above the administration's request 
     will fund the development of new multi-lateration capability 
     for deployment at the following high volume ASDE-3 sites: 
     Memphis, Tennessee; Louisville, Kentucky; St. Louis, 
     Missouri; Dallas, Texas; Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles, 
     California; and Atlanta, Georgia.


        IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM

       New York Integrated Control Complex.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $5,000,000 to plan and develop a 
     facility needed to integrate the New York Air Traffic Control 
     Center and TRACON, which are currently located 20 miles apart 
     in outdated facilities. This integration is critical because 
     the New York-New Jersey airspace, the most congested in the 
     United States, is currently inefficiently managed due to the 
     fact that controllers in separate locations must communicate 
     by telephone under extremely trying circumstances. As a 
     result, the controllers must be extremely cautious when 
     moving planes in and out of the airspace. The result is often 
     costly and exorbitant delays, which in turn generate 
     potential safety vulnerabilities.
       Aeronautical Information and Flight Planning Enhancements 
     (AIFPE).--Within the En

[[Page 955]]

     Route Automation Program, the Committee has provided an 
     additional $4,200,000 for Aeronautical Information and Flight 
     Planning Enhancements. This additional funding will provide 
     for new development of hand-off capability between Canada, 
     the United States and Mexico. At present, this procedure is 
     currently done manually. The Committee believes that 
     automating this process will enhance both the safety and 
     efficiency of controlled aircraft within North America.
       Automated surface observing system.--The Committee's 
     recommendation includes $12,100,000 for the automated surface 
     observing system program as requested in the President's 
     budget. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes 
     $500,000 to implement an automated weather sensor system at 
     the Driggs-Reed Memorial Airport in Idaho Falls, ID.
       Long Range Radar Sustainment (LRRS).--The Committee has 
     provided $7,500,000 for Long Range Radar Sustainment. The 
     amount provided is the same as that provided in the recently 
     enacted Supplemental Appropriations bill of fiscal year 2002. 
     Together these funds will provide for a $15,000,000 
     sustainment program for the ARSR-4 radar systems located on 
     the perimeter of the United States. While these radars were 
     scheduled to be decommissioned prior to the events of 
     September 11th, it is now apparent both to the FAA and 
     Department of Defense that these aging radars must remain in 
     operation.
       Free flight phase two.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $96,200,000 for Free Flight Phase II activities. The 
     recommendation is $26,300,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and $10,000,000 less than the budget estimate. 
     Within the available funds, the Committee has provided full 
     funding for the User Request Evaluation Tool (URET).
       Aeronautical Data Link (ADL) Applications.--The Committee 
     has reduced the budget request for Aeronautical Data Link 
     Applications to $29,700,000 which is $3,500,000 lower than 
     the budget request. The Aeronautical Data Link program is 
     designed to provide data link applications between ground and 
     airborne automation systems. This program is designed to 
     reduce voice congestion as well as grant pilots direct access 
     to weather and air traffic control information while reducing 
     voice communication errors. Recently FAA officials have 
     encountered technical software development challenges in 
     certifying the en route controller/pilot data link (CPDLC) 
     system. As such, the FAA has postponed the deployment of the 
     CPDLC system by roughly 2 years. The funds reduced from the 
     budget request include $2,000,000 from the CPDLC Build II 
     project; $500,000 from the Flight Information Service Data 
     Link program; and, $1,000,000 from the CPDLC Decision Support 
     System Services.
       Airport surveillance radar (ASR-11).--The Committee has 
     provided $90,000,000 for the Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-
     11) program. The amount provided is $33,400,000 less than the 
     budget request. The new ASR-11 radar is expected to provide 
     digital radar data necessary to interface with new automation 
     systems, such as the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement 
     System (STARS). The FAA expects to procure this radar as part 
     of a larger contract vehicle managed by the United States Air 
     Force. Due to concerns over delivery delays and the 
     performance of this radar, the FAA ordered that the ASR-11 
     vendor provide its final system for the development, test, 
     and evaluation phase at the end of calendar year 2001. That 
     date was then slipped until March of 2002. The FAA and the 
     Air Force have been conducting such testing individually. It 
     appears that certain problems with the radar's performance 
     may persist, including the appearance of false targets on the 
     radar screen in numbers that exceed the agency's 
     specification. The FAA, like the Air Force, is now bringing 
     the radar into operational testing to determine whether these 
     and other problems can be resolved in the operational 
     environment. The Committee will monitor the progress of this 
     program carefully. Given the testing delays already 
     encountered and the uncertainty that surrounds the next round 
     of testing, the Committee has reduced funding for the program 
     below the requested level.
       Radar at Gallatin Airport.--The Committee is concerned 
     about potential safety risks associated with the lack of 
     radar coverage at Gallatin Airport, Montana, an airport whose 
     enplanements and operations are growing. The Committee 
     directs the administrator to conduct a site survey for the 
     installation of the appropriate radar at the airport.
       Precision runway monitor (PRM).--The Committee has provided 
     a total of $18,000,000 for the procurement of three precision 
     runway monitors (PRMs). This rapid update special purpose 
     radar system enables aircraft to approach the airport in dual 
     arrival streams with shorter separation distances and in 
     deteriorating weather conditions. The vendor of this 
     technology has offered to extend the existing price of PRM 
     units, making it possible for the FAA to achieve substantial 
     savings for the taxpayer through a three-unit purchase. The 
     Committee expects the FAA to initiate a procurement of three 
     systems, with the expectation that systems will be installed 
     at Hartsfield International Airport, Detroit Metropolitan-
     Wayne County Airport, and one other site to be determined. 
     Within the amount provided, sufficient funds are made 
     available for the installation of a PRM already under 
     contract at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. The 
     Committee believes that this installation will better ensure 
     that the full capacity benefits of new runway 6L/24R will be 
     realized.
       Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities--Replace.--The 
     Committee recommendation provides $103,566,000 for this 
     program. The recommendation provides funding for the 
     following projects:

                 Fiscal Year 2003 Terminal Air Traffic

Pago Pago, American Samoa......................................$175,000
Baltimore, MD.................................................2,088,581
Chantilly, VA...................................................600,000
Deer Valley, AZ.................................................803,196
Memphis, TN...................................................1,147,000
Portland, OR (TRACON).........................................5,500,000
Dallas, TX (Addison)..........................................5,700,000
Reno, NV......................................................8,349,000
Fort Wayne, IN................................................3,539,000
Newport News, VA..............................................6,400,000
La Guardia, NY................................................9,460,000
St. Louis, MO (TRACON)........................................1,500,000
Corpus Christi, TX..............................................700,000
Beaumont, TX..................................................1,000,000
Seattle, WA (ATCT)..............................................550,000
Salina, KS......................................................500,000
Newark, NJ....................................................3,000,000
Pt. Columbus, OH..............................................2,100,000
Grand Canyon, AZ................................................255,898
Savannah, GA....................................................919,190
Newburgh, NY..................................................2,065,000
Richmond, VA....................................................550,000
Vero Beach, FL..................................................878,775
Everett, WA.....................................................925,000
Roanoke, VA.....................................................550,000
Merrimack, NH (BCT)...........................................4,700,000
Seattle, WA (TRACON)..........................................4,782,701
Phoenix, AZ..................................................14,107,919
Manchester, NH..................................................943,609
Wilkes Barre, PA..............................................2,000,000
Topeka, KS....................................................1,690,131
Billings, MT..................................................2,120,000
Missoula, MT..................................................2,000,000
Provo, UT.......................................................666,000
Albuquerque, NM...............................................1,800,000
Columbus, MS..................................................1,500,000
Las Vegas, NV.................................................3,000,000
Columbia, SC..................................................1,000,000
Reno, NV (TRACON).............................................4,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
  Total.....................................................103,566,000

       Oakland Tower Replacement.--The Committee has reduced the 
     request for Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities 
     Replacement by $19,000,000. This reduction is attributable to 
     the deletion of funding for the replacement of the air 
     traffic control tower at Oakland, California. Based on the 
     FAA's newly updated contracting schedule, the agency will not 
     be able to contract for this tower within fiscal year 2003.
       Static Transfer Switches.--The Committee commends the FAA 
     for procuring and installing static transfer switches at en 
     route facilities. The switches enable air traffic control 
     centers to switch to back-up power systems quickly in order 
     to prevent computers from ``crashing.'' The Committee 
     encourages the FAA to proceed expeditiously with this effort.
       Notams Graphics.--The Committee directs the FAA to expand 
     the use of graphics to not only flight service stations but 
     also to provide pilots with advisory graphics of information 
     contained in the NOTAMs including temporary flight 
     restrictions. It is important that graphics on Special Use 
     Airspace also be made available, and the Committee believes 
     that advisory graphics can be conveyed through the Direct 
     User Access Terminal System and other sources, including the 
     internet.


                      INCREASE CAPACITY OF THE NAS

       Navigation and landing aids.--The Committee provides a 
     total of $307,735,000 to modernize the FAA's navigation and 
     landing aids systems which is $57,935,000 more than the 
     President's budget request. Within the funds provided, the 
     Committee includes $1,500,000 for navigation aids and 
     equipment at the Nikolski Airport; $4,000,000 for navigation 
     and landing improvements at the Cincinnati Northern Kentucky 
     International Airport; $4,000,000 for navigation and landing 
     improvements for Lambert-St. Louis International Airport; 
     and, $800,000 for remote transmitter receivers at Las Vegas-
     McCarran International Airport.
       Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS).--The Committee 
     continues to be concerned about the diminishing return on 
     investment expected from the deployment of the Wide Area 
     Augmentation System as well as the accuracy of the FAA's 
     budget for this program during consideration of the fiscal 
     year 2002 Appropriations bill. The administrator submitted a 
     special request for funding to obtain a third geo-stationary 
     satellite to support the WAAS signal. The Committee funded 
     this special request but the FAA has now informed the 
     Committee that the initiative, as so many others within the 
     WAAS program, will be delayed. The FAA has now decided to 
     execute a competitive contract for this satellite 
     communications service. This has resulted in a diminished 
     requirement for funds in fiscal year 2003. As a result, the 
     Committee has lowered funding for the WAAS program to 
     $98,900,000, a reduction of $11,600,000 from the budget 
     request.

[[Page 956]]

       Loran-C Upgrade/Modernization.--Within the funds provided 
     for navigation and landing aids, the Committee includes 
     $21,000,000 for Loran-C upgrades and modernizations.
       Instrument Landing System (ILS)--Establish/upgrade.--The 
     Committee recommendation provides $36,180,000 and directs the 
     increase above the budget request to be distributed as 
     follows:

Mena Intermountain Municipal Airport, AR....................$580,000.00
Winder-Barrow Airport, GA..................................4,000,000.00
Olive Branch Airport, MS.....................................600,000.00
Reno/Tahoe International Airport, NV.......................1,500,000.00
Pangborn Memorial Airport, WA..............................1,500,000.00
Wasilla Airport, AK........................................1,000,000.00
Stuttgart Municipal Airport, AR............................2,000,000.00
Talladega Municipal Airport, AL............................1,500,000.00

       Transponder Landing System (TLS).--The Committee 
     recommendation provides $12,000,000, an increase of 
     $6,000,000 over the fiscal year 2002 appropriated level to 
     acquire and site TLS units. The Committee directs the FAA to 
     conduct surveys and cost benefit analysis for TLS deployments 
     with the appropriated funding at the following locations:

Driggs-Reed Memorial and Sandpoint, ID.......................$4,000,000
William H. Morse Airport, Bennington, VT......................2,000,000
Elko and Minden-Tahoe Airports, NV............................4,000,000
La Grand/Union County Airport, OR.............................2,000,000

       In addition, the Committee recognizes that most of these 
     sites are repeated from previous legislation and directs the 
     FAA to use previous appropriations expeditiously to install 
     these and previously named sites. The Committee further 
     expects the FAA to expeditiously install and commission all 
     previously named sites that are found to be suitable for 
     installation once type acceptance has been reinstated.
       Approach Lighting System Improvement (ALSIP).--The 
     Committee recommendation provides $29,755,000 for the 
     procurement and deployment of runway lighting system to 
     facilitate improved and precision landing capabilities at 
     various airports. The Committee directs funding to be 
     allocated to the airports listed below as follows:

Auburn-Opelika R.G. Pitts Airport, AL (MALSR)................$1,500,000
Reno-Stead Airport, NV (MALSR)................................2,400,000
Baton Rouge Municipal Airport, LA (MALSR).......................750,000
Cleveland Hopkins Int'l, Runway 24L (MALSR).....................400,000
Alaska statewide rural airport lighting......................11,000,000
North Little Rock Municipal, AR (MALSR).........................450,000

       In addition, the Committee provides $6,000,000 to reduce 
     the backlog of MALSR systems that are awaiting installation 
     and $4,000,000 to procure additional systems. The Committee 
     recommends that the FAA continue to procure the latest 
     equipment that has been approved for use in the National 
     Aerospace System (NAS).
       Advanced technology and oceanic procedures.--The Committee 
     has been supportive of the need to improve the capability of 
     air traffic services over the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and 
     has been concerned about delays and difficulties the FAA has 
     experienced in the past with the Advanced Technologies and 
     Oceanic Procedures (ATOP) procurement. Although considered a 
     non-developmental acquisition, it was determined after the 
     contract was awarded in June, 2001, that the amount of 
     essential software to be developed and tested was severely 
     underestimated. Due to the additional complexity, delays in 
     software development continue to plague the procurement, and 
     the factory-level acceptance testing which was scheduled to 
     be completed in September, 2002, has yet to begin. The 
     Committee urges the FAA to aggressively manage this 
     procurement and deletes $11,051,000 in anticipation of the 
     cascading effect software development problems will have on 
     the delivery of the first system.


                     IMPROVE RELIABILITY OF THE NAS

       Airport cable loop systems.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides $5,500,000 to continue FAA's efforts to upgrade and 
     replace deteriorated cable of the surveillance and landing 
     communications systems within the National Airspace System. 
     Within the request provided is $1,500,000 for a fiber optic 
     loop around Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport.
       Flight service station switch modernization.--The Committee 
     has included $13,200,000 for the flight service station 
     switch modernization program as requested in the budget 
     request. This modernization program will replace 65 voice 
     switching systems at Automated Flight Service Stations and 
     provide eight small tower voice switches for the non-
     automated Flight Service Stations in the Alaskan region. The 
     Committee believes it would be prudent for the FAA to deploy 
     the switches consistent with its OASIS implementation plan. 
     At the same time, the Committee cautions FAA not to use this 
     direction as a reason to delay the implementation of the 
     OASIS system.
       Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR)/Enhanced Terminal 
     Voice Switch (ETVS).--The Committee provides $17,200,000 for 
     the Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR) program. This 
     modernization program is designed to replace 421 electro-
     mechanical and non-supportable electronic voice pitching 
     systems. The amount provide over the budget request will be 
     used for the following activities: $3,000,000 will be used 
     for additional conferencing capability to improve interagency 
     coordination during periods of security vulnerabilities which 
     was identified by the FAA after the events of September 11th, 
     2001; and, $8,000,000 will be used to increase substantially 
     the number of ETVS/RDVS units procured in 2003.
       Alaska NAS Interfacility Comm System (ANICS).--The 
     Committee recommendation includes $4,000,000. This is 
     $1,100,000 more than the requested level of funding and is 
     the same level appropriated in fiscal year 2002. With this 
     amount, sufficient funding has been provided to begin 
     installation at a second Phase II site this year.
       Initial Academy Training System (IANTS).--Within the En 
     Route Automation Program, the Committee has provided 
     $16,900,000 over and above the budget request for the Initial 
     Academy Training System program (IATS). These additional 
     funds will provide a standardized Display System Replacement 
     (DSR) training platform at the FAA Academy located in 
     Oklahoma City, OK. At present, newly hired air traffic 
     controllers train at the academy on outdated M-1 consoles and 
     do not receive any training on the standardized Display 
     System Replacement platform until they arrive at an Air Route 
     Traffic Control Center (ARTCC). These additional funds will 
     be critical to the training of what is expected to be an 
     increased number of new recruits to replace controllers 
     entering retirement.
       En Route Automation Program.--The Committee has reduced the 
     funding requested for the En Route Automation Program by 
     $12,200,000. This reduction is attributable to a level of 
     unobligated balances that continue to mount in the En Route 
     Communications Gateway program. Over a 3 year period between 
     fiscal year 2000 and 2002, the Committee has appropriated 
     $104,700,000 for the Eunomia/ECG Program. The FAA has re-
     scoped this program, which is designed to replace the 
     Peripheral Adapter Module Replacement Item (PAMRI) equipment, 
     to meet other critical needs as determined by the FAA's Air 
     Traffic Services office. Due to the delays associated with 
     the rescoping of the ECG program, it is anticipated that the 
     program will have an unobligated balance of $12,200,000 
     entering fiscal year 2003. The Committee has adjusted the 
     fiscal year 2003 budget request to account for this 
     unobligated balance.
       FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI).--The Committee 
     has provided $46,600,000 for FAA's Telecommunications 
     Infrastructure (FTI). The amount provided is the same as the 
     budget request. The FTI Program is intended to improve 
     telecommunications services within the FAA's NAS and non-NAS 
     infrastructures. The current incumbent provider of these 
     services is WorldCom. Given the recent financial troubles 
     besetting this company, the Committee is concerned with the 
     company's ability to continue to provide critical 
     telecommunications services for the nation's air traffic 
     control infrastructure. While the FAA has now awarded the new 
     FTI contract to another vendor, WorldCom recently signed a 5-
     year bridge contract to provide for a transition period 
     between WorldCom and the new provider. The Committee is 
     concerned about WorldCom's ability to perform all elements of 
     the 5-year bridge contract. As such, the Committee directs 
     that the administrator develop a contingency plan for the 
     continuation of telecommunications services in the event that 
     WorldCom is incapable of fulfilling its contract obligations. 
     The Committee expects the administrator to coordinate with 
     the Office of the Inspector General in the development of 
     this contingency plan.
       Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure.--Within the funds 
     provided for air/ground communications infrastructure, the 
     Committee has included $3,000,000 to develop and test a 
     prototype capability to transmit critical flight data from 
     aircraft to ground station using currently installed data 
     management and communications equipment.


               IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF MISSION SUPPORT

       DOD/FAA facilities transfer.--The Committee recommends 
     $3,200,000, including $2,000,000 for the Lawton/Fort Sill 
     Regional Airport ARAC (Airport Radar Approach Control).
       En route communications and control facilities 
     improvements.--The Committee provides $1,307,953 for en route 
     communications and control facilities improvements, which is 
     $250,000 more than the President's budget. Within the amount 
     provided, the Committee includes $250,000 for a remote 
     communications outlet at Keokuk, IA Airport.
       Asset Support Chain Management (ASCM).--The Committee has 
     provided $5,000,000 for the Logistics Support Systems and 
     Facilities activity. This program will provide a single

[[Page 957]]

     integrated planning, inventory, and asset management solution 
     to improve the FAA's performance, financial, and logistics 
     information systems. The amount provided is $4,300,000 less 
     than the budget request. This reduction is attributable to 
     the slippage in a number of programmed elements.
       Transition Engineering Support.--The Committee has provided 
     $37,000,000 for Transition Engineering Support. This program 
     supports the NAS Implementation Support Contract (NISC). The 
     amount provided is $2,000,000 less than the budget request 
     and the Committee believes that this slight reduction can be 
     easily accommodated without any significant impact on the 
     agency's overall NAS modernization effort.
       Technical Services Support Contract (TSSC).--The Committee 
     has provided $44,700,000 for the Technical Services Support 
     Contract. The amount provided is $2,000,000 less than the 
     level in the budget request. This adjustment is attributable 
     to savings adjusted by the FAA resulting from the transition 
     from a new TSSC contract the reduction is expected to have no 
     impact on system performance.
       Resource Tracking Program (RTP).--The Committee has 
     provided a total of $2,500,000 for the Resource Tracking 
     Program. This amount is $1,200,000 less than the budget 
     request. This reduction will result in the deferral of 
     software maintenance upgrades. However, this deferral should 
     in no way undermine the FAA's ability to improve the 
     integrity of its internal budgeting processes.

                 Research, Engineering, and Development


                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$195,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\....................................124,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................124,000,000

\1\Does not reflect $50,000,000 of supplemental appropriations pursuant 
to Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       This appropriation finances research, engineering, and 
     development programs to improve the national air traffic 
     control system by increasing its safety, security, 
     productivity, and capacity. The programs are designed to meet 
     the expected air traffic demands of the future and to promote 
     flight safety. The major objectives are to keep the current 
     system operating safely and efficiently; to protect the 
     environment; and to modernize the system through improvements 
     in facilities, equipment, techniques, and procedures in order 
     to insure that the system will safely and efficiently handle 
     the volume of aircraft traffic expected to materialize in the 
     future.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommendation includes $124,000,000, for the 
     FAA's research, engineering, and development activities.
       A table showing the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, the 
     fiscal year 2003 budget estimate, and the Committee 
     recommendation follows:

                                      RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     Fiscal year      Committee
                          Program Name                             2002 enacted    2003 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improve Aviation Safety:
    Reduce Commercial Aviation Facilities:
        Fire Research and Safety................................      $5,242,000      $6,429,000      $6,429,000
        Propulsion and Fuel Systems.............................       5,998,000       3,998,000       4,998,000
        Advanced Materials/Structural Safety....................       1,338,000       1,374,000       1,374,000
        Flight Safety/Atmospheric Hazards Research..............       4,494,000       3,101,000       4,101,000
        Aging Aircraft..........................................      25,600,000      20,974,000      20,974,000
        Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research.......       2,794,000       1,920,000       1,920,000
        Flightdeck/Maint/Sysy Integration Human Factors.........       8,003,000       8,411,000       8,411,000
    Reduce General Aviation Fatalities:
        Propulsion and Fuel Systems.............................       2,570,000       1,713,000       1,713,000
        Advanced Materials/Structural Safety....................       1,636,000       1,679,000       1,679,000
        Flight Safety/Atmospheric Hazards Research..............       1,926,000       1,329,000       1,329,000
        Aging Aircraft..........................................       6,400,000       5,243,000       5,243,000
        Flightdeck/Maint/Sysy Integration Human Factors.........       1,903,000       2,000,000       2,000,000
    Aviation System Safety:
        Aviation Safety Risk Analysis...........................       5,784,000       6,926,000       6,926,000
        ATC/AF Human Factors....................................       8,500,000      10,317,000      10,317,000
        Aeromedical Research....................................       6,121,000       6,603,000       6,603,000
        Weather Research........................................      13,877,000      19,406,000      19,406,000
    Improve Efficiency of Air Traffic Control System: Weather          9,791,000       9,099,000      12,099,000
     Research Efficiency........................................
    Reduce Environmental Impacts of Aviation: Environment and         22,081,000       7,698,000       2,698,000
     Energy.....................................................
Improve Efficiency of Mission:
    System Planning and Resource Management.....................       1,200,000       1,459,000       1,459,000
    Technical Laboratory Facilities.............................      12,250,000       6,455,000       6,455,000
    Strategic Partnership.......................................         400,000         610,000         610,000
System Security Technology:
    Explosives and Weapons Detection............................      32,624,000  ..............  ..............
    Airport Security Technology Integration.....................       2,084,000  ..............  ..............
    Aviation Security Human Factors.............................       5,163,000  ..............  ..............
    Aircraft Hardening..........................................       4,640,000  ..............  ..............
    Information System Security.................................       2,581,000  ..............  ..............
Accountwide adjustment: CSRS/FEHB accruals......................  ..............      -2,744,000      -2,744,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total Appropriation.......................................     195,000,000     124,000,000     124,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        IMPROVE AVIATION SAFETY

       Propulsion and fuel systems.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides a total of $6,711,000 for propulsion and fuel 
     systems research to reduce commercial and general aviation 
     fatalities. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes 
     $1,000,000 to continue the activities of the specialty metals 
     processing consortium and $1,000,000 for additional research 
     into the performance and combustion characteristics of 
     aviation grade ethanol fuels.
       Flight safety/atmospheric hazards research.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes a total of $5,430,000, including 
     $3,000,000 for flight safety/atmospheric hazards research to 
     continue the development of in-flight simulator training for 
     civilian and commercial pilots at the Roswell Industrial 
     Center.
       Aging aircraft.--The Committee recommendation includes a 
     total of $26,217,000 for the aging aircraft program to reduce 
     commercial and general aviation fatalities. The Committee has 
     provided resources to continue the collaborative efforts 
     between the FAA and several public and private organizations 
     including the Center for Aviation Systems Reliability (CASR), 
     the Airworthiness Assurance Center of Excellence (AACE) and 
     the Engine Titanium Consortium (ETC). Within the 
     appropriation, the recommendation includes $3,500,000 for the 
     Center for Aviation Systems Reliability (CASR); $4,000,000 
     for the Airworthiness Assurance Center of Excellence (AACE); 
     $3,000,000 for the Engine Titanium Consortium (ETC); 
     $3,000,000 for the Aging Aircraft Nondestructive Inspection 
     Validation Center (AANC); and, $2,500,000 for the Center for 
     Aviation Research and Aerospace Technology (CARAT).
       Anomalous flight monitor.--Within the funds provided, the 
     Committee includes $3,000,000 to develop a pilot project at 
     Seattle-Tacoma International Airport to create a system that 
     integrates and leverages the capabilities of mobile software 
     objects to monitor and understand current air traffic 
     operations and to sense the ``state'' of an aircraft for 
     anomalous flight conditions.
       Weather research safety.--The Committee recommendation 
     provides $19,406,000 to continue the FAA's weather research 
     program that is focused on system safety. Within the funds 
     provided for weather research, the Committee recommendation 
     includes $5,000,000 to continue research to identify wake 
     turbulence by utilizing pulsed laser Doppler radar 
     technology.


          IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM

       Weather research efficiency.--The Committee includes 
     $12,099,000 for weather research to improve the efficiency of 
     the air traffic control system. Within the funds provided, 
     the Committee includes $5,000,000 for wake turbulence 
     research to expedite the development of new standards and 
     procedures.


                REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF AVIATION

       Environment and energy research.--The Committee provides 
     $2,698,000 for environment and energy research, a reduction 
     of $5,000,000 due to budget constraints.

                       Grants-in-Aid for Airports


                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                    (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 2002\1\..................................$1,800,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,100,000,000

[[Page 958]]

Committee recommendation..................................3,100,000,000

\1\Does not reflect $175,000,000 of direct supplemental appropriations 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

       Chapter 471 of title 49, U.S.C. authorizes a program of 
     grants to fund airport planning and development and noise 
     compatibility planning and projects for public use airports 
     in all States and territories.
       The Committee recommends $3,100,000,000 in liquidating cash 
     for grants-in-aid for airports. This is consistent with the 
     Committee's obligation limitation on airport programs for 
     fiscal year 2002 and for the payment of previous years' 
     obligations.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Obligation limitation, 2002..............................$3,300,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,400,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,400,000,000

       The total program level recommended for fiscal year 2003 
     for grants-in-aid to airports is $3,400,000,000 and is 
     intended to be sufficient to continue the important tasks of 
     enhancing airport and airway safety, ensuring that airport 
     standards can be met, maintaining existing airport capacity, 
     and developing additional capacity. The amount provided 
     includes $81,049,000 for administration and airport 
     technology research. Also, the Administration proposes that 
     the grants-in-aid funds be used to make up for shortfalls in 
     overflight fee collections to fund the essential air service 
     program.
       The Committee notes that a sizable alternative source of 
     funding is available to airports in the form of passenger 
     facility charges [PFC's]. The first PFC charge began for 
     airlines tickets issued on June 1, 1992. DOT data shows that 
     as of May 1, 2002, 330 airports have been approved for 
     collection of PFC's in the amount of $34,000,000,000. During 
     calendar year 2001 airports collected $1,590,000,000 in PFC 
     charges, and $1,940,000,000 is estimated to be collected in 
     calendar year 2002. Of the airports collecting PFC's, 
     approximately one-fifth collected about 90 percent of the 
     total, and all of these are either large or medium hub 
     airports. Prior to the authorized increase in PFC charges, 
     the DOT estimated that these airports will collect more than 
     $1,610,000,000 in calendar year 2001, depending on the number 
     of applications received and approved and assuming current 
     statutory authority. The first collections at the new $4.50 
     PFC level began on April 1, 2001 at 31 airports. Eventually, 
     the funding to airports from the 50 percent nominal increase 
     in authorized passenger facility charges will result in 
     dramatically increased resources for airport improvements, 
     expansions, and enhancements.


                       Limitation On Obligations

       The bill includes a limitation on obligations of 
     $3,400,000,000 for fiscal year 2003. This is the same as the 
     President's budget request and $100,000,000 over the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level.
       A table showing the distribution of these funds compared to 
     the fiscal year 2002 levels and the President's budget 
     request follows:

                                                Fiscal year 2003 (Est.)

AIR-21 Appropriations Limitation.........................$3,400,000,000
  Airports Operations.......................................-64,620,000
  Research & Development....................................-16,429,000
  Small Community Program...................................-20,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Available for AIP Grants..............................3,298,951,000
                                                       ================

Primary Airports..........................................1,028,358,014
Cargo (3.0 percent)..........................................98,968,530
Alaska Supplemental..........................................21,345,114
States (20.0 percent):
  Non-Primary Entitlement...................................341,887,082
  State Apportionment by Formula............................317,903,118
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal................................................659,790,200
Carryover Entitlement.......................................300,000,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal Entitlements.................................2,108,461,858
                                                       ================

Small Airport Fund:
  Non Hub Airports..........................................183,303,989
  Non Commercial Service.....................................91,651,994
  Small Hub..................................................45,825,997
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal Small Airport Fund.............................320,781,980
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal Non Discretionary............................2,429,243,838
                                                       ================

Noise (34 percent of Disc)..................................295,700,436
Reliever (0.66 percent of Disc)...............................5,740,067
MAP (4 percent of Disc)......................................34,788,286
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal Disc Set-asides................................336,228,789
                                                       ================

C/S/S/N.....................................................400,108,780
Remaining Discretionary.....................................133,369,593
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal Other Discretionary............................533,478,373
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal Discretionary.................................$869,707,162
                                                       ================

    GRAND TOTAL...........................................3,298,951,000


                      AIRPORT DISCRETIONARY GRANTS

       Within the overall obligation limitation in this bill, over 
     $869,000,000 is available for discretionary grants to 
     airports. The Committee has carefully considered a broad 
     array of discretionary grant requests that can be expected in 
     fiscal year 2003. Specifically, the Committee expects the FAA 
     to give priority consideration to applications for the 
     projects listed below in the categories of the AIP for which 
     they are eligible. If funds in the remaining discretionary 
     category are used for any projects in fiscal year 2003 that 
     are not listed below, the Committee expects that they will be 
     for projects for which FAA has issued letters of intent 
     (including letters of intent the Committee recommends below 
     that the FAA subsequently issues), or for projects that will 
     produce significant aviation safety improvements or 
     significant improvements in systemwide capacity or otherwise 
     have a very high benefit/cost ratio.
       Within the program levels recommended, the Committee 
     directs that priority be given to applications involving the 
     further development of the following airports:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Subaccount                                              Project Name
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abilene Airport, TX.....................................  Various Improvements
Akutan Airport, AK......................................  Various Improvements
Allen Army Airbase, AK..................................  Various Improvements & Maintenance
Anchorage Int'l Airport, AK.............................  Various Improvements
Andalusia Opp, AL.......................................  Runway/Taxiway Overlay
Andrews-Murphy Airport, NC..............................  Various Improvements
Ankeny Regional Airport, IA.............................  Hangar, Taxiway, Apron
Artesia Municipal Airport, NM...........................  Various Improvements
Atka Airport, AK........................................  Various Improvements
Atmore Municipal Airport, AL............................  Improvements in Safety Zones
Austin Straubel Field, WI...............................  Various Improvements
Autauga County Airport, AL..............................  Overlay, Widen Existing Runway
Baltimore-Washington Int'l Airport, MD..................  Various Improvements
Barbour County Regional, WV.............................  Various Improvements
Barkley Regional Airport, KY............................  Runway Extension, Various Improvements
Barter Island Dew Airport (Kaktovik), AK................  Various Improvements
Bartlesville Municipal Airport, OK......................  Runway, Safety Area
Batesville Regional Airport, AR.........................  Various Improvements
Baxter County Regional Airport, AR......................  Runway
Benedum Airport, WV.....................................  Various Improvements
Bert Mooney Airport, MT.................................  Various Improvements
Billings Airport, MT....................................  Terminal & Security
Birmingham International Airport, AL....................  Various Improvements
Bismark Municipal Airport, ND...........................  Terminal Replacement
Blackwell Field Airport, AL.............................  Land Acquisition for Runway Extension
Bob Wiley Field Airport, SD.............................  Various Improvements
Bowling Green/Warren Regional, KY.......................  Facility
Bowman Field Airport, KY................................  Various Improvements
Braxton County Airport, WV..............................  Various Improvements
Bremerton Airport, WA...................................  Various Improvements
Bruce Campbell Field Airport, MS........................  Land Acq., Taxiway
Buffalo Int'l Airport, NY...............................  Runway,Taxiway Ext./Rehab.
Burlington-Alamance Airport, NC.........................  Various Improvements
Bush Field Airport, GA..................................  New Terminal, Access & Parking
Carl P. Savage Airport, GA..............................  Runway Extension & Widening
Cartersville/Bartow Airport, GA.........................  Various Improvements
Central Illinois Regional.Bloomington-Normal, IL........  Airport Improvement Projects

[[Page 959]]

 
Central Nebraska Regional Airport, NE...................  Taxiway & Runway
Central Wisconsin Airport, WI...........................  Runway, Taxiway
Centre Municipal Airport, AL............................  Land Acquisition & Runway Ext.
Chan Gurney Airport, SD.................................  Runway Lighting System
Charlottsville-Albermarle Airport, VA...................  Various Improvements
Cherokee County Airport, GA.............................  Runway Ext., Taxiway & Hangar
Cherry Capital Airport, MI..............................  Terminal Construction
Cheyene Airport, WY.....................................  Runway Safety Area & Taxiway
Cheyenne Airport, CO....................................  Runway Safety & Taxiway
Cheyenne Eagle Butte, SD................................  Reservation Hangar
Chippewa County Int'l Airport, MI.......................  Passenger Terminal
Cincinnati Northern Kentucky Regional, KY...............  Feasibility Study
Clarion County Airport, PA..............................  Runway Expansion
Clark County Airport, IN................................  Lengthen Runway
Cleveland-Hopkins Int'l Airport, OH.....................  Noise Mitigation
Clinton Airport, IA.....................................  Runway, Taxiway Paving
Concord Regional Airport,NC.............................  Runway Ext., Land Acquisition
Connellsville Airport, PA...............................  Runway Extension
Council Bluffs Airport, IA..............................  Land Acquisition, Runway
Craig Field Airport, AL.................................  Runway Improvements
Cumberland Regional Airport, MD.........................  Various Improvements
Dane County Regional Airport, WI........................  Runway Construction
Davenport Municipal Airport, IA.........................  New Terminal Building
Davis City Airport, WV..................................  Various Improvements
Denton Municipal Airport, TX............................  Improvements
Denver International Airport, CO........................  Runway
Detroit Metro Wayne County Airport, MI..................  Terminal, Runway Rehabilitation
Dona Ana County Airport, NM.............................  Runway and Taxiway
Drake Field, AR.........................................  Various Improvements
Eagle County Airport, CO................................  Radar Improvements
Eastern Iowa Regional Airport, IA.......................  Taxiway, Aprons
Eastern West Virginia, WV...............................  Various Improvements
Easterwood Airport, TX..................................  Various Improvements
Elkins-Randolph Field, WV...............................  Various Improvements
Emmett County Regional Airport, MI......................  Passenger Terminal
Erie International, PA..................................  Runway Extension
Fairfield County Airport, SC............................  Runway Extension
Fairfield Municipal Airport, IA.........................  Runway & Taxiway
Fairhope Municipal Airport, AL..........................  New Runway
Fairmont Municipal Airport, WV..........................  Various Improvements
False Pass Airport, AK..................................  Various Improvements
Fayette Airport, WV.....................................  Various Improvements
Ford Airport, MI........................................  Runway Reconstruction
Freeport Albertus Airport, IL...........................  Airport Improvement Projects
Fort Lauderdale Airport, FL.............................  Automated People Mover Study
General Mitchell International Airport , WI.............  Taxiway Extension
Georgetown Air Services Airport, DE.....................  Security Improvements
Glacier Park Int'l Airport, MT..........................  Infrastructure Projects
Glynco Jetport, GA......................................  Terminal, Renovation
Golden Triangle Regional Airport, MS....................  Various Improvement
Grand Forks Int'l Airport, ND...........................  Runway & Parallel Taxiway
Grant County Airport, WV................................  Various Improvements
Great Falls International Airport, MT...................  Category III Upgrades
Greater Rochester Int'l Airport, NY.....................  Various Improvements
Greater Rockford Airport, IL............................  Airport Improvement Projects
Greenbriar Valley Airport, WV...........................  Various Improvements
Gulfport-Biloxi Airport, MS.............................  Terminal Expansion & Security
Harrell Field Airport, AR...............................  Various Improvements
Harrisburg International Airport, PA....................  Multimodal Terminal
Headland Municipal Airport, AL..........................  Land Acquisition, Runway, & Taxiway
Helena Regional Airport, MT.............................  Facility Modernization
Henry E. Rohlsen Airport, St. Croix.....................  Runway Extension
Herrell Field Airport, AR...............................  Repair Facility Camden
Highmore Municipal Airport, SD..........................  Runway
Holly Springs-Marshall County Airport, MS...............  Runway Extension
Houston Municipal Airport, MS...........................  Improvements
Houston Municipal Airport, TX...........................  AIP Priority Language
Huntsville International Airport, AL....................  Air Cargo Apron Expansion and Related Improvements
Indiana City-Jimmy Stewart Airport, PA..................  Runway Extension
Jackson County Airport, WV..............................  Various Improvements
Jackson Int'l Airport, MS...............................  Terminal Renovations
Jackson Municipal Airport, AL...........................  Improvement Project
Johnstown-Cambria County Airport, PA....................  Distribution Center
Jonesboro Municipal Airport, AR.........................  Runway Expansion & terminal
Joplin Regional Airport, MO.............................  Terminal Improvements
Juneau Harbor Int'l Airport, AK.........................  Various Improvements
Kansas City Downtown Airport, MO........................  Runway & Terminal Improvements
Kee Field Airport, WV...................................  Various Improvements
Kennett Memorial Airport, MO............................  Runway Improvements
Ketchikan Int'l Airport, AK.............................  Various Improvements
Key Field Airport, MS...................................  New Terminal Building
Kodiak Airport, AK......................................  Various Improvements
LaCrosse Municipal Airport, WI..........................  Parallel Taxiway
Lafayette Airport, LA...................................  Runway, Taxiway
Lambert Airport, MO.....................................  Parks & Runway Project
Lawrence County Airport, PA.............................  Various Improvements
Lehigh Valley International Airport, PA.................  Lighting
Lewis County Airport, MO................................  Hangar Projects
Lewis University Airport, IL............................  Runway & Hangar
Livingston County Airport, MI...........................  Runway Construction
Logan County Airport, WV................................  Various Improvements
Louisville Int'l Airport, KY............................  Integrated Advanced Technology, Noise
Madison Airport, MS.....................................  Land Acquisition, Taxiway
Madison County Airport, AL..............................  Various Improvements
Manistee County Blacker Airport, MI.....................  Terminal Building
Marion-Crittenden County Airport, KY....................  Expansion
Marks Airport, MS.......................................  Runway Extension
Marlinton City Airport, WV..............................  Various Improvements
Marshall City Airport,WV................................  Various Improvements
Mason City Airport, IA..................................  Runway
Mason County Airport, WV................................  Various Improvements
McAlester Airport, OK...................................  Runway & Various Improvements
McComb-Pike County Airport, MS..........................  Various Improvements
McKinney Municipal Airport, TX..........................  Taxiway
Memorial Field Airport, AR..............................  Terminal Hangars
Mercer City Airport, WV.................................  Various Improvements
Meridian Key Field Airport, MS..........................  Construction
Miami International Airport, FL.........................  Apron Construction Project
Mingo County Airport, WV................................  Various Improvements
Minneapolis-St. Paul Int'l Airport, MN..................  De-icing/holding pad

[[Page 960]]

 
Missoula Int'l Airport, MT..............................  Master Plan, Runway, Land
Monroe Municipal Airport, NC............................  Security Improvements
Monroe Regional Airport, LA.............................  Terminal
Montgomery Regional (Dannelly Field) Airport, AL........  Terminal Improvements
Morganton-Lenoir Airport, NC............................  Terminal & Parking
Morgantown Muni-walter, WV..............................  Various Improvements
Nashville Int'l Airport, TN.............................  Security Enhancement
New Castle County Airport, DE...........................  Digital Video Recording System
New Orleans Airport, LA.................................  Various Improvements
Newport News-Williamsburg Int'l, VA.....................  Baggage Claim Facility
Newton Airport, IA......................................  Taxiway
Niagara Falls Int'l Airport, NY.........................  Hangar Demolition
Northwest Arkansas Regional, AR.........................  Airport Expansion
Oakland Pontiac County Airport, MI......................  Noise Mitigation Program
Ogden Hinckley Airport, UT..............................  Runway Extension
Orlando Int'l Airport, FL...............................  Wildlife Attractants Project
Orlando Sanford International Airport, FL...............  Runway
Ottumwa Industrial Airport, IA..........................  Taxiway
Palmer Municipal Airport, AK............................  Various Improvements
Petersburg Airport, AK..................................  Runway Apron & Various Improvements
Philadelphia International Airport, PA..................  Capital Improvements
Philadelphia Municipal Airport, MS......................  Airfield Expansion
Pierre Regional Airport, SD.............................  Runway & Lighting System
Pilot Point, AK.........................................  Airport Expansion
Pittsburgh International Airport, PA....................  Runway & Security
Port Columbus Int'l Airport, OH.........................  Airport Improvements
Port Heiden Airport, AK.................................  Airport Expansion
Princeton/Caldwell County Airport, KY...................  Runway Extension
Pryor Field Regional, AL................................  Various Improvements
Quad City Airport/Moline, IL............................  Airport Improvement Projects
Raleigh City Memorial, WV...............................  Various Improvements
Ralph Wein Memorial Airport (Kotzebue) AK...............  Various Improvements
Ralph Wien Memorial, AK.................................  Passenger Terminal, Road Relocation
Reagan National Airport, VA.............................  Various Improvements
Reno Stead Airport, NV..................................  Runway and Taxiway
Reno/Tahoe Int'l Airport, NV............................  Taxiway, Runway
Richard B. Russel Airport, GA...........................  Runway Extension & Security
Ripley County Airport, MS...............................  Runway Extension
Roberts Field Airport, OR...............................  Terminal, Expansion
Rock County Airport,WI..................................  Runway
Rockingham-Hamlet County Airport, NC....................  Expansion
Romeo State Airport, MI.................................  Runway Improvements
Roswell Airport, NM.....................................  Maintenance Facility Expansion
Russellville Municipal Airport, AL......................  Runway Extension
Rutland State Airport, VT...............................  Public Taxiway
Ryan Field Baton Rouge Airport, LA......................  Various Improvements, Language
Saline County, AR.......................................  Relocation
Shreveport Regional Airport, LA.........................  Runway, Noise, Cargo
Southcenteral, AK.......................................  Float Plane Facility
Spencer City Airport, WV................................  Various Improvements
Spokane Int'l Airport, WA...............................  Taxiway
Springfield Capital Airport, IL.........................  Airport Improvement Projects
Springfield/Branson Mid-field, MO.......................  Terminal Project
St. George, UT..........................................  Replacement Airport Land Acquisition
St. Louis Lambert, MO...................................  Expansion & Noise Mitigation
St. Paul & St. George, Pribilof Island, AK..............  Runway Improvements
Stanly County Airport, NC...............................  Various Improvements
Statesville Airport, NC.................................  Various Improvements
Stennis Int'l Airport, MS...............................  Expansion
Stockton Metro Airport,CA...............................  Upgrades
Summersville Airport, WV................................  Various Improvements
The Eastern Iowa Airport, IA............................  Taxiway, Apron
Toledo Express Airport, OH..............................  Remediation & Land Development
Tom B David Field Airport, GA...........................  Security & Infrastructure
Tri-State/Walker-Long Field, WV.........................  Various Improvements
Troy Municipal Airport, AL..............................  Land Acquisition, Runway, Parallel Taxiway
Tulsa International Airport, OK.........................  Security Improvements
Tunica County Airport, MS...............................  Construct Main Aircraft Parking Apron
Unalaska Airport, AK....................................  Various Improvements
Upshur County Regional Airport, WV......................  Various Improvements
Vermillion Airport, IL..................................  Various Improvements
Walnut Ridge Regional Airport, AR.......................  Runway Extension
Washington Memorial Airport, MO.........................  Runway Project
Waynesboro Municipal Airport, MS........................  Extension and Runway Widening
Weedon Field Airport, AL................................  Construct Parallel Taxiway
Welch Municipal Airport, WV.............................  Various Improvements
Wendell H. Ford Airport, KY.............................  Various Improvements
Wheeling-Ohio Airport, WV...............................  Various Improvements
Wilmington International, NC............................  Various Improvements
Winfield City Airport, WV...............................  Various Improvements
Winona-Montgomery County Airport, MS....................  Various Improvements
Wood City/Gill Robb Wilson Field, WV....................  Various Improvements
Yeager Airport, WV......................................  Various Improvements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           LETTERS OF INTENT

       Congress authorized FAA to use letters of intent [LOI's] to 
     fund multiyear airport improvement projects that will 
     significantly enhance systemwide airport capacity. FAA is 
     also to consider a project's benefits and costs in 
     determining whether to approve it for AIP funding. FAA 
     adopted a policy of committing to LOI's no more than about 50 
     percent of forecasted discretionary funds allocated for 
     capacity, safety, security, and noise projects. The Committee 
     viewed this policy as reasonable because it gave FAA the 
     flexibility to fund other worthy projects that do not fall 
     under a LOI. Both FAA and airport authorities have found 
     letters of intent helpful in planning and funding airport 
     development.


                             ADMINISTRATION

       The bill provides that, within the overall obligation 
     limitation, $81,049,000 is available for administration of 
     the airports program by the FAA and airport technology 
     research.
       The Committee recommendation includes $16,429,000 for 
     Airport Technology Research. The program is included in AIP 
     for fiscal year 2003 as the research directly supports 
     improvements in airport safety, capacity, and efficiency. The 
     research is directed at mitigation of wildlife strike hazards 
     to aircraft, improvement of airport rescue and firefighting, 
     improvement of airport lighting and marking, reduction in 
     runway incursions, and improvement in airport pavement and 
     design. It also includes funding for the 18 FTE in the 
     Airport Technology Branch at the William J. Hughes Technical 
     Center and continued operation of the pavement test facility 
     at the Technical Center.


                           general provisions

       Second career training program.--The Committee has included 
     bill language which was included in the President's budget 
     request which prohibits the use of appropriated funds for the 
     second career training program. This prohibition has been 
     carried in annual appropriations acts for many years.
       Sunday premium pay.--The bill retains a provision, first 
     included in the fiscal year 1995 appropriations bill, which 
     prohibits FAA from paying Sunday premium pay, except in those 
     cases where the individual actually worked on a Sunday. This 
     provision is identical to that which was in effect for fiscal

[[Page 961]]

     years 1995-2002. It was requested by the administration for 
     fiscal year 2003.
       Manned auxiliary flight service stations.--The Committee 
     has retained bill language which was requested by the 
     administration to prohibit the use of funds for operating a 
     manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous 
     United States. There is no funding provided in the 
     ``Operations'' account for such stations in fiscal year 2003.
       Facilitating Environmental Reviews to Increase Airport 
     Capacity.--The bill authorizes the Federal Aviation 
     Administration (sec. 338) to use funds from airport sponsors, 
     including the airport's ``Grants-in-Aid for Airports'' 
     entitlement funds, for the hiring of additional staff or for 
     obtaining services of consultants for the purpose of 
     facilitating environmental activities related to airport 
     projects that add critical airport capacity to the national 
     air transportation system.
       FAA and TSA Facilities on Airport Property.--The bill 
     includes a provision (sec. 335) that prohibits funds in this 
     Act to be used to adopt guidelines or regulations requiring 
     airport sponsors to provide the Federal Aviation 
     Administration or the Transportation Security Administration 
     ``without cost'' buildings, maintenance, or space for FAA 
     services. The prohibition does not apply to negotiations 
     between FAA and airport sponsors concerning ``below market'' 
     rates for such services or to grant assurances that require 
     airport sponsors to provide land without cost to the FAA for 
     air traffic control facilities. The prohibition also does not 
     apply to the TSA's use of space for security checkpoints.

                     FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

       The principal mission of the Federal Highway Administration 
     is to, in partnership with State and local governments, 
     foster the development of a safe, efficient, and effective 
     highway and intermodal system nationwide including access to 
     and within National Forests, National Parks, Indian Lands and 
     other public lands.
       Under the Committee recommendations, a total program level 
     of $32,892,767,000 would be provided for the activities of 
     the Federal Highway Administration in fiscal year 2003. The 
     following table summarizes the fiscal year 2002 program 
     levels, the fiscal year 2003 program request and the 
     Committee's recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                                                                 --------------------------------    Committee
                             Program                               2002 program     2003 budget   recommendation
                                                                       level         estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal-aid highways limitation\1\..............................     31,799,104      23,204,787      31,800,000
    Limitation on administrative expenses\1\....................       (311,000)       (317,732)       (317,732)
Exempt Federal-aid obligations..................................        965,308         892,767         892,767
Appalachian Development Highway System..........................        200,000   ..............        200,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................     32,964,412      24,097,554      32,892,767
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect TASC reduction of $841,000 in section 349 of Public Law 107-87 as amended by sec. 1106,
  Public Law 107-117.

                 Limitation on Administrative Expenses

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$311,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\....................................317,732,000
Committee recommendation\2\.................................317,732,000

\1\Does not reflect TASC reduction of $841,000 in section 349 of Public 
Law 107-87 as amended by sec. 1106, Public Law 107-117.
\2\Funding for motor carrier administration expenses is included as a 
separate limitation in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

       The limitation on administrative expenses controls spending 
     for virtually all the salaries and expenses of the Federal 
     Highway Administration. The Transportation Equity Act for the 
     21st Century changed the funding source for the highway 
     research accounts from the administrative takedown of the 
     Federal-Aid Highway Program to individual contract authority 
     provisions. The Committee recommends a limitation of 
     $317,732,000. Within the funds provided, the Committee 
     includes $1,261,000 for the Office of Intermodalism.
       The following table reflects the fiscal year 2002 level, 
     the 2003 level requested by the administration, and the 
     Committee's recommendation:


                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                           Program                                                2003 budget     recommendation
                                                                  2002 level        estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses:
    Salaries and benefits....................................          222,936          231,857          231,857
    Travel...................................................            9,473            9,473            9,473
    Transportation...........................................              465              465              465
    GSA rent.................................................           20,621           24,646           24,646
    Communications, rent, and utilities......................            9,607            9,607            9,607
    Printing.................................................            1,412            1,412            1,412
    TASC.....................................................            7,025            6,184            6,184
    Supplies.................................................            2,000            2,000            2,000
    Equipment................................................            4,536            4,536            4,536
    Other (including Office of Intermodalism)................           32,925           27,552           27,552
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................       \1\311,000          317,732          317,732
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect TASC reduction of $841,000 in section 349 of Public Law 107-87 as amended by section 1106,
  Public Law 107-117.

       The Committee recommends the following items be funded 
     under section 104(a)(1)(A): $106,967,000 for the border 
     enforcement program within the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
     Administration. Within that amount, $47,000,000 shall be 
     available for the construction of border inspection 
     facilities along the U.S./Mexico border. The administration's 
     budget proposed that this $47,000,000 expenditure be funded 
     as a statutory earmark within the National Corridor Planning 
     and Development Program.
       Child passenger protection education grants.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $7,500,000 to continue providing 
     grants, as authorized under section 2003(b) of TEA21, that 
     train safety professionals on all aspects of proper child 
     restraint use and educate the public on the installation, 
     selection, and placement of child safety seats.

                          Federal-Aid Highways


                      (limitation on obligations)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2002\1\.....................................$31,799,104,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................23,204,787,000
Committee recommendation.................................31,800,000,000

\1\Does not reflect 0.22 percent reduction in section 1403 of Public 
Law 106-554.

       The accompanying bill includes language limiting fiscal 
     year 2003 Federal-aid highways obligations to $31,800,000,000 
     an increase of $896,000 over the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level and $8,595,213,000 over the budget request.
       The following table shows the distribution of highway funds 
     apportioned to the States under four scenarios: the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level, the President's budget, the level 
     authorized in TEA21 without any negative adjustment 
     associated with the Revenue Aligned Budget Authority Program, 
     and the Committee recommendation.

         FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2003 DISTRIBUTION OF OBLIGATION LIMITATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Fiscal year 2003
                                        Actual fiscal         estimate       Fiscal year 2003   Fiscal year 2003
               States                     year 2002          (includes          TEA21 (No          Committee
                                       distribution\1\   negative RABA)\1\       RABA)\1\      recommendation\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.............................       $561,362,701       $415,438,659       $497,809,309       $567,869,060
Alaska..............................        314,793,656        243,992,539        282,049,558        313,768,347

[[Page 962]]

 
Arizona.............................        486,222,525        360,625,443        428,178,058        478,661,057
Arkansas............................        362,646,673        271,870,783        325,162,357        371,441,005
California..........................      2,516,921,592      1,873,897,524      2,251,986,391      2,680,029,943
Colorado............................        353,162,510        262,226,522        315,313,485        368,466,026
Connecticut.........................        408,915,843        309,661,533        366,787,459        415,502,470
Delaware............................        119,922,108         89,903,183        107,786,314        123,206,642
Dist. of Col........................        110,272,767         80,228,034         97,670,902        112,945,593
Florida.............................      1,288,949,611        962,397,636      1,138,108,292      1,334,666,973
Georgia.............................        988,683,758        736,644,102        874,372,963        995,203,340
Hawaii..............................        142,269,483        105,377,242        126,117,171        144,088,890
Idaho...............................        211,274,214        158,107,857        188,164,413        214,046,391
Illinois............................        933,052,868        687,635,445        828,349,186        952,148,248
Indiana.............................        637,416,428        480,626,303        571,752,610        650,490,398
Iowa................................        329,539,179        244,147,409        295,194,209        339,521,596
Kansas..............................        324,853,609        237,945,876        288,082,372        331,223,637
Kentucky............................        483,773,648        357,260,223        428,654,998        497,841,866
Louisiana...........................        433,572,935        326,043,519        391,892,073        454,098,837
Maine...............................        147,086,603        108,424,690        130,260,610        149,362,482
Maryland............................        444,585,693        334,786,649        402,215,120        466,181,774
Massachusetts.......................        514,199,794        382,618,573        460,170,290        530,161,004
Michigan............................        894,928,134        664,400,228        792,891,230        876,106,351
Minnesota...........................        408,442,237        304,948,964        367,024,766        422,274,333
Mississippi.........................        355,303,061        264,919,392        317,912,106        348,105,687
Missouri............................        646,921,711        481,643,989        579,580,765        664,998,661
Montana.............................        266,186,472        202,334,294        239,147,070        270,616,228
Nebraska............................        215,987,903        157,601,762        190,753,358        219,515,887
Nevada..............................        197,993,516        147,568,451        175,748,970        200,382,228
New Hampshire.......................        140,214,707        105,843,997        126,691,084        145,005,638
New Jersey..........................        724,629,766        534,247,633        643,336,952        758,886,345
New Mexico..........................        268,590,255        201,195,690        240,387,850        274,350,991
New York............................      1,401,040,155      1,050,848,025      1,260,822,015      1,441,245,722
North Carolina......................        773,663,974        576,896,840        686,915,153        793,097,613
North Dakota........................        179,364,219        133,140,857        159,945,661        183,248,856
Ohio................................        961,276,478        715,885,800        858,861,756        973,391,935
Oklahoma............................        428,332,860        313,870,027        379,144,803        440,166,401
Oregon..............................        337,795,085        252,007,794        303,669,209        347,798,226
Pennsylvania........................      1,391,590,528      1,031,424,560      1,241,077,672      1,422,313,254
Rhode Island........................        164,111,783        121,859,206        145,918,370        167,259,925
South Carolina......................        461,159,042        345,741,214        411,340,455        469,006,236
South Dakota........................        199,167,503        148,832,688        178,370,728        203,967,247
Tennessee...........................        622,352,003        470,475,704        564,021,658        633,775,449
Texas...............................      2,146,241,884      1,593,917,206      1,895,420,532      2,212,128,509
Utah................................        216,502,048        159,143,771        192,107,692        220,961,112
Vermont.............................        124,154,439         92,915,343        111,740,964        128,540,498
Virginia............................        709,623,612        537,180,528        640,818,719        714,910,358
Washington..........................        493,764,590        363,330,177        438,456,193        503,641,269
West Virginia.......................        308,053,178        231,628,118        278,412,016        319,158,153
Wisconsin...........................        545,543,085        405,758,783        482,676,315        548,560,941
Wyoming.............................        188,996,676        141,882,461        170,844,171        196,628,021
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................     27,885,409,102     20,781,303,246     24,870,116,373     28,590,967,653
Allocation Programs\2\..............      3,913,694,898      2,423,483,754      2,783,883,627      3,209,032,347
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................     31,799,104,000     23,204,787,000     27,654,000,000     31,800,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes Special Limitation for Minimum Guarantee, Appalachia and High Priority Projects and excludes Exempt
  Minimum Guarantee and Emergency Relief.
\2\Includes territories.

                     FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS PROGRAMS

       The roads and bridges that make up our nation's highway 
     infrastructure are built, operated, and maintained through 
     the joint efforts of Federal, State, and local governments. 
     States have much flexibility to use Federal-aid highway funds 
     to best meet their individual needs and priorities, with 
     FHWA's assistance and oversight.
       The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21), 
     the highway, highway safety, and transit authorization 
     through fiscal year 2003 makes funds available in the 
     following major categories:
       National highway system.--The Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 authorized the 
     National Highway System (NHS), which was subsequently 
     established as a 163,000-mile road system by the National 
     Highway System Designation Act of 1995. This system serves 
     major population centers, intermodal transportation 
     facilities, international border crossings, and major 
     destinations. It is comprised of all interstate routes, 
     selected urban and principal rural arterials, defense 
     highways, and major highway connectors carrying up to 76 
     percent of commercial truck traffic and 44 percent of all 
     vehicle traffic. A State may transfer up to half of its NHS 
     funds to the Surface Transportation program (STP) and all NHS 
     funds with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
     Transportation. The Federal share of the NHS is an 80 percent 
     match and funds remain available for 4 fiscal years.
       Interstate maintenance.--The 46,567-mile Dwight D. 
     Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways 
     retains a separate identity within the NHS. This program 
     finances projects to rehabilitate, restore, resurface and 
     reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction of bridges, 
     interchanges, and over-crossings along existing interstate 
     routes is also an eligible activity if it does not add 
     capacity other than high occupancy vehicle (HOV) and 
     auxiliary lanes.
       All remaining Federal funding to complete the initial 
     construction of the interstate system has been provided 
     through previous highway legislation. The TEA21 provides 
     flexibility to States in fully utilizing remaining 
     unobligated balances of prior Interstate Construction 
     authorizations. States with no remaining work to complete the 
     Interstate System may transfer any surplus Interstate 
     Construction funds to their Interstate Maintenance program. 
     States with remaining completion work on Interstate gaps or 
     open-to-traffic segments may relinquish Interstate 
     Construction fund eligibility for the work and transfer the 
     Federal share of the cost to their Interstate Maintenance 
     program.
       Funds provided for the Interstate maintenance discretionary 
     program in fiscal year 2003 shall be available for the 
     following activities in the corresponding amounts:

        Project                                                  Amount

I-15 Reconstruction, 10800 South to 600 North, UT............$6,000,000
I-182/SR-240 Interchange Reconstruction, WA...................3,000,000
I-195 Relocation Project, RI..................................3,000,000
I-25 Broadway & Alameda Interchange Rebuilding, CO............5,000,000
I-29 Madison Street Interchange, Sioux Falls, SD..............4,000,000
I-295 Via Duct to I-76, NJ....................................2,000,000
I-30/I-35 Dallas, Construction of Bridges for Trinity River, T6,000,000
I-90, Exit 32 Interchange at Sturgis, SD......................4,000,000
I-35/Turkey Creek, Reconstruction Project, KS.................3,000,000
I-40 Crosstown Realignment, OK................................6,000,000
I-40 Paseo del Volcan Interchange, Albuquerque, NM............2,000,000
I-44 & US 65 Interchange, MO..................................2,000,000
I-55 Church Rd. to TN State Line, DeSoto County, MS..........10,000,000
I-55/US-49 Flyover Near Jackson, MS...........................6,000,000
I-65/70 Market Square Redesign/Replace ramp, IN...............5,000,000
I-75 Improvements South West Florida, FL......................2,000,000
I-75/I-475 Systems Interchange Upgrade at North Cove, OH......1,100,000
I-90 Joint Port of Entry Project, WY..........................2,500,000
Marquette Interchange Reconstruction, WI......................8,000,000

[[Page 963]]

Port of Garfield Road & Bridge Road, WA.........................500,000
Route 80 Paterson Interchange, NJ...............................400,000
Sunnyside, South First St. Reconstruction, WA.................1,500,000
SW First-NW Lake Road Project, WA.............................3,000,000
Union Gap, Valley Mall Blvd., WA..............................1,500,000
US-12, Burbank to Walla Walla, WA.............................2,500,000
US-63/I-70 Interchange Improvements, MO......................10,000,000

       Surface transportation program.--The surface transportation 
     program (STP) is a very flexible program that may be used by 
     the states and localities for any roads (including NHS) that 
     are not functionally classified as local or rural minor 
     collectors. These roads are collectively referred to as 
     Federal-aid highways. Bridge projects paid with STP funds are 
     not restricted to Federal-aid highways but may be on any 
     public road. Transit capital projects are also eligible under 
     this program. The total funding for the STP may be augmented 
     by the transfer of funds from other programs and by minimum 
     guarantee funds under TEA21 which may be used as if they were 
     STP funds. Once distributed to the states, STP funds must be 
     used according to the following percentages: 10 percent for 
     safety construction; 10 percent for transportation 
     enhancement; 50 percent divided among areas of over 200,000 
     population and remaining areas of the State; and, 30 percent 
     for any area of the state. Areas of 5,000 population or less 
     are guaranteed an amount based on previous funding, and 15 
     percent of the amounts reserved for these areas may be spent 
     on rural minor collectors. The Federal share for the STP 
     program is 80 percent with a 4-year availability period.
       Bridge replacement and rehabilitation program.--This 
     program is continued by the TEA21 to provide assistance for 
     bridges on public roads, including a discretionary set-aside 
     for high cost bridges and for the seismic retrofit of 
     bridges. Fifty percent of a state's bridge funds may be 
     transferred to the NHS or the STP, but the amount of any such 
     transfer is deducted from the national bridge needs used in 
     the program's apportionment formula for the following year.
       At least 15 percent, but not more than 35 percent, of a 
     State's apportioned bridge funds must be spent on bridges not 
     on the Federal-aid system.
       Funds provided for the bridge discretionary program in 
     fiscal year 2003 shall be available for the following 
     activities in the corresponding amounts:

        Project                                                  Amount

Bull Slough Bridge Repair, AL................................$1,000,000
Canvas Bridge, Nicholas County, WV............................6,000,000
Covered Bridges, including $2,000,000 for Vermont.............8,000,000
Depot Street Bridge restoration, Beacon Falls, CT.............1,000,000
Historic Woodrow Wilson Bridge, Flowood, MS...................1,000,000
Hot Metal Bridge, PA............................................500,000
Hwy-19 Bridge Replacement, Hermann, MO........................5,000,000
I-195 Washington Bridge Replacement, RI.......................7,000,000
Indian River Inlet Bridge Repairs in Sussex, DE...............5,000,000
Lexington Bridge, Cowlitz-Wahkiakum, WA.......................7,500,000
Market Street Bridge Replacement, Lycoming County, PA.........3,500,000
Missouri River Two State Bridge Project, NE...................2,000,000
Monroe St. Bridge Rehabilitation, Spokane, WA.................2,500,000
Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge Reconstruction, New Haven, CT....6,000,000
Pomeroy-Mason Bridge, Mason County, WV........................6,000,000
Red Cliff Arch Bridge Restoration/US24, CO....................6,000,000
Waldo-Hancock Bridge Rehabilitation, ME.......................5,000,000
Russell St. Viaduct Replacement (MD295), Baltimore, MD........6,000,000
Sauvie Island Bridge, Replacement Project, OR.................3,000,000
Tate's Bluff, Arkansas Replacement Bridge, AR.................1,500,000
Two Medicine River Bridge, MT.................................4,000,000
US231 Southbound Tennessee River Bridge Replacement, AL.......8,000,000
Wacker Drive Reconstruction, Chicago, IL......................4,500,000

       National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation Program.--The 
     Committee recommendation provides $8,000,000 for the covered 
     bridge program within the funds made available for the 
     discretionary bridge program. Within this amount, $2,000,000 
     shall be made available for covered bridges in the State of 
     Vermont.
       Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement 
     program.--This program provides funds to States to improve 
     air quality in non-attainment and maintenance areas. A wide 
     range of transportation activities are eligible, as long as 
     DOT, after consultation with EPA, determines they are likely 
     to help meet national ambient air quality standards. TEA21 
     provides greater flexibility to engage public-private 
     partnerships, and expands and clarifies eligibilities to 
     include programs to reduce extreme cold starts, maintenance 
     areas, and particulate matter (PM-10) nonattainment and 
     maintenance areas. If a State has no non-attainment or 
     maintenance areas, the funds may be used as if they were STP 
     funds.
       On-road and off-road demonstration projects may be 
     appropriate candidates for funding under the CMAQ program. 
     Both sectors are critical for satisfying the purposes of the 
     CMAQ program, including regional emissions and verifying new 
     mobile source control techniques.
       Federal lands highways.--This program provides 
     authorizations through three major categories--Indian 
     reservation roads, parkways and park roads, and public lands 
     highways (which incorporates the previous forest highways 
     category)--as well as a new category for Federally-owned 
     public roads providing access to or within the National 
     Wildlife Refuge System. TEA21 also establishes a new program 
     for improving deficient bridges on Indian reservation roads.
       The Committee directs that the funds allocated for this 
     program in this bill and in permanent law are to be derived 
     from the FHWA's public lands discretionary program, and not 
     from funds allocated to the National Park Service's regions. 
     Funds provided for the Federal lands program in fiscal year 
     2003 shall be available for the following activities:

        Project                                                  Amount

Arches National Park Main Entrance Relocation, UT............$1,250,000
BIA Route 13/Route 1 Project, Makah, WA.......................5,400,000
Blackstone River Valley Bikeway, RI...........................2,000,000
Cattle Point Road, San Juan County, WA..........................350,000
Chilatchee Creek Park Access Road Improvements, AL..............475,000
Colonial Historic Park--Jamestown 400th Anniversary Transportation 
  Improvements, VA............................................2,170,000
Council Grove Lake Embankment Roadway, KS.....................1,500,000
Downeast Heritage Center, Parking & Access, ME..................200,000
Fort Drum Road Improvements, NY.................................770,000
Freemont County Project, WY...................................1,100,000
Frog Level Road, Neshoba County, MS...........................1,000,000
Gateway Trail, Grand Canyon National Park, AZ.................1,380,000
Glacier National Park, Going-to-the-Sun Road, MT..............5,000,000
Hawaii Statewide Improvements.................................5,000,000
Highway 93 Expansion Project, MT..............................1,400,000
Homochitto National Forest Access Rd, Lincoln, MS.............2,000,000
Hoonah Road (FM), AK..........................................1,400,000
Hoover Dam Bypass New Bridge downstream of Dam, NV............6,750,000
Hoover Dam Bridge Bypass, AZ..................................7,000,000
Hwy 2 Highline EIS Project, MT................................1,000,000
I-215 Widening, NV............................................3,500,000
Iditarod Historic National Trail Project, AK....................500,000
Kenai River Trail, AK...........................................500,000
KS-115 and KS-911 Interchange, KY.............................1,000,000
Lewis and Clark, Gates of the Mountains Road Project, MT........600,000
Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller Park Pedestrian Walkway, VT..........380,000
Metlakatla/Walden Point Road, AK..............................2,000,000
Naknek Lake Camp Road, AK.....................................3,400,000
Rocks-Back Country Byway, Stage 2, ID.........................2,000,000
Shotgun Cove Road, AK.........................................2,000,000
Southeast Alaska Seatrails, AK..................................750,000
Spirit Lake Tribe Shared Use Path, Fort Totten, ND..............520,000
SR-149 Resurfacing, Rio Grande National Forest, CO............2,000,000
SR-164 Muckleshoots, WA.........................................420,000
US 95 Widening Laughlin Cut-off to Railroad Pass, NV.........10,000,000
USMC Heritage Center Access, VA...............................2,000,000
Yakama Signal Peak Road, WA...................................4,150,000

       Broughton Bridge improvements.--A total of $1,850,000 was 
     provided to make improvements to Broughton Bridge, Kansas in 
     Public Laws 106-346 and 107-87. The balance shall be 
     available to make improvements to the access road to the 
     bridge, including pavement overlay and related shoulder work.
       Minimum guarantee.--Under TEA21, after the computation of 
     funds for major Federal-aid programs, additional funds are 
     distributed to ensure that each State receives an additional 
     amount based on equity considerations. This minimum guarantee 
     provision ensures that each State will have a return of 90.5 
     percent on its share of contributions to the highway account 
     of the Highway Trust Fund. To achieve the minimum guarantee 
     each fiscal year, $2,800,000,000 nationally is available to 
     the States as though they are STP funds (except that 
     requirements related to set-asides for transportation 
     enhancements, safety, and sub-State allocations do not 
     apply), and any remaining amounts are distributed among core 
     highway programs.
       Value pricing program.--As the fiscal year 2003 
     applications for the value pricing program are being 
     reviewed, the Committee encourages FHWA to support the data 
     collection phase of the pay-as-you-drive variable pricing 
     research program in Atlanta, GA.

[[Page 964]]

       Emergency relief.--This program provides for the repair and 
     reconstruction of Federal-aid highways and Federally-owned 
     roads which have suffered serious damage as the result of 
     natural disasters or catastrophic failures. TEA21 restates 
     the program eligibility specifying that emergency relief (ER) 
     funds can be used only for emergency repairs to restore 
     essential highway traffic, to minimize the extent of damage 
     resulting from a natural disaster or catastrophic failure, or 
     to protect the remaining facility and make permanent repairs. 
     If ER funds are exhausted, the Secretary of Transportation 
     may borrow funds from other highway programs.
       High priority projects.--TEA21 includes 1,850 high priority 
     projects specified by the Congress. Funding for these 
     projects totals $9,359,850,000 over the 6 year period with a 
     specified percentage of the project funds made available each 
     year. Unlike demonstration projects in the past, the funds 
     for TEA21 high priority projects are subject to the Federal-
     aid obligation limitation, but the obligation limitation 
     associated with the projects does not expire.
       Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act 
     (TIFIA).--Programs authorized under the Transportation 
     Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) provide 
     credit assistance on flexible terms directly to public-
     private sponsors of major surface transportation projects to 
     assist them in gaining access to the capital markets. The 
     Committee believes that TIFIA is an important part of the 
     Federal Government's overall infrastructure investment 
     effort--one that is likely to grow in importance and size in 
     the future. Unfortunately, demand for resources under the 
     program has not kept pace with the contract authority 
     available under TEA21. As such, the program is expected to 
     carry an unspent balance of over $100,000,000 into fiscal 
     year 2003. The Committee believes that the carryover balances 
     will adequately cover the likely demand for projects in 2003. 
     As such, the Committee has used the program's contract 
     authority to augment funding for the Transportation and 
     Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP), the 
     National Corridor Planning and Development Program, and the 
     Coordinated Border Infrastructure and Safety Program. Demand 
     for resources under these programs will far outstrip current 
     authorizations in 2003.
       National corridor planning and border infrastructure 
     programs.--TEA21 created a national corridor planning and 
     development program that identifies funds for planning, 
     design, and construction of highway corridors of national 
     significance, economic growth, and international or 
     interregional trade. Allocations may be made to corridors 
     identified in section 1105(c) of ISTEA and to other corridors 
     using considerations outlined in legislation. The coordinated 
     border infrastructure program is established to improve the 
     safe movement of people and goods at or across the U.S./
     Mexico and U.S/Canada borders.
       Funds provided for the National Corrider and Border 
     Infrastructure Program shall be available for the following 
     activities:

        Project                                                  Amount

Appalachian North-South Corridor Planning Study, MD..........$1,000,000
Billings Bypass Development, MT...............................4,000,000
Charlotte/Mecklenburg County N/S Transitway, Inc..............2,000,000
Coalfields Expressway, McDowell County, WV....................9,000,000
Continental--1 Hwy Trade Corridor, PA.........................1,000,000
Cottondale-Holt Highway, AL..................................10,000,000
Everett Development 41st Street Interchange, WA...............1,000,000
Fall River--Route 79 Improvements, MA.........................1,000,000
FAST Corridor Project, WA....................................10,000,000
Ft. Wainwright Alternative Access & Chena River Crossing, AK..2,000,000
Hoover Dam Bridge Bypass, AZ..................................2,000,000
Hwy 412, Widening, Paragould, Hwy 141, AR.....................7,000,000
Hwy-28 Expansion, Vernon Parish, LA...........................4,500,000
I-5, SR 542 Widening Sunset Drive Orleans to Britton Rd., WA..2,000,000
I-5 Trade Corridor, OR........................................4,000,000
I-10/LA1 Interchange Bypass, West Baton Rouge Parish, LA........750,000
I-15 widening project, North Las Vegas, NV....................1,000,000
I-20 Garrett Road, Monroe, LA...................................750,000
I-35-E Widening, Dallas and Ellis Counties, TX................5,000,000
I-49 Northern Extension, LA...................................3,470,000
I-49 Southern Extension, LA...................................3,470,000
I-69 Anderson to Flagship Park Center, IN.....................2,000,000
I-69 Construction, TX.........................................5,000,000
I-74 Bridge Project, IA.......................................4,000,000
I-80 Colfax Narrows Project, CA...............................1,000,000
I-85 Extension from Montgomery to I-20/59, AL.................1,000,000
Japonski Island Road, AK......................................1,000,000
Kenai Peninsula Borough Road Improvements, AK.................1,000,000
King Coal Highway, Mercer County, WV..........................9,000,000
KY61 Greensburg to Columbia, KY...............................8,000,000
LA 1 Embankment Stabilization Improvements, LA................3,470,000
LA 11 St. Tammamy Parish, LA....................................400,000
LA 37-U.S. 190 Central Thruway Connector......................3,470,000
LA 820, Lincoln Parish, LA......................................750,000
East-West Highway, ME.........................................3,000,000
Mill Plain Boulevard at I-205, WA.............................3,500,000
Missisquoi Bay Bridge Reconstruction, VT......................3,000,000
New Route 905, Otay Mesa to I-5/I-85m, CA.....................5,000,000
North Country Trans. Study, Plattsburgh/Watertown, NY.........2,000,000
Olathe 127th Street Overpass, KS..............................2,000,000
Arkansas-Tennessee River Crossing Projects....................1,000,000
Panama City Beach, Florida West Bay Bridge Project, FL........2,000,000
Peach St. Corridor Improvement Project, PA....................2,600,000
Pearl River Bridge Connector, I-55 to SR 475, Jackson, MS.....8,000,000
Polk County Highway 22 Project, OR............................2,000,000
Route 24/140 Interchange, MA..................................1,500,000
Rt-12 Corridor Improvement Project, NY........................5,000,000
Rt-403 Relocation, East Greenwich/North Kingstown, RI.........2,000,000
SR-130 Right of Way Willamson, Guadalupe, Travis and Caldwell10,000,000
SR-332 Reconstruction at I-69, Delaware County, IN............1,800,000
Snake River Crossing, Twin Falls, ID..........................1,000,000
Sunland Park Dr. Border Rd. Extension, NM.....................5,000,000
Tuscaloosa Eastern Bypass, AL................................12,000,000
US-5 Improvements from Derby to Barton, VT....................2,000,000
US-23 Buford Hwy Pedestrian Safety Project, GA................1,000,000
US-26 Widening SB-Heartland Expressway, NE....................3,000,000
US-35/Route 34 to I-64, Putnam County, WV.....................4,000,000
US-51 to MS-43 Connector Road, Canton, MS.....................1,200,000
US-60 widening in Butler County, MO...........................8,000,000
US-85/C-470 Santa Fe Interchange, CO..........................6,000,000
US-95, milepost 536 stage 2 construction, Boundary County, ID.1,400,000
US-95, Worley to Mica, Stage 2, ID............................7,000,000
US-287 Corridor Development, OK...............................3,100,000
US-287, Wiley Junction Improvements, CO.......................4,000,000
US-395, North Spokane Corridor, WA............................5,000,000
US-412, AR....................................................8,000,000
US 17/521 Improvements, Georgetown, SC........................2,500,000
WV Route 10, Logan County, WV.................................8,000,000
Western Hamilton County Corridor Study, OH....................2,000,000
Yakima Grade Separation, WA...................................3,500,000

       Middle East-West Highway.--Of the funds provided for Middle 
     East-West Highway, ME, not less than $1,000,000 shall be used 
     to study a potential East-West corridor in Maine and other 
     Northeastern States.
       Ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities.--Section 1207 of 
     TEA21 reauthorized funding for the construction of ferry 
     boats and ferry terminal facilities.
       Funds provided for the Ferry boats and ferry terminal 
     facilities program under the Committee recommendation shall 
     be available for the following activities in the 
     corresponding amounts:

        Project                                                  Amount

Beale Street Landing/Docking Facility, Memphis, TN.............$500,000
Coffman Cove/Wrangell/Petersburg Ferries & Ferry Facility, AK.1,200,000
Corpus Christi Ferry Terminal, TX...............................500,000
Dock Construction for Hickman/Fulton County, Riverport, KY....1,000,000
Ferry Boat Replacement for Rockland and Vinalhaven, ME........2,250,000
Fire Island Ferry Terminal, Saltaire, NY........................500,000
Friday Harbor Ferry Terminal Preservation, WA.................2,000,000
Kitsap Transit, Sidney Landing Terminal, WA...................2,000,000
Middle Bass Ferry Dock Improvements, phase II, OH...............750,000
Mobile Waterfront Terminal, AL................................2,000,000
North Carolina Shipyard, Manns Harbor, NC.......................300,000
San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority Ferry Project, 2,500,000
Ship Island Terminal, Gulfport, MS..............................500,000
Stamford Ferry Terminal, CT...................................1,000,000
Vallejo Baylink Ferry, Terminal and Facilities, CA............1,000,000
TEA21 Setaside...............................................20,000,000

       National scenic byways program.--This program provides 
     funding for roads that are designated by the Secretary of 
     Transportation as All American Roads (AAR) or National Scenic 
     Byways (NSB). These roads have outstanding scenic, historic, 
     cultural, natural, recreational, and archaeological 
     qualities. The Committee recommendation provides $26,500,000 
     for this program in fiscal year 2002.

[[Page 965]]

       Transportation and community and system preservation pilot 
     program.--TEA21 created a new transportation and community 
     and system preservation program that provides grants to 
     States and local governments for planning, developing, and 
     implementing strategies to integrate transportation and 
     community and system preservation plans and projects. These 
     grants may be used to improve the efficiency of the 
     transportation system, reduce transportation externalities 
     and the need for future infrastructure investment, and 
     improve transportation efficiency and access consistent with 
     community character. Funds provided for this program for 
     fiscal year 2003 shall be available for the following 
     activities:

        Project                                                  Amount

Aberdeen Downtown Revitalization, WA...........................$100,000
Alexandria, Third St. Downtown Reconnect Project, LA............350,000
Amsterdam Revitalization Waterfront, NY.........................500,000
Antelope Valley Overpass, Lincoln, NE.........................1,000,000
Atchinson Riverfront Access Parkway Project, KS...............1,000,000
Bagley Road Pedestrian Project, Berea, OH.....................1,300,000
Bellingham Central Avenue Pedestrian Corridor, WA...............250,000
Billings Railroad Separation Study, MT..........................100,000
Boston Long Island Pier ADA Compliance, MA......................200,000
Camp Gorsuch Road & Related Improvements, AK....................500,000
Charles Town Gateway Revitalization Project, WV.................300,000
Charleston Renaissance Gateway Project, WV......................950,000
Concord 20/20 Vision initiative, NH.............................500,000
Dover Lincoln Park Center Project, DE...........................400,000
Eugene Federal Courthouse Area Concept Development, OR..........750,000
Fairbanks Street Improvements & Bike Path, AK...................300,000
Boston Medical Center Pedestrian and Public Access Improvements,
  MA............................................................200,000
Flandreau Santee Sioux Trail, Bicycle and Walking Path, SD......200,000
Fort Campbell Improvements, KY..................................750,000
Frink Park Pier Project, Clayton, NY............................250,000
Girdwood Road Culvery Improvement, AK...........................600,000
Greater Yuma Port Authority, AZ.................................500,000
Gulf of Maine Research Laboratory, Park/Ped., ME................200,000
Hamilton Twp Pedestrian Overpass, NJ............................250,000
Highway-79 Corridor Greenway Project, AL........................500,000
Historic Fort Mitchell, AL....................................1,000,000
I-40 and Avenue ``F'', City Ramp Project, OK....................500,000
I-40/Paseo del Volcan Interchange, Albuquerque NM...............750,000
I-55/Main St. Intersection, MO..................................100,000
Kansas City East/West Connector, MO.............................500,000
Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Interpretive Trail, Mobridge SD....250,000
Lewis and Clark Shared Use Path, ND.............................675,000
Lithonia Streetscape Project, GA..............................1,000,000
Living Wall project, Farmington Hills, MI.......................400,000
MD-404 Shore Highway Phase II, MD.............................1,000,000
Museum Campus Trolleys, Chicago, IL.............................500,000
Nashville Rolling Mill Hills, TN................................500,000
Newberg-Dundee Transportation Improvement Project, OR...........775,000
Northside Drive Corridor Project, Clinton, MS.................1,000,000
Odessa Transportation Plan, DE..................................100,000
Ohio River Trail--Salem to Downtown, Cincinnati, OH.............350,000
Oklahoma Transportation Center Improvements, OK.................500,000
Old Route 66, Streetscape Phase I, Moriarity, NM................400,000
Orange County Congestion Program, CA..........................1,000,000
Owensboro Waterfront Development Project, KY....................750,000
Port of Anchorage road improvements, AK.........................600,000
Paintsville Lake Access Road, KY................................500,000
Pennyrile Parkway Improvements, KY..............................750,000
Portsmouth Piscaraqu Riverwalk, NH..............................500,000
Providence Road Trail Project, Virginia Beach, VA...............400,000
Ruffner Mountain Nature Center, AL..............................500,000
Selma Riverfront Project, AL....................................500,000
Shoreline Interurban Trail Construction Project, WA.............400,000
South Bend Studebaker Corridor, Industrial Park, IN.............500,000
Springfield Downtown Redevelopment Project, VT................1,500,000
SR202/I-70 Interchange improvement, OH..........................750,000
Thea Foss Waterway Environmental Protection and Transportation 
  Impact Study, WA..............................................500,000
Tulsa Trail System, Broken Arrow, OK..........................1,250,000
Ulster County Visitor Center, NY..............................1,000,000
Union City, NJ Traffic Signalization Project, NJ..............1,000,000
US-50 Reconstruction, Dodge City, KS..........................1,000,000
Vanderbilt Children's Hospital, TN..............................250,000
Virginia Corridor Greenway Pilot Project, Modesto, CA...........400,000
Wakulla County Florida, US-319 Expansion, FL....................250,000
Watertown Community Trail Extension, SD.........................100,000
Yorktown Waterfront Revitalization & Streetscape, VA..........1,000,000
10th Street South Project, St. Cloud, MN........................750,000
19th Ave. North Extension/Reconstruction, Clinton, IA.........1,500,000
19th St./Rimrock Way Ped. Improvements, Redmond, OR.............100,000

                 Appalachian Development Highway System

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$200,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\...............................................
Committee recommendation....................................200,000,000

\1\The budget estimate requests funding under the Federal-Aid Highway 
obligation limitation.

       The Committee recommendation includes $200,000,000 for the 
     Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS). The amount 
     provided is the same as the fiscal year 2002 comparable 
     level. Funding for this initiative is authorized under 
     section 1069(y) of Public Law 102-240--the Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act. The ADHS program provides 
     funds for the construction of the Appalachian corridor 
     highways in the 13 States that comprise the Appalachian 
     region. These highways, in many instances, are intended to 
     replace some of the most deficient and dangerous segments of 
     rural roadway in America.

                 Limitation on Transportation Research

Limitation, 2002\1\........................................$447,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\....................................462,500,000
Committee recommendation....................................462,500,000

\1\Resources available in fiscal year 2002 and requested in fiscal year 
2003 are assumed within the Federal aid highway obligation limitation 
in the budget request for fiscal year 2003.

       The limitation controls spending for the transportation 
     research and technology programs of the FHWA. This limitation 
     includes the intelligent transportation systems, surface 
     transportation research, technology deployment, training and 
     education, and university transportation research. The 
     Committee recommendation provides an obligation limitation 
     for transportation research of $462,500,000.

Surface transportation research............................$103,000,000
Technology deployment program................................50,000,000
Training and education.......................................20,000,000
Bureau of Transportation Statistics..........................31,000,000
ITS standards, research, operational tests, and development.110,000,000
ITS deployment..............................................122,000,000
University transportation research...........................26,500,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Subtotal................................................462,500,000

       Highway research and development.--The Committee 
     appreciates the improvement in the justification accompanying 
     the budget request and notes the presentation of the surface 
     research estimate separate from the presentation of the 
     technology deployment funding estimate.

Environment, planning, and real estate......................$16,774,000
Research and technology program support.......................8,545,000
International research..........................................500,000
Structures...................................................13,085,000
Safety.......................................................12,490,000
Highway operations...........................................13,101,000
Asset management..............................................3,290,000
Pavements research...........................................15,200,000
Policy research...............................................8,510,000
Long Term Pavement Project (LTPP)............................10,000,000
Advanced Research...............................................750,000
R&T strategic planning/performance measures.....................755,000

       Environment, planning, and real estate.--The Committee 
     recommendation includes $16,774,000 for environment, 
     planning, and real estate research, which is $4,221,000 more 
     than the budget estimate. Within the funds provided for this 
     research activity, the Committee has provided $800,000 to 
     continue dust and persistent particulate abatement research 
     in Kotzebue, Alaska.
       Research and technology program support.--The Committee 
     recommends $8,545,000, an increase of $1,462,000 from the 
     budget request and $410,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level. Within the funds available for research and 
     technology, the Committee has provided $750,000 for the 
     Center on Coastal Transportation Research at the University 
     of South Alabama.

[[Page 966]]

       International research.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $500,000 for international research. This is the 
     same amount provided in fiscal year 2002 and is consistent 
     with the amount authorized under TEA21.
       Structures.--The Committee has provided $13,085,000 for 
     structures research, an increase of $4,067,000 from the 
     budget request. This research effort allows FHWA reduce 
     deficiencies on National Highway System bridges and should 
     facilitate continued progress on high performance materials 
     and engineering applications to design, repair, retrofit, 
     inspect, and rehabilitate bridges. The Committee directs the 
     FHWA to continue its collaborative research effort with West 
     Virginia University's Construct Facilities Center regarding 
     research into composite structure and related engineering 
     research. Within the funds for this research activity, the 
     Committee has provided $500,000 for a demonstration project 
     to evaluate the use of battery-powered cathodic protection to 
     extend the life of concrete bridges that are located in 
     extreme cold weather conditions. The Committee recommendation 
     also includes $500,000 to support non-destructive structural 
     evaluation technology at the New Mexico State University's 
     Bridge Research Center.
       Safety.--The Committee recommendation provides $12,490,000 
     for safety research, an increase of $2,973,000 above the 
     budget estimate. These funds will allow FHWA to continue to 
     accelerate the substantial progress being made on 
     technologies or strategies to reduce run-off-road crashes, 
     improve night-time driving, reduce the frequency of crashes 
     at intersections, improve pedestrian safety, and develop, 
     test, and refine the Interactive Highway Safety Design Model. 
     Within the funds provided, the Committee included $1,500,000 
     to conduct research into heavy vehicle safety, and 
     vulnerability assessments regarding security and safety in 
     all modes of transportation at a not-for-profit, technology-
     oriented entity in the Pacific Northwest with demonstrated 
     research capabilities to address issues of braking, vehicle 
     electrification and human factors.
       Highway operations.--The Committee recommendation provides 
     $13,101,000 for research activities regarding highway 
     operations, which is $3,309,000 more than the budget request. 
     Within these funds, the Committee has included $1,200,000 to 
     analyze existing conditions and make recommendations that 
     will enhance the freight mobility transportation system in 
     Washington State.
       Asset management.--The Committee recommends $3,290,000 for 
     asset management research activities, an increase of $631,000 
     from the budget estimate.
       Policy.--The Committee recommendation includes $8,510,000, 
     an increase of $180,000 from the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level and an increase of $1,263,000 above the budget 
     estimate.
       Pavements research.--The Committee recommends $15,200,000 
     for highway pavement research, including work on asphalt, 
     Portland cement pavement research, polymer additives, and 
     recycled materials. This is $4,799,000 more than the budget 
     estimate and $1,447,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level. Within the funds provided, the Committee has 
     included $1,000,000 to the Center for Portland Cement 
     Concrete Pavement Technology at Iowa State University; 
     $1,000,000 to continue evaluation of GSB-88 emulsified binder 
     treatment application; $1,250,000 for the National Center for 
     Asphalt Technology (NCAT) and $1,000,000 to continue research 
     related to silica fume high performance concrete.
       Advanced research.--The Committee recommendation deletes 
     $203,000 from the budget request and provides $750,000. The 
     Committee notes the many of the proposed areas of research 
     and technology investigation duplicate efforts in other 
     research activities and in the ITS research program.
       R&T strategic planning and performance measures.--The 
     Committee has provided $755,000 for research and technology 
     strategic planning and performance measures, an increase of 
     $27,000 from the budget request. The Committee anticipates 
     that this level of funding will be sufficient to support 
     planned strategic planning activities, research outreach, and 
     development and refinement of performance measures, as 
     required by the Government Performance and Results Act 
     (GPRA).
       Other.--The Committee supports the FHWA effort with AASHTO, 
     TRB, among others in advancing a national R&T agenda in the 
     areas of safety, infrastructure renewal, operations and 
     mobility, planning and environment, and policy analysis and 
     systems monitoring. The Committee recognizes the benefits of 
     improved communication and coordination between key partners 
     and stakeholders, and awaits completion of the synthesis 
     report on the partnership initiative.
       ITS Standards, Research, Operational Tests, Development, 
     and Deployment.--The Committee recommends that the 
     $232,000,000 authorized in TEA21 for ITS research and 
     associated activities in fiscal year 2002 be allocated in the 
     following manner:

Research and Development....................................$50,701,000
Operational Tests............................................10,782,000
Evaluation/Program Policy Assessment..........................6,739,000
Architecture and Standards...................................18,868,000
Program Support..............................................11,455,000
Integration..................................................11,455,000
ITS Deployment Incentive Program............................122,000,000

       Specified ITS deployment projects.--It is the intent of the 
     Committee that the following projects contribute to the 
     integration and interoperability for intelligent 
     transportation systems in metropolitan and rural areas as 
     provided under section 5208 of TEA21 and promote deployment 
     of the commercial vehicle intelligent transportation system 
     infrastructure as provided under section 5209 of TEA21. 
     Funding for deployment activities are to be available as 
     follows:

        Project                                                  Amount

Advance Traveler Info. System & Smart Card System, OH........$2,500,000
Alaska Statewide: Smart Emergency Medical Access System.......3,000,000
Boston Traffic Monitoring & Security System, MA...............2,000,000
Bozeman Pass Wildlife Channelization Study, MT..................500,000
Cargo Mate Logistics and Intermodal Management System, NY.....2,000,000
Cary, Computerized Traffic Signal System, NC..................1,000,000
CCTA Burlington Multimodal Transit Center, VT.................1,000,000
Center for Injury Sciences at UAB, Crash Notification, AL.....2,000,000
Central Florida Regional Trans. Authority, Orange/Seminole ITS2,000,000
Chattanooga (CARTA) ITS, TN...................................1,500,000
Sierra Madre Intermodal Trans. Center, Los Angeles, CA........2,500,000
CVISN, NM.....................................................1,125,000
Flint Mass Transportation Authority ITS program, MI...........1,000,000
Intelligent Transportation Center, Atlanta, GA..................500,000
GMU, ITS Research, VA.........................................2,000,000
Great Lakes ITS program, MI...................................3,000,000
Harrison County Sheriff's Department, ITS, MS.................1,000,000
Hoosier SAFE-T, IN............................................2,000,000
Huntsville, AL................................................2,000,000
I-80 Dynamic Message Signs, Southern WY.......................4,000,000
Idaho Statewide CVISN.........................................2,250,000
Illinois Statewide............................................4,500,000
Iowa Statewide ITS............................................1,400,000
Kansas City Scout, Advanced Traffic Management System, KS.....1,500,000
Kansas City SmartPort.........................................1,000,000
Kent, Intracity Transit Project, WA...........................1,500,000
Lynnwood ITS, WA..............................................2,000,000
Maine Statewide, Rural Advanced Traveler Info. System, ME.....2,000,000
Maryland Statewide ITS........................................2,000,000
Missouri Statewide Rural ITS, MO..............................2,000,000
NDSU Advanced Traffic Analysis Center, ND.....................1,000,000
Nebraska statewide ITS........................................5,000,000
New Bedford ITS Port Information Center, MA...................1,000,000
Oklahoma Statewide ITS........................................7,000,000
Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, PA..........................5,000,000
Program of Projects, WA.......................................5,500,000
Providence Transportation Information Center, ITS, RI.........2,000,000
Sacramento Area Council of Governments, ITS, CA...............1,000,000
Shreveport ITS Project, LA....................................1,000,000
SCDOT Statewide ITS...........................................5,000,000
SR-68/Riverside Dr. ITS, Espanola, NM...........................475,000
Surface Transportation Institute, Univ. of North Dakota, ND...1,500,000
T-REX Southeast Corridor Multi-Modal Project, CO..............9,000,000
Tucson ER-LINK ITS project, AZ................................1,250,000
Univ. of Nebraska Lincoln, SMART Transportation, NE...........2,000,000
University of Kentucky Transportation Center, KY..............2,000,000
Utah Commuter Link, Davis and Utah Counties, UT...............1,000,000
Vermont Statewide Rural Advanced Traveler System, VT..........1,500,000
Vermont Variable Message Signs, VT............................1,000,000
Washington, DC Metro ITS......................................4,000,000
Northern Virginia ITS, VA.....................................4,000,000
Wisconsin State Patrol Mobile Data Communications Network.....2,000,000

       Illinois ITS.--The Committee provides $4,500,000 to the 
     Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) for Intelligent 
     Transportation Systems grants. The Committee expects IDOT to 
     fund the following projects: $750,000 to Lake County for 
     traffic corridor communications systems; $450,000 to DuPage 
     County for traffic signal coordination; $850,000 for an I-55/
     Lake Springfield Fixed Anti-Icing System; $800,000 to the 
     Village of Bourbonnais for congestion relief projects; and 
     $150,000 for the city of Marion's traffic control project. 
     The Committee further provides $1,500,000 to the city of 
     Chicago for Intelligent Transportation Systems grants, 
     including the Cicero Avenue Traveler Information project and 
     the Traffic Management Center.

           Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$6,000,000 

[[Page 967]]

Budget estimate, 2003\2\.....................................6,000,000 
Committee recommendation\2\.................................(6,000,000)

\1\Funding derived from limitation on administrative expenses.
\2\Funding for NDGPS provided within FAA ``facilities and equipment'' 
account.

       NDGPS.--The Committee recommendation includes $6,000,000 
     for continued investment in the Nationwide NPGPS Network. The 
     funding is provided within the FAA's facilities and equipment 
     account.

                  Bureau of Transportation Statistics


                      (limitation on obligations)

Appropriations, 2002........................................$31,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................31,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................31,000,000

\1\Excludes $675,000 for CSRS/FEHP accruals.

       The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) was 
     established in section 6006 of the Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act [ISTEA], to compile, analyze, 
     and make accessible information on the Nation's 
     transportation systems, collect information on intermodal 
     transportation, and enhance the quality and effectiveness of 
     the statistical programs of the Department of Transportation.

                          Federal-Aid Highways


                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002....................................$30,000,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................29,000,000,000
Committee recommendation.................................32,000,000,000

       The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation 
     of $32,000,000,000.

              FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

       In December 1999, the Congress passed the Motor Carrier 
     Safety Improvement Act (Public Law 106-159), which 
     established the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
     (FMCSA) within the Department of Transportation. Prior to 
     this legislation, motor carrier safety responsibilities were 
     housed within the Federal Highway Administration.
       The preeminent mission of the FMCSA is to improve the 
     safety of commercial vehicle operations on the nation's 
     highways. A primary goal of the agency is to reduce the 
     number of accidents and fatalities due to truck accidents. 
     FMCSA resources and activities contribute to safety in 
     commercial vehicle operations through enforcement, safety 
     regulation, technological innovation, improvements in 
     information systems, training, and improvements to commercial 
     driver's license testing, record keeping, and sanctions. To 
     achieve these goals, the FMCSA works with Federal, State, and 
     local enforcement agencies, the motor carrier industry, and 
     highway safety organizations.

                          Motor Carrier Safety


                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

       The Motor Carrier Safety program provides for the salaries, 
     operating expenses, research funding for the FMCSA. The Motor 
     Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (MCSIA) amended 
     Section 104(a)(1) of title 23 to provide one-third of 1 
     percent of the administrative takedown to be made available 
     to administer motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier 
     research. The administration's budget requests a takedown of 
     45/100 of 1 percent for these purposes.


                  Limitation on administrative Expense

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$110,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 (limitation)..........................117,464,000
Committee recommendation....................................117,464,000

\1\Does not reflect reduction of $158,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-
87, as amended by Public Law 107-117.

       The Committee recommendation provides a total of 
     $117,464,000 for operating expenses and research funding for 
     the FMCSA consistent with the budget request. Of the funds 
     provided, $110,464,000 is for operating expenses and 
     $7,000,000 is for research and technology initiatives. The 
     recommendation provides the following adjustments to the 
     budget request:

Share the Road Safely.........................................-$100,000
Safety is Good Business Program................................-250,000
R&T Information Dissemination..................................-150,000
Hazardous Materials Safety and Security........................+500,000

       Domestic motor carrier safety.--While FMCSA has moved 
     expeditiously to implement the United States-Mexico cross-
     border trucking safety provisions, the Committee remains 
     concerned about the lack of progress that has been made in 
     commercial motor vehicle safety in recent years. Despite the 
     fact that there has been a nearly 50 percent increase in 
     funding for motor carrier safety activities since the FMCSA 
     was created in 1999, there has been only a 3.5 percent 
     decrease in the number of fatalities involving large truck 
     crashes. In fact, more than one out of ten people killed in 
     motor vehicle incidents are involved in a crash with a large 
     truck even though large trucks represent a very small 
     percentage of total registered vehicles. Given this record, 
     it calls into question whether the FMCSA will achieve its 
     1999 goal of reducing truck deaths and injuries by 50 percent 
     by 2009.
       The Committee reminds FMCSA that the agency's safety 
     oversight efforts for domestic truck traffic should be equal 
     to, if not greater than, those for cross-border traffic. The 
     fact that it takes FMCSA an average of 4 years to complete a 
     rulemaking and that many rules have not been published by 
     their statutory deadlines is evidence that the agency has a 
     long way to go in pursuing its safety mission. Furthermore, 
     in the aftermath of the events of September 11th, the 
     Committee urges FMCSA to be particularly attentive to the 
     security risks associated with the commercial driver's 
     license program and the transportation of hazardous materials 
     as discussed in greater detail in this report.
       Commercial drivers license oversight.--Federal regulations 
     require individuals to carry a commercial driver's license 
     (CDL) when operating a commercial motor vehicle weighing in 
     excess of 26,001 pounds, when hauling hazardous materials or 
     when transporting at least 16 passengers. Over the last 
     decade, the number of CDL holders has doubled to over 10.5 
     million today and it is estimated that nearly 470,000 new 
     CDLs are issued each year. Since truck travel volume is 
     expected to increase roughly 20 percent over the next decade, 
     it is critically important that FMCSA put adequate safety 
     measures in place to effectively monitor the commercial motor 
     vehicle industry and commercial motor vehicle drivers. The 
     fiscal year 2002 Supplemental Appropriations bill included 
     $17,300,000 for FMCSA to boost CDL fraud detection and 
     prevention efforts as well as to conduct background check 
     reviews of CDL drivers who hold or seek hazardous materials 
     endorsements. These additional funds will assist FMCSA in its 
     efforts to address the deficiencies in the CDL licensing and 
     testing program that were outlined in the Inspector General's 
     May, 2002 report. The Committee notes that the FMCSA 
     concurred with nearly all of the IG's recommendations. Given 
     the expected growth in the number of CDL holders, it is 
     essential that FMCSA conduct timely compliance reviews of 
     State CDL programs. The Committee believes it is essential 
     that State and third party CDL examiners be monitored 
     regularly to ensure that any deficiencies in the program can 
     be eliminated. As such the Committee encourages FMCSA to 
     adopt a standard that includes such monitoring activities as 
     may be necessary to comport with the IG's recommendation.
       Hazardous materials transportation.--Every day in the 
     United States, there are over 800,000 shipments of hazardous 
     materials ranging from flammable materials and explosives to 
     poisons and corrosives. The Committee commends FMCSA for 
     completing over 38,000 security sensitivity visits of 
     hazardous materials transportation and other at-risk 
     providers earlier this year. These visits have served to 
     increase the level of awareness of hazardous materials 
     carriers to terrorist threats and to identify potential 
     security vulnerabilities for corrective or law enforcement 
     action. However, the Committee firmly believes that FMCSA 
     must continue to aggressively monitor the safety and security 
     vulnerabilities in the transportation of hazardous materials 
     since 90 percent of hazardous material shipments occur by 
     truck. The Committee urges FMCSA to vigorously enforce 
     compliance with Federal hazardous materials regulations and 
     to encourage States to appropriately utilize the motor 
     carrier safety assistance program for hazardous materials 
     training and enforcement. With regard to hazardous materials 
     safety and security research, the Committee provides $758,000 
     which is $500,000 more than the budget request. The 
     additional funds above the budget request shall be used to 
     expand and expedite the completion of FMCSA's hazardous 
     materials security risk assessments.
       ``Safety is Good Business'' Program.--The Committee has 
     deleted the funding for this initiative in the motor carrier 
     research program. The Committee believes that the ``Safety is 
     Good Business'' program should be funded out of FMCSA's high 
     priority initiatives program within the motor carrier safety 
     assistance program.
       Crash causation study.--The Committee recommends $5,000,000 
     for the continuation of FMCSA's comprehensive crash causation 
     study. The Committee appreciates the complexity of this study 
     which now involves over 100 Federal, state and contractor 
     support personnel. Over 450 crashes have been investigated, 
     but many of these have not been completely coded. The 
     Committee understands that the FMCSA sought out a 
     Transportation Research Board committee to review the first 
     set of large truck crash causation cases and to make 
     recommendations on what coding changes may be necessary. The 
     Committee reiterates its message from last year that it is 
     imperative that the results of this study should be made 
     available as soon as possible. The study's results will 
     assist FMCSA in setting safety priorities as well as serve as 
     useful tools for Congressional oversight and legislative 
     activities. The Committee directs FMCSA and NHTSA to submit a 
     letter report to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations by March 15, 2003

[[Page 968]]

     indicating the study's progress; the Department's response to 
     and status of TRB's recommendations; and, a time schedule for 
     the release of its initial results.
       Share the road safely.--The Committee provides a total of 
     $600,000 for the ``Share the Road Safely'' program which is 
     designed to educate the motoring public on how to share the 
     road safely with large trucks and buses. As required by the 
     Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, $500,000 of 
     the funds provided for this program are transferred from 
     NHTSA's highway safety program account. While this program is 
     administered by the FMCSA, the Committee believes that NHTSA 
     should have input into the program's development since NHTSA 
     is the agency with primary responsibility for the behavioral 
     programs geared toward passenger car drivers. The Committee 
     urges FMCSA to coordinate the agency's ``share the road'' 
     efforts with NHTSA.
       Young driver pilot program.--In February, 2001, the FMCSA 
     requested comments on a proposal that the agency had received 
     to initiate a pilot program which would waive Federal 
     regulations to allow individuals between the ages of 18 and 
     21 to work in truck driver jobs in interstate commerce. 
     Current Federal safety regulations require that commercial 
     motor vehicle drivers be at least 21 years of age. The 
     Committee is aware that FMCSA has received comments from 
     state transportation officials and private citizens opposing 
     this proposal due to safety concerns. Given the fact that 
     young drivers are overrepresented in motor vehicle crashes, 
     the Committee is not convinced of the merits of this 
     proposal. Prior to the approval of such a pilot program, the 
     Committee directs the FMCSA Administrator to conduct a 
     thorough analysis of the safety ramifications and whether 
     there's a genuine shortage of truck drivers to warrant such a 
     waiver of the Federal safety regulations.
       Driver record improvements.--Section 204 of the Motor 
     Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (MCSIA) requires 
     States to query the National Driver Register (NDR) and the 
     Commercial Driver's License Information System prior to 
     issuing or renewing a motor vehicle operator's license. The 
     Committee notes that the rule implementing this provision has 
     yet to be promulgated and would remind FMCSA and NHTSA that 
     each agency shares an equal responsibility for fulfilling the 
     MCSIA requirement. However, progress on this rule has been 
     stalled because each agency believes that the other has the 
     lead on the rule's development. The Committee directs the 
     Secretary to assign either FMCSA or NHTSA as the lead agency 
     in the rule's development and urges both agencies to move 
     forward expeditiously on this rule as other driver record 
     improvements, such as the one-driver, one-record pointer 
     system, are further developed. In that regard, the Committee 
     directs NHTSA and FMCSA to conduct an analysis of the costs 
     associated with the development of a one-driver, one-record 
     pointer system and the strategic steps necessary for its 
     implementation and submit that analysis to the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations by June 1, 2003.
       Driver research.--Within the funds provided for FMCSA's 
     research and technology program, the Committee provides 
     $700,000 for the Transportation Research Institute at the 
     George Washington University VA Campus for advanced research 
     on driver error related to fatigue, inattentiveness and sleep 
     deprivation through the use of sophisticated in-vehicle 
     monitoring and assistance systems related to vehicle 
     performance. In addition, the Committee has included $250,000 
     to initiate a separate multidisciplinary driver research 
     program that evaluates cognitive sensory, environmental, 
     mechanical, and large-scale epidemiologic aspects of driver 
     behavior in order to identify measures that show promise of 
     improving safety and reduce the likelihood of serious injury.

                 National Motor Carrier Safety Program


                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    (Liquidation of
                                       contract         (Limitation on
                                    authorization)       obligations)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............       $205,896,000        $205,896,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........        190,000,000         190,000,000
Committee recommendation........        190,000,000         190,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The FMCSA's National Motor Carrier Safety Program (NMCSP) 
     was authorized by TEA21 and amended by the Motor Carrier 
     Safety Improvement Act of 1999. This program consists of two 
     major areas: the motor carrier safety assistance program 
     (MCSAP) and the information systems and strategic safety 
     initiatives (ISSSI). MCSAP provides grants and project 
     funding to States to develop and implement national programs 
     for the uniform enforcement of Federal and State rules and 
     regulations concerning motor safety. The major objective of 
     this program is to reduce the number and severity of 
     accidents involving commercial motor vehicles. Grants are 
     made to qualified States for the development of programs to 
     enforce the Federal motor carrier safety and hazardous 
     materials regulations and the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety 
     Act of 1986. The basic program is targeted at roadside 
     vehicle safety inspections of both interstate and intrastate 
     commercial motor vehicle traffic. ISSSI provides funds to 
     develop and enhance data-related motor carrier programs.
       The Committee recommends $190,000,000 in liquidating cash 
     for this program consistent with the authorized contract 
     activity level.


                       Limitation on Obligations

       The Committee recommends a $190,000,000 limitation on 
     obligations for motor carrier safety grants. This is the 
     level authorized under the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement 
     Act of 1999, which amended TEA21.
       Truck driver training program.--Within the funds provided 
     for FMCSA's high priority initiative program, the Committee 
     provides $700,000 for the development of a concrete skid pad 
     at Lewis-Clark State College North Lewiston Training 
     Facility. The project would enable the creation of controlled 
     ``adverse'' weather situations, including ice and rain, as 
     well as faulty braking systems, tire blow-outs, and anti-skid 
     equipment failure, as part of the Commercial Drivers License 
     Training program, which provides safety training for bus and 
     commercial motor vehicle drivers.
       Highway watch program.--Within the funds provided for 
     FMCSA's high priority initiative program, the Committee 
     provides $1,000,000 for the continuation of the Highway Watch 
     program. The Highway Watch program trains professional truck 
     drivers to recognize and report a variety of incidents on the 
     Nation's highways. As the program is expanded to reach an 
     increasing number of truck drivers, the Committee urges that 
     a security component be included in the training to help 
     truck drivers better identify potential security threats.
       Operation Respond.--Within the funds provided for FMCSA's 
     high priority initiatives, the Committee includes $1,000,000 
     to design, build, and demonstrate the benefits of a seamless 
     hazardous materials incident detection, management, and 
     response system, including the expansion of the Operation 
     Respond network of emergency responders and by linking this 
     network with tracking and automatic crash notification 
     technologies. The Committee urges that, working with the 
     private sector, these funds be used to establish a national 
     first responder emergency services network and to accelerate 
     deployment of Operation Respond software.


                       BORDER ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,866,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................59,967,000
Committee recommendation..................................\1\59,967,000

\1\Funded under FHWA administrative takedown.

       The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), enacted in 
     1993, anticipated the initiation of cross-border trucking 
     shipments between the United States and Mexico by December, 
     1995. The previous Administration made a specific decision 
     not to allow Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to transport 
     cross-border shipments beyond a limited commercial zone into 
     the United States due to concerns over the safety of the 
     Mexican trucking fleet. In February, 2001, an Arbitral Panel 
     issued a finding that the United States was out of compliance 
     with NAFTA and could not bar all Mexican applicants from 
     entering the United States. However, the Panel clearly 
     stipulated that NAFTA did not restrict the ability of the 
     United States to implement measures to ensure Mexican 
     trucking companies and Mexican truck drivers meet U.S. safety 
     standards.
       Last year, the Committee dedicated a significant amount of 
     time and effort to the safety concerns associated with the 
     initiation of cross-border trucking shipments between the 
     United States and Mexico when the Administration announced 
     its intention to open the border by January, 2002. The fiscal 
     year 2002 Transportation Appropriations Act included a 
     general provision which required a number of actions by the 
     Secretary of Transportation, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
     Administration (FMCSA) and the Inspector General (IG) prior 
     to the opening of the United States-Mexico border to 
     commercial vehicle traffic beyond the commercial zone. A key 
     provision was the requirement that the Inspector General 
     conduct a comprehensive review of border operations to verify 
     whether safety requirements are in place. The Inspector 
     General's report of June 25, 2002 states that the FMCSA has 
     made measured progress toward meeting the Act's requirements 
     to hire and train inspectors; establish inspection 
     facilities; and develop safety processes and procedures for 
     Mexican long-haul carriers.
       However, the IG's report indicates that there are remaining 
     issues of concern. Two areas that need additional attention 
     are law enforcement authority's access to databases and the 
     ability of States to prosecute Mexican trucks operating in 
     violation of U.S. law. Specifically, the IG's report states 
     that Mexico's commercial driver's license (CDL) and vehicle 
     registration databases are sufficiently accurate and 
     integrated into databases. However, 6 of the 25 United 
     States-Mexico border crossings do not have adequate access to 
     these databases to verify licenses, registration, operating 
     authority or insurance. Additionally, the Transportation Act 
     required the IG to verify that measures are in place to 
     enable U.S. law enforcement authorities to ensure the 
     effective enforcement and monitoring of Mexican motor 
     carriers according to U.S. law. The IG's report

[[Page 969]]

     points out only two States--Arizona and California--have 
     enacted legislation authorizing their enforcement personnel 
     to take action when they encounter a vehicle operating 
     without authority. This means that 48 States lack any law to 
     put out-of-service or penalize large trucks that are caught 
     operating without Federal operating authority. The Committee 
     commends the Agency for promulgating a rule that includes 
     operating authority violations among the safety criteria for 
     placing vehicles out of service until States enact their own 
     statutes.
       Finally, Section 350 of the fiscal year 2002 Transportation 
     Appropriations Act requires that, prior to the opening of the 
     United States-Mexico border to commercial vehicle traffic, 
     the Secretary of Transportation must certify in writing in a 
     manner addressing the IG's findings and verify that opening 
     the border does not pose an unacceptable safety risk to the 
     American public. The Committee intends to continue to closely 
     monitor the implementation of the United States-Mexico cross-
     border trucking provisions to ensure that safety is not 
     compromised. The Committee has included a general provision 
     continuing the cross-border safety provisions included in the 
     2002 Transportation Appropriations Act.
       The Committee recommends $41,967,000 for Federal border 
     enforcement staffing and operations and $18,000,000 for State 
     operations grants to the southern border States.
       Additional border enforcement funding is provided in this 
     bill including $8,250,000 for State operations grants under 
     the National Motor Carrier Safety Program, and $47,000,000 
     for inspection station construction under the Federal Highway 
     Administrator's administrative takedown.

             NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

       The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 
     was established as a separate organizational entity in the 
     Department of Transportation in March 1970. It succeeded the 
     National Highway Safety Bureau, which previously had 
     administered traffic and highway safety functions as an 
     organizational unit of the Federal Highway Administration.
       The agency's current programs are authorized in four major 
     laws: (1) the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 
     (chapter 301 of title 49, U.S.C.); (2) the Highway Safety 
     Act, (chapter 4 of title 23, U.S.C.); (3) the Motor Vehicle 
     Information and Cost Savings (MVICSA) Act, (Part C of 
     subtitle VI of title 49, U.S.C.); and (4) the Transportation 
     Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21).
       The first law provides for the establishment and 
     enforcement of safety standards for vehicles and associated 
     equipment and the conduct of supporting research, including 
     the acquisition of required testing facilities and the 
     operation of the national driver register (NDR). Discrete 
     authorizations were subsequently established for the NDR 
     under the National Driver Register Act of 1982.
       The second law provides for coordinated national highway 
     safety programs (section 402) to be carried out by the States 
     and for highway safety research, development, and 
     demonstration programs (section 403). The Anti-Drug Abuse Act 
     of 1988 (Public Law 100-690) authorized a new drunk driving 
     prevention program (section 410) to make grants to States to 
     implement and enforce drunk driving prevention programs.
       The third law (MVICSA) provides for the establishment of 
     low-speed collision bumper standards, consumer information 
     activities, diagnostic inspection demonstration projects, 
     automobile content labeling, and odometer regulations. An 
     amendment to this law established the Secretary's 
     responsibility, which was delegated to NHTSA, for the 
     administration of mandatory automotive fuel economy 
     standards. A 1992 amendment to the MVICSA established 
     automobile content labeling requirements.
       The fourth law (TEA21) reauthorizes the full range of NHTSA 
     programs and enacts a number of new initiatives. These 
     include: safety incentives to prevent operation of motor 
     vehicles by intoxicated persons (section 163 of title 23 
     U.S.C.); seat belt incentive grants (section 157 of title 23 
     U.S.C.); occupant protection incentive grants (section 405); 
     and highway safety data improvement incentive grant program 
     (section 411). TEA21 also reauthorized highway safety 
     research, development and demonstration programs (section 
     403) to include research measures that may deter drugged 
     driving, educate the motoring public on how to share the road 
     safely with commercial motor vehicles, and provide vehicle 
     pursuit training for police. Finally, TEA21 adopts a number 
     of new motor vehicle safety and information provisions, 
     including rulemaking directions for improving air bag crash 
     protection systems, lobbying restrictions, exemptions from 
     the odometer requirements for classes or categories of 
     vehicles the Secretary deems appropriate, and adjustments to 
     the automobile domestic content labeling requirements.
       In 2000, the Transportation Recall Enhancement, 
     Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act amended the 
     National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act in numerous 
     respects and enacted many new initiatives. These consist of a 
     number of new motor vehicle safety and information 
     provisions, including a requirement that manufacturers give 
     NHTSA notice of safety recalls or safety campaigns in foreign 
     countries involving motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle 
     equipment that are identical or substantially similar to 
     vehicles or equipment in the United States; higher civil 
     penalties for violations of the law; a criminal penalty for 
     violations of the law's reporting requirements; and a number 
     of rulemaking directions that include developing a dynamic 
     rollover test for light duty vehicles, updating tire safety 
     and labeling standards, improving the safety of child 
     restraints, and establishing a child restraint safety rating 
     consumer information program.
       The following table summarizes the Committee 
     recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003      Committee
                          Program                                enacted          estimate       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and research...................................     $200,264,000      $200,444,508      $215,000,000
National driver register (HTF)............................       (2,000,000)       (2,000,000)       (2,000,000)
Highway traffic safety grants (firewall)..................      223,000,000       225,000,000       225,000,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total...............................................      423,264,000       425,444,508       440,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Operations and Research


                     (Including Highway Trust Fund)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 General Fund      Trust Fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002.........................................     $126,264,000      $74,000,000     $200,264,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\.....................................      126,444,508       74,000,000      200,444,508
Committee recommendation.....................................      141,000,000       74,000,000      215,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes 4,437,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       For fiscal year 2003, the Transportation Equity Act for the 
     21st Century (TEA21), as amended, authorizes $72,000,000 of 
     contract authority from the highway trust fund to finance 
     operations and research activities eligible under title 23 
     U.S.C. 403. This funding is included within the firewall 
     guarantee for highway spending. The act also includes an 
     authorization, subject to appropriations, from the highway 
     trust fund of $2,000,000 to maintain the National Driver 
     Register. In addition, the administration is requesting 
     $130,881,000 for activities related to sections 30104 and 
     32102 of title 49. This funding is derived from the general 
     fund and is subject to appropriations.
       The accompanying bill provides appropriations totaling 
     $215,000,000 to be distributed as follows:

                                                              Committee
        Program                                          recommendation
Salaries and benefits.......................................$63,328,000
Travel........................................................1,324,000
Operating expenses...........................................22,834,000
Contract Programs:
  Safety performance.........................................10,393,000
  Safety assurance...........................................15,760,000
  Highway safety.............................................52,458,000
  Research and analysis......................................59,396,000
  General administration........................................657,000
Grant administration reimbursement..........................-11,150,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total...................................................215,000,000


                           operating expenses

       Workforce planning and development.--NHTSA established this 
     program in fiscal year 2001 in an effort to encourage college 
     students to enter into the fields of engineering, research, 
     science and technology, vehicle safety and injury. The 
     Committee recognizes the agency's desire to build a base of 
     employees for future employment but would note that the 
     challenges of attrition in the transportation workforce are 
     not unique to NHTSA. The Committee believes that this type of 
     workforce planning should be done throughout the entire 
     Department of Transportation through the coordination of the 
     office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration. The 
     Committee includes $300,000 within the NHTSA budget for a 
     more measured initiative in this area.
       Contract execution delays.--The Committee is aware that 
     there continue to be excessive delays in the timely execution 
     of NHTSA contracts. All too frequently, contract recipients 
     have had to wait for several months before Federal funds are 
     granted. The Committee expects greater attention to this area 
     and insists that once a contract has been awarded that it 
     should be executed in a timely fashion. The Committee directs 
     the NHTSA Administrator to conduct a thorough review of the 
     agency's contracting procedures and to take appropriate steps 
     to eliminate any unnecessary delays.

[[Page 970]]



                      safety performance standards

       Passenger vehicle tire traction.--The Transportation Recall 
     Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation Act of 2000 
     (TREAD) mandated the Secretary to strengthen the Federal 
     standards governing tire safety performance. NHTSA issued a 
     proposed rulemaking on March 5, 2002, to revise and update 
     its tire safety standards. The proposed rule addresses tire 
     safety from the vantage point of reducing the chances of tire 
     failure principally by increasing tire resistance to heat and 
     high speed operation. Although NHTSA has a consumer 
     information program, the Uniform Tire Quality Grading System, 
     which assigns traction ratings to tires marketed in the 
     United States, there is no Federal standard requiring 
     acceptable levels of tire adhesion or traction, especially 
     for passenger vehicles operating on wet road surfaces. As 
     NHTSA prepares its final rule on tire safety performance, the 
     Committee encourages NHTSA to consider including standards 
     for tire performance on wet road surfaces. Absent such 
     inclusion, the Committee directs NHTSA to send a letter to 
     the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations explaining 
     why wet road tire performance standards were not included.


                            SAFETY ASSURANCE

       Defect information system.--NHTSA's Office of Defect 
     Investigation is in the process of replacing its current 
     defect database with a new information system. When fully 
     operational, this new system, which is being developed by the 
     Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, will store 
     consumer complaints as well as the early warning data as 
     required by the TREAD Act. The Inspector General issued a 
     report earlier this year which raised concerns about whether 
     this new information system can be successfully implemented 
     on-time and within the estimated $5,000,000 budget. The 
     Committee believes that NHTSA should be attentive to the 
     concerns raised by the IG and directs NHTSA to provide a 
     letter to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 
     which details the current schedule and cost estimate for this 
     system.
       Early Warning Reporting System.--The Committee directs the 
     Administrator to submit a report to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations detailing the methods the Agency 
     will adopt to ensure that all tires imported and sold in the 
     United States comply with the Early Warning Reporting System 
     as outlined in NHTSA's final regulations.

                        highway safety programs

       The Committee recommends the following adjustments to the 
     budget request:

Occupant protection: Outreach initiatives to increase belt u+$3,500,000
Emergency medical services...................................+1,000,000
Impaired driving:
  Judicial/prosecutorial initiative..........................+1,500,000
  Repeat offender tracking model.............................+3,000,000
  Target population outreach.................................+1,500,000
Motorcycle safety..............................................+300,000
Drugs, driving and youth.......................................+295,000
Highway safety research........................................+200,000

       National occupant protection program.--The stated 
     objectives of NHTSA's occupant protection program are to 
     increase seat belt use and decrease the number of child 
     occupant fatalities. Over the last several years, NHTSA has 
     set aggressive goals for achieving seat belt use across the 
     nation since each percentage point increase in seat belt use 
     saves approximately 226 lives and prevents over 3,700 
     injuries each year. NHTSA's seat belt goal in 2001 was 86 
     percent and while seat belt use reached an all-time high of 
     73 percent, the agency still fell far short of its national 
     goal. The Committee is disappointed that NHTSA's seat belt 
     goal dropped from 87 percent in 2002 to 78 percent in 2003 
     and that the agency's fiscal year 2003 budget cut its core 
     safety program dedicated to national occupant protection by 
     14 percent. The Committee strongly believes that NHTSA must 
     continue to be vigilant and creative in its efforts to 
     increase national seat belt use particularly for those 
     targeted groups that are high-risk and often difficult to 
     reach. The Committee recommends $14,683,000 for NHTSA's 
     occupant protection efforts which is $3,500,000 more than the 
     President's budget request. The Committee directs that these 
     additional funds be used to continue the outreach activities 
     toward minority populations, teens and rural populations. To 
     further supplement NHTSA's overall seat belt efforts, the 
     Committee has included bill language to continue the public 
     service message program that was started in fiscal year 2002. 
     A more detailed discussion of this program is included in the 
     NHTSA bill language section of this report.
       Impaired driving.--The Committee is very concerned about 
     the lack of progress that is being made to reduce the number 
     of alcohol-related motor vehicle fatalities. In 2000, there 
     were 16,653 alcohol-related fatalities which was 5.4 percent 
     more than 1999 and represented the largest percentage 
     increase on record. These alcohol-related crashes also cause 
     an estimated 300,000 injuries and cost society over 
     $45,000,000,000 every year. Unfortunately, the preliminary 
     estimates for 2001 indicate there was virtually no reduction 
     in the number of alcohol-related fatalities. At the 
     Committee's hearing on highway safety on February 27, 2002, 
     witnesses testified that the progress in meeting national 
     goals to reduce alcohol-impaired driving has stalled in 
     recent years. Again, as in the case of NHTSA's occupant 
     protection program, the fiscal year 2003 budget reduced 
     NHTSA's impaired driving core program by 22 percent at a time 
     when alcohol-related fatalities are increasing. The Committee 
     recommends $15,576,000 for NHTSA's impaired driving program 
     which is $6,000,000 more than the President's budget request.
       Judicial and prosecutorial awareness.--Within the funds 
     provided for NHTSA's impaired driving program, the Committee 
     provides $1,500,000 to improve prosecutorial and judicial 
     actions to combat alcohol-impaired driving. A review of past 
     NHTSA expenditures to combat impaired driving revealed that 
     the agency has dedicated only a small portion of Section 403 
     funds to support the role of prosecutors and judges in 
     dealing with impaired drivers. The Committee directs the 
     Secretary of Transportation, in cooperation with the Attorney 
     General, to conduct a detailed analysis designed to 
     strengthen Federal policies and laws intended to combat 
     alcohol-impaired driving and document the results and 
     recommendations. This report should identify best strategies 
     for reducing obstacles to obtaining convictions of alcohol-
     impaired driving and strategies to help prosecutors and 
     judges apply sanctions in a consistent manner. The report 
     should also emphasize strategies to reduce plea bargaining, 
     diversion or deferral programs, and other means used by 
     offenders to avoid any permanent record of an alcohol-related 
     offense. In particular, the analysis should provide guidance 
     for improving judicial and prosecutorial training, outreach, 
     and adherence to state standards of conduct. The Committee 
     directs NHTSA to submit this report to the Senate and House 
     Committees on Appropriations by October 1, 2003.
       Tracking repeat offenders.--The Committee includes 
     $3,000,000 within NHTSA's impaired driving program to 
     expedite the development and expand the testing of the model 
     ``Driver History Information Records System for Impaired 
     Driving.'' This tracking system is designed to assist States 
     and local communities to exchange timely information about 
     prior impaired driving offenses and to transmit conviction 
     and license suspension notices among law enforcement 
     officials, the courts and driver licensing agencies.
       Impaired driving and targeted populations.--The Committee 
     is concerned that there continues to be certain segments of 
     the population that are over represented in alcohol-related 
     motor vehicle crashes. For example, male drivers between the 
     ages of 21 and 34 represent the highest percentage of 
     alcohol-related fatalities. The Committee strongly believes 
     that NHTSA must continue to vigorously pursue strategies to 
     reduce impaired driving among the age groups and ethnic 
     populations that represent the highest risk. Within the funds 
     provided for NHTSA's impaired driving program, the Committee 
     includes $1,500,000 to increase the outreach efforts with 
     these targeted populations.
       Highway safety research.--The Committee includes $7,298,000 
     for NHTSA's highway safety research program, an increase of 
     $200,000 above the President's budget request. Within the 
     funds provided, the Committee includes $200,000 to initiate 
     research on advanced alcohol ignition interlock systems. A 
     key component of this research is the development of advanced 
     technologies for use in the steering wheel that could detect 
     blood alcohol levels.
       Drugs, driving and youth.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $1,437,000 for NHTSA's drugs, driving and youth 
     program efforts, an increase of $295,000 over the President's 
     budget. The Committee is concerned about the data which 
     indicates that alcohol and drug use is increasing among 
     teenagers. Since this youth population is expected to 
     increase nearly 5 percent by the year 2005, the Committee 
     believes it is particularly important for NHTSA to boost its 
     impaired driving youth prevention and education activities. 
     The Committee is aware of programs such as the ``Protecting 
     You, Protecting Me'' curriculum which is designed to educate 
     children in grades 1 through 5 about the dangers of riding in 
     a car with an impaired driver and underage alcohol 
     consumption. The Committee directs NHTSA to utilize these 
     additional funds to develop a similar type of program 
     directed toward teenage drivers.
       Emergency medical services.--The Committee recommends 
     $3,189,000 for emergency medical services, which is 
     $1,000,000 more than the President's budget request. Within 
     the funds provided, the Committee includes $1,000,000 to 
     continue training EMS personnel in delivering pre-hospital 
     care to patients with traumatic brain injuries. Since this 
     program's inception in 1998, it is estimated that nearly 31 
     states will have received the training and educational 
     material and over 1,600 in-state instructors will have 
     received training. The Committee urges NHTSA to continue this 
     national rollout with the Brain Trauma Foundation and its 
     Centers of Excellence. Just as it is important

[[Page 971]]

     for EMS personnel to receive proper training to care for the 
     critically injured, it is equally important that first 
     responders have the tools necessary to locate the injured as 
     quickly as possible. There have been a number of highly 
     publicized cases of crash victims who were stranded for 
     extended periods of time because their vehicles were not 
     easily located. Advanced location technology associated with 
     wireless E 9-1-1 can assist law enforcement and EMS personnel 
     in reaching victims quickly. The Committee notes that NHTSA's 
     fiscal year 2003 budget includes plans to develop a national 
     clearinghouse and best practices document for State 
     implementation of wireless E 9-1-1. As these implementation 
     tools are developed, the Committee encourages NHTSA to 
     consult with a broad range of EMS providers, law enforcement 
     officials, wireless technology providers and the appropriate 
     Federal and State agencies.
       Motorcycle safety.--The Committee provides $945,000 for 
     NHTSA's motorcycle safety efforts which represents a $300,000 
     increase over the President's budget. The Committee is 
     concerned about the upward trend in the number of motorcycle 
     fatalities. From 1999 to 2000, motorcycle fatalities rose by 
     15 percent and the preliminary estimates for 2001 indicate 
     that fatalities rose by another 7.2 percent over 2000. Since 
     new unit sales of on-highway motorcycles have increased in 
     recent years, rider training programs have not been able to 
     keep pace. In December 2000, NHTSA assembled a technical 
     working group comprised of law enforcement, health care, 
     insurance and motorcycle organizations to assist in the 
     development of the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety. The 
     Committee has provided increased funding to further assist in 
     the implementation of the Agenda's urgent and essential 
     recommendations. In particular, the Committee urges NHTSA to 
     coordinate with the motorcycle community to focus these 
     additional resources toward strategies which will enhance 
     rider crash avoidance skills and improve motorcycle 
     conspicuity.


                         research and analysis

       National Automotive Sampling System.--The Committee 
     provides $11,570,000 for the National Automotive Sampling 
     System (NASS), an increase of $1,000,000 over the President's 
     budget request. The NASS General Estimates System data 
     assists in assessing the trend and magnitude of the crash 
     situation in this country, and the NASS Crashworthiness Data 
     System provides more in-depth and descriptive data which 
     allows NHTSA to quantify the relationships between the 
     occupants and vehicles in the real-world crash environment. 
     The Committee directs NHTSA to utilize the additional funds 
     to expand the NASS database with a particular focus on child 
     safety seat and tire-related data.
       Biomechanical research.--The Committee provides a total of 
     $14,954,000 for biomechanics research which is $1,000,000 
     more than the President's budget request. The Committee's 
     recommendation includes necessary resources for the continued 
     research of the Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network 
     program. In addition, within the funds provided, the 
     Committee includes $2,000,000 to continue research related to 
     traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries caused by motor 
     vehicle, motorcycle, and bicycle accidents at the Southern 
     Consortium for Injury Biomechanics.
       Tire safety research.--The Committee recommendation 
     includes $375,000 in NHTSA's pneumatic tire research program 
     for the Mercer Engineering Research Center to initiate 
     research on the relationships between tire age, condition 
     driven, load and pressure and the effects on tire safety.
       Built-in child restraints.--Section 13(h) of the TREAD Act 
     required NHTSA to conduct a study on the use and 
     effectiveness of automobile booster seats for children. To 
     date, NHTSA has yet to release this study which had a 
     statutory deadline of November 1st, 2001. The pending study 
     is expected to compare the safety benefits of existing 
     booster systems to the safety provided to children who are 
     using lap and shoulder belts alone. The Committee urges NHTSA 
     to issue the results of the booster seat study without delay, 
     however, the Committee believes that a review of integrated 
     or built-in child restraints is also warranted. The Committee 
     provides $1,000,000 within NHTSA's safety systems research 
     program to conduct an evaluation of integrated or built-in 
     child safety systems. The evaluation should include the 
     safety and correctness of fit for the child; the availability 
     of testing data on the system and vehicle in which it will be 
     used; compatibility with different makes and models; cost-
     effectiveness in mass production for consumers; ease of use 
     and relative availability to children riding in motor 
     vehicles; and benefits of built-in seats to increasing 
     compliance with State child occupant restraint laws. The 
     Committee directs NHTSA to submit the results of this 
     supplementary study to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations by October 1, 2003.
       Heavy vehicle research.--Within the funds provided for 
     heavy vehicle research, the Committee includes $1,000,000 for 
     the National Transportation Research Center in Tennessee to 
     continue to conduct broad-based laboratory-to-roadside 
     research into heavy vehicle safety issues.

                        national driver register


                          (highway trust fund)

       The National Driver Register (NDRS) is a central repository 
     of information on individuals whose licenses to operate a 
     motor vehicle have been revoked, suspended, canceled, or 
     denied. The NDR also contains information on persons who have 
     been convicted of serious traffic-related violations such as 
     driving while impaired by alcohol or other drugs. State 
     driver licensing officials query the NDR when individuals 
     apply for a license, for the purpose of determining whether 
     driving privileges have been withdrawn by other States. Other 
     organizations such as the Federal Aviation Administration and 
     the Federal Railroad Administration also use NDR license data 
     in hiring and certification decisions in overall U.S. 
     transportation operations.
       The bill includes $2,000,000 for the NDR from the highway 
     trust fund.
       In addition, the Committee reminds NHTSA that the direction 
     given to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
     regarding the implementation of Section 204 of the Motor 
     Carrier Safety Improvement Act and the development of a one-
     driver, one-record pointer system is equally applicable to 
     NHTSA. The Committee expects both agencies to work together 
     on these initiatives without further delay.

                     Highway Traffic Safety Grants


                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                          (Highway Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$223,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................225,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................225,000,000

       For fiscal year 2003 the Transportation Equity Act for the 
     21st Century authorized the following State grant programs: 
     Highway Safety Program, the Alcohol-Impaired Driving 
     Countermeasures Incentive Grant Program and the Occupant 
     Protection Incentive Grant Program. Under the Highway Safety 
     Program, grant allocations are determined on the basis of a 
     statutory formula established under 20 U.S.C. 402. Individual 
     States use this funding in national priority areas 
     established by Congress which have the greatest potential for 
     achieving safety improvements and reducing traffic crashes, 
     fatalities, and injuries. Also, the national occupant 
     protection survey shall be funded from within this amount. 
     The Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures Incentive Grant 
     Program encourages States to enact stiffer laws and implement 
     stronger programs to detect and remove impaired drivers from 
     the roads. The occupant protection program encourages States 
     to promote and strengthen occupant protection initiatives. 
     The State Highway Safety Data Grants Program encourages 
     States to improve their collection and dissemination of 
     important highway safety data.
       The Committee recommends an appropriation for liquidation 
     of contract authorization of $225,000,000 for the payment of 
     obligations incurred in carrying out provisions of these 
     grant programs.
       The Committee has included a provision prohibiting the use 
     of section 402 funds for construction, rehabilitation or 
     remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for 
     State, local, or private buildings or structures.

                       limitation on obligations

       The bill includes language limiting the obligations to be 
     incurred under the various highway traffic safety grants 
     programs. Separate obligation limitations are included in the 
     bill with the following funding allocations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003     Committee
                                                                  enacted          estimate       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway safety programs....................................     $160,000,000      $165,000,000      $165,000,000
Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures grants............       38,000,000        40,000,000        40,000,000
Occupant protection incentive grants.......................       15,000,000        20,000,000        20,000,000
State highway safety data grants...........................       10,000,000   ................  ...............
                                                            ----------------------------------------------------
    Total..................................................      223,000,000       225,000,000       225,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 972]]

                             bill language

       Public safety messages.--The bill contains a provision 
     (sec. 340) extending the authority for States to use traffic 
     safety grant funds under Section 402 to produce and place 
     highway safety public service messages in television, radio, 
     cinema, print media and on the Internet. This year, the 
     Committee continues a provision that was included in the 
     fiscal year 2002 bill which designated safety belt use 
     innovative grant funds to be used for public safety messages 
     and evaluation to support the Operation ABC (America Buckles 
     up Children) Mobilizations that are conducted each year in 
     May and November. Most of these funds were used to support 
     State high-visibility ``Click It or Ticket'' enforcement 
     programs in May 2002. The preliminary results from the May 
     2002 initiative show continued success in achieving 
     measurable increases in seat belt use. The average percentage 
     increase in seat belt use for those States utilizing paid 
     advertising in the May mobilization initiative was 7.6 
     percent.
       The Committee believes that this program must be continued 
     and expanded in order to achieve its full potential in saving 
     lives and reducing injuries. Just as high visibility 
     enforcement programs have proven to be effective in 
     increasing seat belt use, research has also concluded that 
     sobriety checkpoints are highly effective in reducing 
     alcohol-related traffic fatalities and injuries. NHTSA's own 
     survey has indicated that 4 out of 5 Americans support 
     increased enforcement and tougher laws to protect themselves 
     and their families from impaired drivers. The Committee has 
     included bill language providing $20,000,000 from seat belt 
     and impaired driving grant programs to be used as directed by 
     the NHTSA Administrator for broadcast advertising to support 
     national law enforcement mobilizations aimed at increasing 
     seat belt use and controlling impaired driving. It is the 
     Committee's intent that these funds support at least two 
     national mobilizations during the year, and that NHTSA work 
     on these initiatives with the States and non-profit safety 
     organizations that have been active in conducting recent 
     mobilizations. Further, the Committee expects NHTSA to work 
     with the States to ensure that they have adequate resources 
     for impaired driving enforcement activities as part of the 
     mobilizations.

                    FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

       The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) became an 
     operating administration within the Department of 
     Transportation on April 1, 1967. It incorporated the Bureau 
     of Railroad Safety from the Interstate Commerce Commission, 
     the Office of High Speed Ground Transportation from the 
     Department of Commerce, and the Alaska Railroad from the 
     Department of the Interior. The Federal Railroad 
     Administration is responsible for planning, developing, and 
     administering programs to achieve safe operating and 
     mechanical practices in the railroad industry. Grants to the 
     National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and other 
     financial assistance programs to rehabilitate and improve the 
     railroad industry's physical infrastructure are also 
     administered by the Federal Railroad Administration.
       The Committee recommends $1,049,065,000 for the activities 
     of the Federal Railroad Administration for fiscal year 2003. 
     This is $337,800,000 more than the budget request.
       The following table summarizes the Committee 
     recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Fiscal year--
                                                             -----------------------------------    Committee
                           Program                                                2003 budget     recommendation
                                                                2002 enacted        estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety and operations\1\\2\\3\..............................     $110,857,000       $73,264,000     $118,264,000
New user fee revenue for safety and operations..............  ................       45,000,000  ...............
Railroad research and development...........................       29,000,000        14,325,000       29,325,000
New user fee revenue for railroad research and development..  ................       14,000,000  ...............
Next generation high-speed rail.............................       32,300,000        23,200,000       30,000,000
Alaska railroad rehabilitation\4\...........................       20,000,000   ...............       25,000,000
Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation\5\........      521,476,000       521,476,000      826,476,000
Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project..................       20,000,000        20,000,000       20,000,000
Amtrak Reform Council.......................................         (225,000)  ...............  ...............
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Total budgetary resources.............................      733,633,000       711,265,000    1,049,065,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not include reductions of $175,000 pursuant to section 349 of Public Law 107-87 and $150,000 pursuant to
  section 1106 of Public Law 107-117 for fiscal year 2002.
\2\Does not include supplemental funding of $6,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117 for emergency expenses to
  respond to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.
\3\Fiscal year 2003 budget estimate excludes $4,625,000 in CSRS retirement and FEHB accruals.
\4\Fiscal year 2002 excludes $10,200,000 transferred from USAF.
\5\Excludes $100,000,000 from Public Law 107-117 and $205,000,000 from the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act
  for further recovery from and response to terrorist attacks on the United States.

                         Safety and Operations

Appropriations, 2002\1\\2\.................................$110,857,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................73,264,000
Committee recommendation....................................118,264,000

\1\Does not reflect reduction of $175,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 and $150,000 pursuant to section 1106 of Public Law 
107-117.
\2\Does not include supplemental funding of $6,000,000 pursuant to 
Public Law 107-117 for emergency expenses to respond to the September 
11, 2001, terrorist attack on the U.S.

       The Safety and Operations account provides support for FRA 
     rail safety activities and all other administrative and 
     operating activities related to staff and programs.
       Inspector workforce.--The Committee has approved the 
     President's request for 10 additional full time equivalent 
     (FTE) staff years and 20 additional positions which will 
     bring FRA's inspector workforce to a total of 444 FTEs. The 
     Committee includes $1,393,000 to fund 6 additional track 
     inspector FTEs and 4 additional operating practice inspector 
     FTEs. Given the recent increases in track-caused accidents 
     and derailments as well as human-factor caused accidents, the 
     Committee urges FRA to move rapidly to fill these positions.
       Highway-railroad grade crossing safety.--The Committee 
     notes that the Department has either completed or made 
     substantial progress on most of the actions specified in its 
     strategic action plan to improve safety at highway-railroad 
     grade crossings. In view of the need to continue progress in 
     this area, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
     Transportation to submit with the fiscal year 2004 budget 
     request a new action plan outlining specific efforts to be 
     pursued by FRA, FHWA, FMCSA, NHTSA and the ITS Joint Program 
     Office to improve safety at both public and private 
     crossings.
       Positive train control.--The Committee agrees with the 
     National Transportation Safety Board that the current pace of 
     development and implementation of collision avoidance 
     technologies is inadequate. No plan for industry-wide 
     integration has been developed. Progress has been 
     particularly slow along rail lines that primarily serve 
     freight carriers, and even those lines with significant 
     passenger traffic remain largely unprotected today--some 12 
     years after positive train control was first placed on the 
     Safety Board's ``Most Wanted'' list. The Committee directs 
     FRA to submit an updated economic analysis of the costs and 
     benefits of PTC and related systems that takes into account 
     advances in technology, and systems savings to carriers and 
     shippers as well as other cost savings that might be realized 
     by prioritized deployment of these systems, especially along 
     lines that might mix freight and passenger trains. That 
     analysis should be submitted as a letter report to both the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by October 1, 
     2003.
       Safety assurance and compliance program (SACP).--In 1997, 
     FRA began the implementation of the Safety Assurance and 
     Compliance Program (SACP) which is a systems-based approach 
     to safety inspection and is designed to help maximize FRA's 
     safety inspection efforts. With over 220,000 miles of 
     railroad operated by the nation's Class I, regional and local 
     freight railroads, the Committee believes it is imperative 
     that FRA continue to utilize SACP as well as traditional 
     methods of inspection. The Committee directs FRA to provide a 
     status report by April 1, 2003 to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations which summarizes FRA's SACP 
     activities in fiscal year 2002 along with the agency's safety 
     audit plans for fiscal year 2003.


                    SAFETY AND OPERATIONS USER FEES

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................($45,000,000)
Committee recommendation...............................................

       User fees.--The Committee denies the Administration's 
     legislative proposal to impose safety user fees on FRA safety 
     and operations services.

                   Railroad Research and Development

Appropriations, 2002........................................$29,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,325,000
Committee recommendation.....................................29,325,000

       The Federal Railroad Administration's Railroad Research and 
     Development Program provides for research in the development 
     of safety and performance standards for high-speed rail and 
     the evaluation of their role in the Nation's transportation 
     infrastructure. The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $29,325,000 for railroad research and development, 
     $15,000,000 more than the administration's requested level.

[[Page 973]]



                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the following funding levels for 
     the Railroad research and development programs:

Railroad System Issues.......................................$3,225,000
Human Factors.................................................3,478,000
Rolling Stock and Components..................................2,487,000
Track and Structures..........................................5,225,000
Track and Train Interaction...................................3,350,000
Train Control.................................................1,250,000
Grade Crossings...............................................1,435,000
Hazardous Materials Transportation............................1,000,000
Train Occupant Protection.....................................6,450,000
R&D Facilities and Test Equipment.............................1,425,000

       Track and Structures.--The Committee provides $5,225,000 
     for FRA's track and structures research efforts. Within the 
     funds provided, the Committee includes $1,000,000 to continue 
     the development of the Integrated Railway Remote Information 
     Service (InteRRIS) which is public-private demonstration 
     program which utilizes defect detectors across North America. 
     InteRRIS is an internet-based system designed to aggregate, 
     interrogate and store data from these field-deployed detector 
     systems. These additional funds will provide enhancements to 
     FRA's National Rail Corridor Car Performance Database to make 
     it web accessible and generate new queries to support any 
     analysis of the data for improving safety and predictive 
     maintenance. The Committee also includes $2,000,000 for 
     Marshall University and the University of Nebraska for safety 
     research programs in rail equipment, human factors, track, 
     and rail safety related issues.
       Freight congestion study.--The Committee is aware of 
     continued railroad-freight congestion issues in the Chicago, 
     Illinois region. It can take 2 days or more to move freight 
     through the region, oftentimes at train speeds averaging 
     between 6.8 and 12 m.p.h. Blocked crossings also contribute 
     to this congestion. More than 37,500 rail freight cars move 
     through the region daily across nearly 2,000 at-grade 
     railroad crossings and to 26 intermodal yards. The Committee 
     directs the Federal Railroad Administrator to work with the 
     Chicago Transportation Coordination Office and communities in 
     the Chicago region, including the city of Chicago, to compile 
     and publish a periodic measure of the impact of rail 
     operations in the area. This shall also include the status of 
     improvement projects undertaken by the railroads to relieve 
     congestion. This information should translate operational 
     reports to reflect community impacts of blocked crossings and 
     idling locomotives/trains. These reports shall be submitted 
     on a quarterly basis. The administrator should also expand 
     the number of monitored crossings in the Chicago region to 
     measure the full extent of block railroad crossings, 
     including using event recorders and/or remote monitors to 
     collect data indicating the exact times grade crossing gates 
     are closed and the length of time they remain closed. The 
     administrator should report to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations the status of these efforts no 
     later than 120 days after enactment.


              RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT USER FEES

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................($14,000,000)
Committee recommendation...............................................

       User fees.--The Committee denies the Administration's 
     legislative proposal to impose user fees on FRA's railroad 
     research and development activities.

       Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program

       Section 502 of Public Law 94-210, as amended authorizes 
     obligation guarantees for meeting the long-term capital needs 
     of private railroads. Railroads utilize this funding 
     mechanism to finance major new facilities and rehabilitation 
     or consolidation of current facilities. No appropriations or 
     new loan guarantee commitments are proposed in fiscal year 
     2003.
       The Rail Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program, 
     as established in section 7203 of the Transportation Equity 
     Act for the 21st Century [TEA21], will enable the Secretary 
     of Transportation to provide loans and loan guarantees to 
     State and local governments, Government-sponsored authorities 
     and corporations, railroads and joint ventures to acquire, 
     improve, or rehabilitate intermodal or rail equipment or 
     facilities, including track, bridges, yards, and shops.

                    Next Generation High-Speed Rail

Appropriations, 2002........................................$32,200,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................23,200,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,000,000

       The Committee has provided $30,000,000 in general fund 
     appropriations for the High-Speed Ground Transportation 
     [HSGT] Program, $6,800,000 more than the President's budget 
     request.
       The Committee first provided funding for the Next 
     Generation High-Speed Rail [NGHSR] Program in fiscal year 
     1995. The program funds high-speed rail research, 
     development, and technology demonstration programs to foster 
     high-speed passenger service on rail corridors throughout the 
     country.
       The Committee recommends the following funding levels for 
     the Next Generation High-Speed Rail Programs:

High-speed train control systems.............................$5,000,000
High-speed non-electric locomotives...........................5,300,000
Grade crossing hazard mitigation/Low-cost innovative technolog3,900,000
Track and structures technology...............................1,200,000
Corridor planning.............................................9,100,000
Magnetic levitation...........................................5,500,000

       High-speed train control systems.--The Committee has 
     provided a total of $5,000,000 for the North American Joint 
     PTC project.
       Grade crossing hazard mitigation/low-cost innovative 
     technologies.--The Committee recommends $3,900,000 for grade 
     crossing hazard mitigation and low-cost innovative technology 
     initiatives.
       Within the funds provided, the Committee includes the 
     following allocations:

North Carolina Sealed Corridor Initiative......................$700,000
Illinois Rail-Grade crossing safety program.....................800,000
State of Vermont hazard elimination.............................500,000

       Corridor planning.--The Committee includes $9,100,000 for 
     passenger rail corridor planning. Within the funds provided, 
     the Committee includes the following allocations:

Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor, NC.......................$1,000,000
California high-speed rail....................................2,000,000
Florida high-speed rail.......................................3,850,000
Gulf Coast high-speed rail corridor.............................800,000
Seattle-Everett corridor study..................................750,000
Las Vegas-Los Angeles high-speed study..........................200,000
Northern New England corridor, VT...............................500,000

       Seattle-Everett, Washington Rail Corridor Study.--The 
     Committee provides $750,000 to conduct a corridor planning 
     study of track capacity and utilization by freight, commuter 
     and intercity rail services in the Seattle-Everett portion of 
     the Pacific Northwest High Speed Rail Corridor and the 
     environmental challenges that would accompany expansion of 
     that track capacity.
       Las Vegas-Los Angeles study.--The Committee provides 
     $200,000 to conduct a rail capacity and ridership analysis 
     for high-speed rail service between Las Vegas and Los 
     Angeles. The study will assess existing capacity along the 
     route; identify potential improvements to increase capacity 
     and reduce trip times; conduct preliminary engineering and 
     assess station requirements.
       Magnetic levitation transportation.--A total of $5,500,000 
     has been provided for magnetic levitation activities to be 
     distributed as follows:

Washington-Baltimore, MD: Environmental studies................$500,000
Nevada-California: Environmental impact studies, design and en2,000,000
Greensburg-Pittsburgh, PA: Planning, engineering and design...2,000,000
Southern California Maglev environmental study and planning...1,000,000

       Rail-highway crossing hazard eliminations.--Section 1103 of 
     the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) 
     provides $5,250,000 for the elimination of rail-highway 
     crossing hazards. Of these set-aside funds, the following 
     allocations are made:

Gulf Coast high-speed rail corridor..........................$2,000,000
Chicago Hub high-speed rail corridor between Milwaukee and La Crosse, 
  WI............................................................500,000
Pacific Northwest high-speed rail corridor....................1,500,000
  


                     Alaska Railroad Rehabilitation

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................25,000,000

\1\Excludes $10,200,000 transferred from USAF pursuant to section 8062 
of Public Law 107-117.

       The Committee has included a total of $25,000,000 for rail 
     safety and infrastructure improvements benefiting passenger 
     operations of the Alaska railroad. This railroad extends 498 
     miles from Seward through Anchorage, the largest city in 
     Alaska, to the city of Fairbanks, and east to the town of 
     North Pole and Eielson Air Force Base. It carries both 
     passengers and freight, and provides a critical 
     transportation link for passengers and cargo traveling 
     through difficult terrain and harsh climatic conditions.

     Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Appropriations, 2002\1\....................................$521,476,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................521,476,000

[[Page 974]]

Committee recommendation....................................826,476,000

\1\Excludes supplemental funding of $100,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 
107-117 and $205,000,000 pursuant to the Supplemental Appropriations 
Act for Fiscal Year 2002.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       For fiscal year 2003, the administration has requested an 
     appropriation of $521,476,000. Separately, Amtrak's Board of 
     Directors has submitted a budget request for $1,200,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2003, an increase of $305,000,000 or 58 
     percent more than the fiscal year 2003 budget request.
       Transparency in Amtrak's Budget Process.--The Secretary and 
     other members of the administration have stated repeatedly 
     that greater transparency is needed in Amtrak's budgeting 
     process. The Committee wholeheartedly agrees and commends the 
     Secretary for his successful efforts in requiring Amtrak to 
     provide all relevant participants in the debate with accurate 
     and timely financial documentation. Similarly, the Committee 
     commends Amtrak's new leadership for its willingness to 
     provide such transparency in the development of the 
     railroad's spending plans.


                         Amtrak Reform Council

Appropriations, 2002\1\........................................$225,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...............................................

\1\The Council is an independent entity. Its funding is presented 
within the FRA for display purposes only.

       The Committee has not provided funding for the Amtrak 
     Reform Council as the Council has now issued its final report 
     and completed its work.


               pennsylvania station redevelopment project

Appropriations, 2002........................................$20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................20,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,000,000


       In 2000, an advance appropriation of $20,000,000 was 
     provided for each fiscal year 2001, 2002, and 2003. These 
     funds support the redevelopment of the Pennsylvania Station 
     in New York City, including the renovation of the James A. 
     Farley Post Office building as a train station and commercial 
     center, and basic upgrades to Pennsylvania Station.

                     FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

       The Federal Transit Administration was established as a 
     component of the Department of Transportation by 
     Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, effective July 1, 1968, 
     which transferred most of the functions and programs under 
     the Federal Transit Act of 1964, as amended (78 Stat. 302; 49 
     U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), from the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development. The missions of the Federal Transit 
     Administration are: to assist in the development of improved 
     mass transportation facilities, equipment, techniques, and 
     methods; to encourage the planning and establishment of urban 
     and rural transportation services needed for economical and 
     desirable development; to provide mobility for transit 
     dependents in both metropolitan and rural areas; to maximize 
     productivity of transportation systems; and to provide 
     assistance to State and local governments and their 
     instrumentalities in financing such services and systems.
       The current authorization for the programs funded by the 
     Federal Transit Administration is contained in the 
     Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century.
       Under the Committee recommendation, a total program level 
     of $7,226,000,000 would be provided for the programs of the 
     Federal Transit Administration for fiscal year 2003, which is 
     the obligation limitation authorized under the mass transit 
     category in TEA21. This funding is comprised of 
     $1,445,000,000 in direct appropriations of general funds and 
     $5,781,000,000 in limitations on contract authority.
       The following table summarizes the Committee's 
     recommendations compared to fiscal year 2002 and the 
     administration's request:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Committee
                        Program                             2002 enacted     2003 estimate\1\    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses................................             67,000             73,000             73,000
Formula grants\2\\3\...................................          3,542,000          3,839,000          3,839,000
University transportation research.....................              6,000              6,000              6,000
Transit planning and research..........................            116,000            122,000            122,000
Capital investment grants\3\\4\........................          2,891,000          3,036,000          3,036,000
Job access and reverse commute grants..................            125,000            150,000            150,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................          6,747,000          7,226,000          7,226,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $3,586,000 in CSRS/FEHB accruals.
\2\Excludes $23,500,000 in Emergency supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\3\Fiscal year 2002 reflects transfer of $50,000,000 from Formula grants to Capital investment grants.
\4\Excludes $100,000,000 in Emergency supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

                        Administrative Expenses

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    General fund     Trust fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............................................     $13,400,000     $53,600,000     $67,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003\1\........................................      14,600,000      58,400,000      73,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      14,600,000      58,400,000      73,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Excludes $3,586,000 in CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       The Committee recommends a total of $73,000,000 in budget 
     resources funds for administrative expenses.

                             Formula Grants

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              General fund       Trust fund            Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\\2\................................      $668,400,000    $2,873,600,000    $3,542,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................       767,800,000     3,071,200,000     3,839,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................       767,800,000     3,071,200,000     3,839,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Reflects $50,000,000 transferred to capital investment grants pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and excludes
  $23,500,000 in Emergency Supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\Fiscal year 2002 does not reflect FHWA flex funding transferred to FTA.

       Formula grants to States and local agencies funded under 
     this heading fall into four categories: urbanized area 
     formula grants (U.S.C. sec. 5307); clean fuels formula grants 
     (U.S.C. sec. 5308); formula grants and loans for special 
     needs of elderly individuals and individuals with 
     disabilities (U.S.C. sec. 5310); and formula grants for non-
     urbanized areas (U.S.C. sec. 5311). In addition, setasides of 
     formula funds are directed to: a grant program for intercity 
     bus operators to finance Americans with Disabilities Act 
     [ADA] accessibility costs; and the Alaska Railroad for 
     improvements to its passenger operations.
       Within the total funding level of $3,839,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 2003, the statutory distribution of these formula grants 
     is allocated among these categories as follows:

Urbanized areas (sec. 5307)..............................$3,445,939,606
Clean fuels (sec. 5308)......................................50,000,000
Elderly and disabled (sec. 5310).............................90,652,801
Nonurbanized areas (sec. 5311)..............................240,607,643
Over-the-Road Bus Program.....................................6,950,000
Alaska railroad...............................................4,849,950

       Section 3007 of TEA21 amends U.S.C. 5307, urbanized formula 
     grants, by striking the authorization to utilize these funds 
     for operating costs, but includes a specific provision 
     allowing the Secretary to make operating grants to urbanized 
     areas with a population of less than 200,000. Generally, 
     urbanized formula grants may be used to fund capital 
     projects, and to finance planning and improvement costs of 
     equipment, facilities, and associated capital maintenance 
     used in mass transportation. All urbanized areas greater than 
     200,000 in population are statutorily required to use 1 
     percent of their annual formula grants on enhancements, which 
     include landscaping, public art, bicycle storage, and 
     connections to parks.
       Clean fuels program.--The Transportation Equity Act for the 
     21st Century requires that $50,000,000 be set-aside from 
     funds made available under the formula grants program to fund 
     the clean fuels program. The clean fuels program is 
     supplemented by an additional set-aside from the major 
     capital investment's bus program and provides grants for the 
     purchase or lease of clean fuel buses for eligible recipients 
     in areas that are not in compliance with air quality 
     attainment standards. The Committee has included bill 
     language transferring the clean fuel formula set-aside funds 
     to the capital investment grants account. The Committee has 
     identified designated recipients of these funds within the 
     projects listed under the bus program of the capital 
     investment grants account.
       The following table displays the State-by-State 
     distribution of the formula program funds within each of the 
     program categories:

[[Page 975]]



 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, FISCAL YEAR 2003 GUARANTEED LEVEL APPORTIONMENT FOR FORMULA PROGRAMS (BY STATE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Section 5310
                                                  Section 5307    Section 5311     elderly and    Total formula
                     State                       urbanized area   nonurbanized    persons with       programs
                                                                      area        disabilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama........................................     $14,927,927      $6,693,617      $1,582,925      $23,204,469
Alaska.........................................    \1\8,546,214         932,932         240,303        9,719,449
American Samoa.................................  ..............         153,033          60,088          213,121
Arizona........................................      44,214,267       3,265,400       1,652,847       49,132,514
Arkansas.......................................       8,076,720       4,841,871       1,029,871       13,948,462
California.....................................     583,841,997      10,475,294       9,488,919      603,806,210
Colorado.......................................      46,448,166       2,907,313       1,160,010       50,515,489
Connecticut....................................      46,629,133       1,488,013       1,128,644       49,245,790
Delaware.......................................       6,342,133         674,647         352,994        7,369,774
District of Columbia...........................      66,802,132  ..............         309,042       67,111,174
Florida........................................     158,320,783       6,710,664       6,064,881      171,096,328
Georgia........................................      63,237,705       8,484,475       2,295,637       74,017,817
Guam...........................................       1,359,878          60,272         157,227        1,577,377
Hawaii.........................................      26,885,021       1,003,351         476,147       28,364,519
Idaho..........................................       5,731,779       1,843,482         455,768        8,031,029
Illinois.......................................     220,316,888       7,163,547       3,526,256      231,006,691
Indiana........................................      36,011,838       7,130,780       1,871,517       45,014,135
Iowa...........................................      12,875,848       4,838,882         980,862       18,695,592
Kansas.........................................       9,613,682       3,954,869         882,653       14,451,204
Kentucky.......................................      19,550,450       6,611,124       1,461,839       27,623,413
Louisiana......................................      31,467,926       5,164,303       1,455,553       38,087,782
Maine..........................................       3,062,068       2,566,899         533,084        6,162,051
Maryland.......................................      69,014,462       2,800,694       1,545,478       73,360,634
Massachusetts..................................     127,232,927       1,907,117       2,041,414      131,181,458
Michigan.......................................      68,303,580       8,975,050       2,938,848       80,217,478
Minnesota......................................      42,155,128       5,897,179       1,366,007       49,418,314
Mississippi....................................       5,276,443       5,782,322       1,032,720       12,091,485
Missouri.......................................      36,804,592       6,690,078       1,788,808       45,283,478
Montana........................................       2,581,607       1,784,329         384,485        4,750,421
N. Mariana Islands.............................         676,035          20,103          60,998          757,136
Nebraska.......................................       8,374,720       2,420,469         596,510       11,391,699
Nevada.........................................      24,300,864         859,972         721,940       25,882,776
New Hampshire..................................       4,650,337       1,826,955         457,852        6,935,144
New Jersey.....................................     216,873,343       1,764,450       2,587,773      221,225,566
New Mexico.....................................       9,107,633       2,555,496         655,206       12,318,335
New York.......................................     548,839,731       9,273,805       6,091,120      564,204,656
North Carolina.................................      37,223,366      11,455,078       2,563,722       51,242,166
North Dakota...................................       3,056,087       1,098,920         310,725        4,465,732
Ohio...........................................      91,723,614      10,796,386       3,431,195      105,951,195
Oklahoma.......................................      13,978,521       5,254,198       1,208,398       20,441,117
Oregon.........................................      36,021,230       3,860,548       1,122,512       41,004,290
Pennsylvania...................................     155,123,266      10,871,771       4,044,433      170,039,470
Puerto Rico....................................      44,710,018         886,606       1,399,708       46,996,332
Rhode Island...................................       8,295,427         321,072         463,004        9,079,503
South Carolina.................................      14,169,630       5,711,432       1,383,261       21,264,323
South Dakota...................................       2,348,155       1,496,539         339,305        4,183,999
Tennessee......................................      28,761,361       7,277,715       1,914,830       37,953,906
Texas..........................................     194,268,566      16,176,384       5,644,548      216,089,498
Utah...........................................      27,314,937       1,295,746         592,321       29,203,004
Vermont........................................       1,043,904       1,344,823         294,426        2,683,153
Virgin Islands.................................  ..............         290,119         150,772          440,891
Virginia.......................................      54,257,001       6,317,842       2,017,699       62,592,542
Washington.....................................      95,180,075       4,247,980       1,720,930      101,148,985
West Virginia..................................       4,929,603       3,461,591         784,330        9,175,524
Wisconsin......................................      41,295,126       6,734,456       1,574,405       49,603,987
Wyoming........................................       1,381,764         982,612         256,054        2,620,430
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.................................   3,433,535,608     239,404,605      90,652,801    3,763,593,014
Oversight......................................      17,253,948       1,203,038  ..............       18,456,986
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
Total..........................................   3,450,789,556     240,607,643      90,652,801    3,782,050,000
                                                ================================================================
Clean Fuels....................................  ..............  ..............  ..............       50,000,000
Over-the-Road Bus Accessibility................  ..............  ..............  ..............        6,950,000
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand Total..............................  ..............  ..............  ..............    3,839,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes $4,849,950 for the Alaska Railroad improvements to passenger operations.

       Over-the-road buses.--The Committee has included $6,950,000 
     in fiscal year 2003 for the over-the-road accessibility 
     program. These funds are intended to assist over-the-road bus 
     operators in complying with the Americans with Disabilities 
     Act accessibility requirements.

                   University Transportation Research

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                General fund   Trust fund       Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002..........    $1,200,000    $4,800,000    $6,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........     1,200,000     4,800,000     6,000,000
Committee recommendation......     1,200,000     4,800,000     6,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Section 5505 of TEA21 provides authorization for the 
     university transportation research program. The purpose of 
     the university transportation research program is to become a 
     national resource and focal point for the support and conduct 
     of research and training concerning the transportation of 
     passengers and property. Funds provided under the FTA 
     university transportation research program are transferred to 
     and managed by the Research and Special Programs 
     Administration (RSPA), combined with a transfer from the 
     Federal Highway Administration of $26,500,000. The transit 
     university transportation research program funds are 
     statutorily available only to the following universities: 
     University of Minnesota and Northwestern University. Funding 
     is also statutorily available for awards based on competitive 
     applications of approved universities.
       The Committee action provides $6,000,000 for the university 
     transportation research program, the same level as provided 
     in fiscal year 2002.

                     Transit Planning and Research

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                General fund   Trust fund       Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\.......   $23,000,000   $93,000,000  $116,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........    24,200,000    97,800,000   122,000,000
Committee recommendation......    24,200,000    97,800,000   122,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect FHWA flex funding transferred to FTA.

       The Committee action provides $122,000,000 for transit 
     planning and research. The bill contains language specifying 
     that $60,385,600 shall be available for the metropolitan 
     planning program; $5,250,000 for the rural transit assistance 
     program; $31,500,000 for the national planning and research 
     program; $12,614,400 for the State planning and research 
     program; $8,250,000 for transit cooperative research; and 
     $4,000,000 for the National Transit Institute at Rutgers 
     University.
       The following table summarizes the Committee 
     recommendation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Fiscal year--
                             ----------------------------    Committee
                              2002 program   2003 budget  recommendation
                                level\1\      estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metropolitan planning.......   $55,422,400   $60,385,600    $60,385,600
Rural transit assistance         5,250,000     5,250,000      5,250,000
 program....................
State planning and research     11,577,600    12,614,400     12,614,400
 program....................
Transit cooperative research     8,250,000     8,250,000      8,250,000
 program....................
National Transit Institute..     4,000,000     4,000,000      4,000,000
National planning and           31,500,000    31,500,000     31,500,000
 research program...........
                             -------------------------------------------
      Total.................   116,000,000   122,000,000    122,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Fiscal year 2002 does not reflect FHWA flex funding transferred to
  FTA.


[[Page 976]]

                 NATIONAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH PROGRAM

       The Committee recommendation includes transit planning and 
     research grants from the national program for:

        Project                                                  Amount
Auburn University Campus Transit System, AL....................$375,000
Center for Composites Manufacturing, AL.......................1,000,000
Detroit Airport Rail Project, MI................................200,000
Detroit Area Regional Transportation Authority Studies, MI......750,000
Electric Transit Vehicle Institute, TN..........................500,000
I-93 Corridor Transit Investment Study, NH....................1,000,000
National Bio-terrorism Civilian Medical Response Center, PA...1,000,000
National Deployment of the ITN America, ME......................500,000
NDSU Transit Center for Small Urban Areas, ND...................400,000
Rich Passage Passenger Ferry Project, WA......................1,000,000
Rockford-Belvidere, Transit Feasibility Study, IL...............250,000
Transit Usage, Home Interview Survey Study, UT..................500,000
Washington State Ferries Wireless Connection Project, WA......1,000,000
WVU Exhaust Emissions Testing, WV.............................1,400,000
Zinc-air Zero emissions bus, NV...............................1,500,000
Project ACTION................................................3,000,000

                      Trust Fund Share of Expenses


                (Liquidation of Contract Authorization)

                          (highway trust fund)

Appropriations, 2002...................................($5,398,000,000)
Budget estimate, 2003...................................(5,781,000,000)
Committee recommendation.................................5,781,000,000 

       For fiscal year 2003, the Committee has provided 
     $5,781,000,000 in liquidating cash for the trust fund share 
     of transit expenses associated with the following programs: 
     administrative expenses, formula grants, university 
     transportation research, transit planning and research, job 
     access and reverse commute grants, and capital investment 
     grants. This level of funds is equal to the total budget 
     authority from the highway trust fund inside the transit 
     firewall as outlined in the transportation discretionary 
     spending guarantee subtitle of the Transportation Equity Act 
     for the 21st Century.

                       Capital Investment Grants

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                General funds     Trust funds         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\......................................     $618,200,000   $2,272,800,000   $2,891,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................      607,200,000    2,428,800,000    3,036,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................      607,200,000    2,428,800,000    3,036,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes $50,000,000 transferred from formula grants pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and excludes $100,000,000
  in Emergency supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

       Section 5309 of 49 U.S.C. authorizes discretionary grants 
     or loans to States and local public bodies and agencies 
     thereof to be used in financing mass transportation 
     investments. Investments may include construction of new 
     fixed guideway systems and extensions to existing guideway 
     systems; major bus fleet expansions and bus facility 
     construction; and fixed guideway expenditures for existing 
     systems.
       The Committee action provides a level of $3,036,000,000. 
     Within this total, $2,428,800,000 is from the ``Mass 
     transit'' account of the highway trust fund, and no more than 
     $607,200,000 shall be appropriated from general funds. The 
     following table summarizes the Committee recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year
                                                                   2002 program     2003 budget      Committee
                                                                       level         estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bus and bus facilities..........................................    $618,200,000    $607,200,000    $607,200,000
Fixed guideway modernization....................................   1,136,400,000   1,214,400,000   1,214,400,000
New systems and new extensions..................................   1,136,400,000   1,214,400,000   1,214,400,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................   2,891,000,000   3,036,000,000   3,036,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Limited extensions of discretionary funds.--There have been 
     occasions when the Committee has extended the availability of 
     capital investment funds. These extensions are granted on a 
     case by case basis and, in nearly all instances, are due to 
     circumstances that were unforeseen by the project's sponsor. 
     The availability of these particular funds are intended for 
     one additional year, absent further congressional direction. 
     The Committee directs the FTA not to reallocate funds 
     provided in fiscal year 1999 and fiscal year 2000 for the 
     following projects:
       --Santa Fe/El Dorado, New Mexico rail link project
       --Albuquerque, New Mexico light rail project
       --Tuscaloosa, Alabama intermodal center
       --Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee, Wisconsin rail extension 
         project
       --Northern New Mexico park and ride facilities and State of 
         New Mexico, Buses and Bus-Related Facilities
       --Birmingham, Alabama transit corridor project
       --Harrisburg, Pennsylvania-Capital Area Transit/Corridor 
         One commuter rail project
       --Charleston, South Carolina monobeam corridor project
       --King County, Washington park and ride expansion
       --Sequim, Washington--Clallam Transit multimodal center
       --Birmingham-Jefferson County, Alabama buses
       --Port MacKenzie/Upper Cook Inlet Intermodal Facility
       --Roaring Fork Transportation Authority, CO
       --Dothan Wiregrass, Alabama vehicles and transit facility
       --Jefferson/Montevallo, Alabama pedestrian walkway
       --Montgomery, Alabama Union Station intermodal center
       --Pritchard, Alabama bus transfer center
       --West Virginia statewide intermodal facility and buses.
       Bill language.--The bill contains a general provision (sec. 
     322) reprogramming funds provided in previous fiscal years 
     for the following project:
       --Wilmington, Delaware downtown transit connector (fiscal 
         year 2000 and fiscal year 2001)--to be made available for 
         Wilmington, Delaware commuter rail improvements.
       --Missoula Ravalli Transportation Management Administration 
         buses (fiscal year 2001)--to be made available for 
         Missoula Ravalli Transportation Management Administration 
         buses and bus facilities.


                         bus and bus facilities

       The Committee recommendation for bus and bus facilities 
     funding is $657,200,000. These funds may be used to replace, 
     rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment and to 
     construct bus-related facilities. Funds for bus and bus 
     facilities shall be distributed as follows:

        Project                                                  Amount

AC Transit Buses and Bus Facilities, CA......................$1,000,000
Adams Transit Authority Buses and Bus Facilities, PA............400,000
Ajo to Phoenix Bus Service, AZ..................................200,000
Alabama A&M University bus & bus facilities, AL.................500,000
Alabama State Docks Intermodal Facility, AL..................10,000,000
Alabama Statewide Bus Facilities and Ancillary Equipment, AL..3,000,000
Alabama Statewide Replacement of Senior Center Vans, AL.......4,500,000
Albuquerque, NM bus and bus facilities..........................300,000
Allegheny Port Authority Buses, PA............................1,000,000
Allentown Intermodal Transportation Center, PA................3,000,000
Altoona Metro Transit buses, PA.................................500,000
Anchorage Int'l Airport Intermodal Facility, AK...............2,000,000
Anchorage Transfer Facility, AK...............................3,000,000
Ann Arbor Transportation Authority Bus & Bus Facilities, MI...3,000,000
Area Transportation Authority Buses, North Central PA.........3,000,000
Area VII Agency on Aging Bus and Bus Facility, MT.............1,000,000
Arkansas Statewide, AR.......................................10,000,000
Attleboro Intermodal Facility, MA...............................750,000
Aurora Avenue Bus Rapid Transit, WA...........................2,000,000
Austin Bus Projects, TX.......................................8,000,000
Bay Area Transportation Authority Buses, Traverse City, MI....1,000,000
Beaumont buses, TX..............................................300,000
Beaver County Transit Authority, Buses, PA......................500,000
Bergen County Intermodal Park-n-Ride & Facilities, NJ.........1,750,000
Berks Area Reading Transportation Buses and Bus Facilities,
  PA..........................................................1,000,000
Bi-State Development Agency Bus Replacement, MO...............3,000,000
Blue Water Area Transit bus facility, Port Huron, MI..........2,000,000
Bridgeport High Speed Ferry Terminal Project, CT..............2,000,000
Brockton Intermodal Transportation Center, MA.................1,500,000
Brookhaven Multi-Modal Transportation Center, MS..............2,000,000
Broward County Buses and Bus Facility, FL.....................2,000,000
Brownsville buses, TX...........................................300,000
BRT Systems, Appurtenances & Facilities, HI..................11,000,000
Buffalo Auditorium Intermodal Center, NY......................5,000,000

[[Page 977]]

Burien transit center, transit oriented development, WA.......2,000,000
Bus Rapid Transit Project, Las Vegas Blvd., NV................5,000,000
Capital Area Transit buses, PA..................................500,000
Capital Area Transportation Authority (CATA), Lansing, MI.....3,000,000
Cedar Falls, Multimodal Facility, IA..........................1,100,000
Cherry Street Multimodal Facility, IN.........................1,300,000
Chittenden County Transit Authority Bus and Facility, VT......4,000,000
Cincinnati Government Square Transit Transfer Center, OH......6,400,000
Coffman-Cove Inner-island Ferry/Bus Terminal, AK..............2,000,000
Colorado Statewide, CO........................................9,000,000
Connecticut State-wide Buses, CT..............................2,500,000
C-Tran, Vancouver Mall transit center, WA.....................2,700,000
Delaware Statewide Buses......................................3,250,000
East Central Florida Transit Coalition, Bus and Facilities, F11,000,000
East Palo Alto Buses, CA........................................400,000
Easton Intermodal Terminal, PA................................2,000,000
Edmonds Crossing multi-modal project, WA......................4,000,000
El Paso Bus Projects, TX......................................4,000,000
Espanola ADA van & Compressed Gas Equipment, NM..................75,000
Fairbanks Intermodal Facility, AK...............................250,000
Fairbanks Rail/Bus Transfer Facility, AK......................2,000,000
Ferguson van replacement, MO.....................................45,000
Flint Mass Transportation Authority bus and bus facilities, MI3,750,000
Fort Smith Bus, AR............................................1,500,000
Fresno Buses, CA................................................600,000
Fort Worth buses, TX............................................500,000
Galveston Buses, TX...........................................2,000,000
Gardena Municipal Bus Lines, CA.................................350,000
Georgia Statewide, Bus Replacement Program....................1,500,000
Gloucester Co Sr. Buses, NJ.....................................350,000
Greater Minnesota Transit Authority Bus & Bus Facilities, MN..9,500,000
Greater Triskett Bus Garage Rehabilitation, OH................3,000,000
GRTA Express Bus & Facility, GA...............................8,000,000
Hampton Roads Transit Facility Replacement, VA................4,000,000
Hartford Downtown Circulator, CT..............................2,800,000
Hartford-New Britain Busway Project, CT......................12,500,000
Hattiesburg Intermodal Facility, MS...........................3,500,000
Hawaii Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities, HI...................6,000,000
Hazelwood van expansion, MO......................................80,000
Henderson County Facility, KY.................................2,000,000
Hershey Intermodal Transportation Center, PA..................2,000,000
Hoover & Vestavia Hills Diesel Hybrid Electric Buses, AL......1,000,000
Houston buses, MO...............................................100,000
Huntsville Int'l Airport Intermodal Center Phase III, AL......3,000,000
Idaho Transit Coalition Bus and Bus Facilities................2,500,000
Illinois Statewide, IL.......................................10,000,000
Indiana Statewide.............................................2,000,000
Indianapolis Downtown Transit Center, IN......................4,500,000
Intermodal/Inland Port Terminal, SC...........................5,000,000
Iowa City Intermodal Transit Facility, IA.....................8,000,000
Iowa Statewide................................................6,500,000
Jackson Transportation Authority Bus Facility, MI...............500,000
Jamaica Intermodal Facilities, NY.............................3,000,000
Jefferson City Transit bus and van, MO........................2,000,000
Johnson County Transit Programs, KS.............................500,000
Kalamazoo Transportation Center, MI...........................2,900,000
Kansas City KCATA Buses, MO...................................3,750,000
Kansas Statewide..............................................3,000,000
Knoxville Electric Transit Intermodal Center, TN..............3,400,000
LSU Health Sciences Center, Shreveport Intermodal Facility, LA2,000,000
Lane Transit District Bus Facility, OR........................6,000,000
Las Vegas Downtown Transportation Center, NV..................4,500,000
Las Vegas Transit Access Project, NV............................500,000
Livermore Valley Center Project, CA.............................300,000
Lorain Renovation Train Depot in a Multi-modal Hub, OH........2,400,000
Los Angeles MTA Bus and Bus Facility, CA......................5,000,000
Los Angeles to Pasadena Construction Authority Bus Program, CA3,000,000
Louisiana Statewide..........................................13,000,000
Lowell-Gallagher Intermodal Facility, MA......................1,000,000
Lubbock buses, TX...............................................500,000
Macon Union Station Intermodal Center Rehabilitation, GA......2,000,000
Marquette County Transit Authority bus and bus facilities, MI.2,750,000
MARTA Bus Replacement & clean fuel buses & facilities, GA....10,000,000
Maryland Statewide...........................................13,000,000
Maui County buses, HI.........................................1,500,000
Memphis Airport Intermodal Facility Improvements, TN..........3,000,000
Metro Area Transit--Intermodal Facility, NE...................2,000,000
Metro Area Transit,South Omaha/Stockyard Center, NE...........1,500,000
Metro Transit Bus & Bus facilities, Twin Cities, MN...........7,000,000
Miami-Dade County, Buses Acquisition, FL......................3,000,000
Michigan Statewide, Buses & Bus Facilities....................4,000,000
Missouri Statewide Bus and Bus Facility Projects..............5,500,000
Mobile Health Service Buses, NYC, NY............................750,000
Modesto Bus Maintenance Facility, CA............................500,000
Montclair State Univ.Campus & Community Bus System, NJ........1,500,000
Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) Bus and Bus Facilities, CA.......500,000
Montgomery County FDA Transit Center, MD........................375,000
Montpelier Multimodal Center, VT..............................3,000,000
Mount Vernon multi-modal facility, WA.........................1,160,000
Mountain Line Buses, Missoula, MT.............................1,000,000
Municipal Transit Operators Coalition, Long Beach, CA.........1,750,000
Nebraska Statewide............................................2,000,000
New Hampshire Statewide Bus Acq., NH..........................3,000,000
New York CNG Urban Buses, NY..................................4,000,000
Newport Trolley Project, RI.....................................500,000
Niagara Falls International Train Station, NY.................1,500,000
Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority Buses, Facilities, N2,500,000
Normal Multi-modal Facility, IL...............................1,750,000
North Carolina Statewide......................................8,000,000
North Dakota Statewide........................................2,900,000
Norwich Hollyhock Station ITC Project, CT.....................2,000,000
OATS Bus and Bus Facilities, MO...............................3,000,000
Oceangateway Development Project, ME..........................1,500,000
Ohio Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities.........................8,000,000
Oklahoma statewide buses and bus facilities..................12,000,000
OSU Multimodal Transportation Facility, OK....................4,500,000
Palo Alto Bus Facility, CA......................................400,000
Penn Station Platform Extension, NJ...........................2,000,000
Pierce County bus and bus facilities, WA......................3,000,000
Port Angeles, International Gateway project, WA...............1,500,000
Port MacKenzie Intermodal Facility, AK........................2,000,000
Port of Anchorage Intermodal Facility, AK.....................1,000,000
Potomac & Rappahannock PRTC, Buses, VA........................2,000,000
Premium Commuter Service Pilot Program, RI....................1,250,000
Pullman Multi-modal Center, PA................................1,000,000
Reno and Sparks Downtown Facilities, NV.......................6,200,000
Rhode Island Statewide........................................7,000,000
Richmond Multi-modal Facility, VA.............................4,000,000
Rio Rancho, Buses and Bus Facilities, NM........................250,000
Rochester Genesee Transportation Authority's Buses, NY........1,500,000
Rosebud Sioux Tribe Bus Facility, SD............................206,500
Rural Transit Buses & Facilities, NV..........................2,000,000
Sacramento Regional Transit District Bus Facility, CA.........1,250,000
Saginaw Transit Authority Regional Service buses, MI............500,000

[[Page 978]]

Salem Area Mass Transit Bus and Bus Facility, OR..............2,000,000
San Antonio, Transit Bus System Modernization, TX.............3,000,000
San Francisco Muni, Bus and Bus Facilities, CA................5,000,000
Santa Barbara Bus and Bus Facilities, CA........................750,000
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Buses, CA.........2,000,000
Santa Fe bus and bus facility, NM.............................1,000,000
Section 5327 Oversight Activities.............................5,493,500
SEPTA Intermodal Facility, Bucks County, PA...................2,000,000
SEPTA Norristown Intermodal Facility, PA......................4,000,000
Seward Buses & Bus Facility, AK.................................200,000
Ship Creek Pedestrian & Intermodal Facility, AK...............1,000,000
Sierra Madre CNG Fueling Station, CA............................200,000
Small Bus System Program of Projects, WA......................2,140,000
SMART bus and bus facilities, Oakland County MI...............1,000,000
Snohomish County Community Transit park and ride, WA..........3,500,000
Sound Transit regional transit hubs, WA.......................5,000,000
South Bend TRANSPO Buses, IN..................................1,500,000
South Carolina Statewide.....................................14,000,000
Southeast Missouri Trans. Services Bus & Bus Facilities, MO.....500,000
Spokane bus and bus facilities, WA............................3,000,000
Springfield Transportation Department Buses, MO...............2,000,000
Springfield Union Station, MA.................................8,000,000
St. Charles buses and equipment, MO.............................245,000
St. Johnsbury Transit Center Rehabilitation, VT.................250,000
St. Joseph Buses, MO..........................................2,000,000
START Bus Service, AZ...........................................300,000
Stoddard County van, MO..........................................30,000
Tennessee Statewide Buses and Bus Facility, TN................9,500,000
Thompkins Consolidated Area Transit Bus & bus facility, NY....1,000,000
Topeka Transit Buses, KS......................................1,500,000
Transit Authority of N. Kentucky Buses and bus facility, KY...1,000,000
Trenton Station Intermodal Project, NJ.......................12,000,000
Tri-Met Buses, Portland, OR...................................3,000,000
Troy State University Bus Shuttle Program, AL.................1,500,000
TTA Transit Authority Bus and Van Purchase, WV................1,800,000
Tucson Downtown Intermodal Center, AZ.........................3,000,000
UNI Intermodal Facility, IA...................................1,250,000
Union Station Restoration, NY.................................1,250,000
Union Station/Molton Street Multimodal Facility, AL...........5,000,000
University of North Alabama Transit Projects, AL..............2,000,000
University of Rhode Island Student Transportation Services, RI1,250,000
UTA and Park City Transit Buses, UT...........................5,000,000
Utah Statewide regional intermodal transportation centers, UT.1,000,000
Valley Metro/RPTA, Buses & Bus Facilities, Phoenix, AZ........8,000,000
Wabash Landing Transit Bus and Bus Facility, IN...............1,000,000
Wasilla Intermodal Facility, AK.................................900,000
Wesbrook Parking Garage/Intermodal Facility, ME...............1,000,000
West Coast Florida Bus Coalition, Buses & Bus Facilities, FL..8,000,000
West Lafayette Articulated Buses, IN..........................2,000,000
West Virginia Statewide.......................................4,000,000
Westchester County Bee-Line Buses, NY.........................1,500,000
Wilkes-Barre Intermodal Facility, PA..........................1,000,000
Wisconsin Statewide..........................................12,500,000
WMATA Clean Fleet Bus Program, VA.............................3,000,000
Wyandotte Co. Buses, KS.........................................500,000
Wyoming Bus & Bus Facilities, WY..............................2,500,000
York County Transit Authority, Buses, PA......................1,500,000

       Illinois Statewide Buses.--The Committee provide 
     $10,000,000 to the Illinois Department of Transportation 
     (IDOT) for Section 5309 Bus and Bus Facilities grants. The 
     Committee expects IDOT to provide at least $5,000,000 for 
     Downstate Illinois replacement buses in Bloomington-Normal, 
     Peoria, Macomb, Madison County, Rock Island, Rosiclare, 
     Kankakee, Quincy, Rockford, and Springfield. Further, the 
     Committee expects IDOT to provide appropriate funds for bus 
     facilities in Champaign-Urbana (University of Illinois Park 
     and Ride/Daycare Center), Galesburg, Rockford, and 
     Springfield.
       Washington Statewide Small Transit Systems, Buses and Bus 
     Facilities.--The Committee provides $2,140,000 to the 
     Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for 
     Section 5309 Bus and Bus Facilities grants. The Committee 
     expects WSDOT to fund the following projects: (1) $432,000 to 
     Grant Transit Authority; (2) $144,000 to Grays Harbor 
     Transportation; (3) $288,000 to Island Transit; (4) $96,000 
     to Pacific Transit; and, (5) $1,180,000 to Pullman Transit.

                      fixed guideway modernization

       The Committee recommends a total of $1,214,400,000 for the 
     modernization of existing rail transit systems. Under TEA21 
     all of the funds are distributed by formula. The following 
     table itemizes the fiscal year 2002 rail modernization 
     allocations by State:

  Estimated fiscal year 2003 section 5309 fixed guideway modernization


                                                            Fiscal year
        State                                               2003 budget

Alaska.......................................................$2,423,937
Arizona.......................................................1,845,317
California..................................................139,151,518
Colorado......................................................2,261,031
Connecticut..................................................40,546,804
District of Columbia.........................................57,562,724
Florida......................................................19,685,468
Georgia......................................................27,042,153
Hawaii........................................................1,304,537
Illinois....................................................131,151,605
Indiana.......................................................8,972,016
Louisiana.....................................................2,972,818
Maryland.....................................................29,372,229
Massachusetts................................................75,767,529
Michigan........................................................575,906
Minnesota.....................................................5,896,427
Missouri......................................................5,008,671
New Jersey..................................................104,313,737
New York....................................................368,542,791
Ohio.........................................................18,427,652
Oregon........................................................4,930,300
Pennsylvania................................................100,301,564
Puerto Rico...................................................2,722,582
Rhode Island.....................................................98,373
Tennessee.......................................................406,222
Texas.........................................................9,197,893
Virginia.....................................................18,194,293
Washington...................................................22,695,789
Wisconsin.......................................................884,114
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total.................................................1,202,256,000
One percent oversight........................................12,144,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
    Total appropriation...................................1,214,400,000


                               NEW STARTS

       The bill provides $1,239,400,000 for New Starts. These 
     funds are available for major investment studies, preliminary 
     engineering, right-of-way acquisition, project management, 
     oversight, and construction for new systems and extensions. 
     Under section 3009(g) of TEA21, there is an 8-percent 
     statutory cap on the amount made available for activities 
     other than final design and construction--that is, 
     alternatives analysis, environmental impact statements, 
     preliminary engineering, major investment studies, and other 
     predesign and preconstruction activities.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The bill allocates the funds provided for New Starts as 
     follows:

        Project                                                  Amount

Alaska-Hawaii Setaside......................................$10,296,000
Allegheny Port Authority, Stage II Light Rail Transit, PA....26,250,000
Altamont Commuter Express San Jose to Stockton, CA............1,000,000
Anderson County, South Carolina Transit System, SC............5,000,000
Baltimore Central Light Rail Double Track Project, MD........24,250,000
BART, SFO Extension, CA.....................................100,000,000
Birmingham Transit Corridor Study/PE, AL......................3,000,000
Boston, North Shore Corridor Project, MA........................500,000
Boston, MA, South Boston Piers Transitway.......................681,000
Bridgeport Intermodal Corridor Project, CT....................5,000,000
Burlington-Middlebury Commuter Rail, VT.......................2,000,000
Canal Streetcar, New Orleans, LA.............................30,000,000
Charlotte South Corridor Light Rail Project, NC...............8,000,000
Chicago, Douglas Blue Line Project, IL.......................55,000,000
Chicago, METRA, Expansion Project, IL........................52,000,000
Chicago, Ravenswood Brown Line Expansion Project, IL..........2,000,000
DART, Suburban Areas Extension, Dallas, TX...................60,000,000
Dulles Link Project, VA......................................18,000,000
East Side Access Project, NY.................................12,000,000

[[Page 979]]

Euclid Corridor Transportation Project, Cleveland, OH.........6,000,000
Houston Advanced Metro Transit Plan..........................20,000,000
Hudson-Bergen, Hoboken to Tonnelle Ave., NJ (MOS2)...........50,000,000
Hudson-Bergen, Jersey City, Bayonne & Hoboken, NJ (MOS1).....19,200,000
Interstate MAX Light Rail Transit Extension Project, Portland70,000,000
Johnson County Commuter Rail, KS................................400,000
Little Rock River Rail, AR....................................2,000,000
Los Angeles, North Hollywood Extension, CA...................40,490,000
Lowell, MA to Nashua, NH Commuter Rail Ext. Project, NH.........500,000
MARC Expansion Project, MD...................................12,000,000
MARTA North Line Extension Project Completion, GA............16,110,000
MATA Medical Rail Extension, Memphis, TN.....................15,610,000
Medical Center Light Rail Extension, UT......................10,000,000
Metro Link Commuter Rail, St. Clair Extension Project, IL.....3,370,000
Metro North Rolling Stock, CT.................................6,000,000
Nashville Light Rail, TN......................................3,500,000
Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link, 15 Station Light Rail Line, NJ...60,000,000
North Shore Connector Project, Pittsburgh, PA.................7,025,000
North/South TRAX Light Rail Transit Line, UT....................720,000
Oceanside-Escondido Light Rail Project, CA...................12,200,000
Ogden to Provo Commuter Rail Corridor, UT.....................6,000,000
Pawtucket Layover Facility, RI................................4,500,000
Port McKenzie Ferry, AK.......................................5,000,000
Raleigh, Triangle Transit Project, NC........................11,000,000
Resort Corridor Project, Las Vegas, NV........................9,000,000
Salt Lake City University TRAX Light Rail Transit Line, UT...68,760,000
San Diego Mission Valley East Line Project, CA...............65,000,000
San Juan-Tren Urbano.........................................30,038,000
Santa Fe/El Dorado Rail Link, NM..............................1,000,000
Scranton to New York City Passenger Rail Service, PA..........3,000,000
SEPTA Schuylkill Valley Metro Project, PA....................15,000,000
Sounder Commuter Rail, WA....................................30,000,000
Stamford Urban Transitway, Phase 2 Project, CT...............12,000,000
T-REX Southeast Light Rail Corridor, CO......................70,000,000
Tri-Rail, Double Track Improvement, FL.......................18,500,000
Twin Cities Hiawatha & Northstar Projects, MN................48,000,000
Vermont Transportation Authority Rolling Stock, VT............1,000,000
Virginia Railway Express VRE, Project, VA.....................4,000,000
Wilmington Train Station improvements, DE.....................3,000,000
Wilsonville to Beaverton Commuter Rail Project, OR............4,500,000
WMATA Addison Rd, Largo Extension, MD........................60,000,000

       Anderson County, South Carolina Transit System.--The 
     Anderson County trolley system would prove an integral part 
     of the commuter population in Anderson County. It would move 
     people, many of which are low income, from their homes to 
     jobs by using the rail system. This would create a more 
     efficient and environmentally conscious answer to the 
     overburdened system currently in place. The project is 
     currently in alternatives analysis. The Committee has 
     recommended $5,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
     in fiscal year 2003.
       Atlanta, Georgia, north line extension project.--The 
     Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) has 
     completed construction of a 2.3-mile, 2-station extension of 
     the North Line from the Dunwoody station to North Springs. 
     This extension initiated Revenue Operations on December 16, 
     2001. This extension serves the rapidly-growing area north of 
     Atlanta, which includes Perimeter Center and north Fulton 
     County, and connects this area with the rest of the region by 
     providing better transit service for both commuters and 
     inner-city residents traveling to expanding job 
     opportunities. On December 20, 1994, FTA issued an FFGA 
     committing a total of $305,010,000 in New Starts funding to 
     this project. In the Conference Report to the fiscal year 
     2000 appropriations act, FTA was instructed to amend the FFGA 
     for this project to incorporate a change in scope as 
     authorized under section 3030(d)(2) of TEA21. Accordingly, on 
     March 2, 2000, FTA amended the FFGA to include 28 additional 
     railcars, a multilevel parking facility in lieu of a surface 
     parking lot, and enhancements to customer security and 
     amenity measures at the Sandy Springs and North Springs 
     stations. The total cost of the amended project is 
     $463,180,000, with $370,540,000 from the section 5309 New 
     Starts program. Of the $65,530,000 increase in Federal 
     funding, $10,670,000 was applied from unexpended prior-year 
     funds identified from cost savings on the Dunwoody section of 
     the North Line extension. Including these prior-year funds, a 
     total of $354,500,000 has been appropriated for this project 
     through fiscal year 2002. This leaves $16,100,000 remaining 
     in the amended FFGA for this project. The Committee has 
     recommended $16,100,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Baltimore/Central LRT Double-Tracking.--The Maryland Mass 
     Transit Administration is constructing 9.4 miles of track to 
     upgrade designated areas of the Baltimore Central Corridor 
     Light Rail Line that are currently single track. The Central 
     Corridor is 29-miles long and operates between Hunt Valley in 
     the north to Cromwell/Glen Burnie in the south, serving 
     Baltimore City and Baltimore and Anne Arundel Counties, with 
     extensions providing direct service to the Amtrak Penn 
     Station and the Baltimore-Washington International Airport. 
     This project double-tracks eight sections of the Central 
     Corridor between Timonium and Cromwell Station/Glen Burnie, 
     for a total of 9.4-miles. Although no new stations are 
     required, the addition of a second track will require 
     construction of second station platforms at four stations. 
     Other elements included in the project are bridge and 
     crossing improvements, a bi-directional signal system with 
     traffic signal preemption on Howard Street, and catenary and 
     other equipment and systems. The double tracking will be 
     constructed almost entirely in existing right-of-way. In July 
     2001, FTA and MTA entered into a FFGA in the amount of 
     $120,000,000 in 5309 New Starts funds. The total estimated 
     cost of the project is $153,700,000 (escalated dollars). A 
     total of $21,490,000 has been appropriated through fiscal 
     year 2002. The Committee has recommended $24,250,000 in New 
     Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Birmingham, Alabama, transit corridor project.--The 
     Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) completed 
     a Regional Transit Feasibility Analysis as part of the 
     Strategic Regional Multi-modal Mobility Plan (Plan) in 
     November 1999. The overall Plan includes a congestion 
     management system element and a feasibility determination for 
     regional transportation and transit improvements for the 
     Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Area of Jefferson and Shelby 
     Counties. In the Phase I regional transportation and 
     investment planning process, the transportation alternatives 
     that were identified included highway improvements, high-
     occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, improved fixed-route transit 
     service, circulator and feeder bus service, express bus 
     service operating from park-and-ride lots on HOV lanes and 
     light rail transit. The conclusions from the Phase I effort 
     included, among other findings, the need to address long-term 
     dedicated public transit funding and land development 
     policies. The Birmingham MPO, representing local municipal 
     and county governments, in cooperation with the Birmingham-
     Jefferson County Transit Authority, is conducting Phase II. 
     Phase II will identify the locally preferred alternative in 
     each corridor in accordance with FTA's regulations for Major 
     Capital Investment Projects. Phase II is scheduled for 
     completion in fiscal year 2002. Through fiscal year 2002, 
     Congress has appropriated $10,860,000 in section 5309 New 
     Starts funds for this effort and it has been authorized in 
     TEA21. The Committee has recommended $3,000,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Burlington, Vermont, Burlington to Middlebury rail line 
     project.--The Vermont Agency of Transportation and Vermont 
     Rail Division are working to slowly rehabilitate the rail 
     system along the western side of the State to provide faster 
     and more efficient service to a greater amount of people in 
     Vermont. Given the overwhelming success of the Champlain 
     Flyer commuter rail line from Burlington to Charlotte, 
     Vermont. This new rail line would extend service to 
     Middlebury as well as add more daily travelers on the rail 
     system. The Committee has recommended $2,000,000 in New 
     Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Central Link Light Rail, Puget Sound, Washington.--The 
     Committee strongly supports a comprehensive transit solution 
     for the Puget Sound, Washington corridor. It is currently the 
     second most congested area in the Nation. FTA entered into a 
     $500,000,000 Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) with Sound 
     Transit in January 2001 for the former MOS-1. Since that 
     time, the project has faced increased scrutiny and oversight 
     by Congress and the Department of Transportation Inspector 
     General related to concerns about cost increases and schedule 
     delays. This thorough examination of the project is 
     justified.
       The Committee has been encouraged by progress made in 
     recent months. The agency

[[Page 980]]

     has new leadership and a new management team. New management 
     has executed an agency-wide re-organization and instituted 
     rigorous new budget and project controls. Based on a re-
     examination of the entire project, the Sound Transit Board 
     identified a 13.9-mile, 11-station initial segment in 
     September 2001. In November 2001, the Board formally adopted 
     the initial segment as the new minimum operable segment. The 
     Initial Segment, runs between the north end of the Downtown 
     Seattle transit Tunnel south to the intersection of South 
     154th Street and State Route 518.
       The Committee understands that Sound Transit will request a 
     FFGA for the same $500,000,000 granted in 2001, but will seek 
     to apply it to the revised alignment. Through fiscal year 
     2003, Congress has appropriated $90,970,000 for the project.
       Charlotte, North Carolina, south corridor light rail 
     transit project.--The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS), 
     in cooperation with the City of Charlotte, is proposing to 
     design and construct an 11.2-mile light rail transit line 
     extending from Uptown Charlotte to the Town on Pineville, 
     North Carolina, near the South Carolina border. The proposed 
     project is currently planned to operate within portions of 
     existing Norfolk-Southern (NS) railroad rights-of-way (ROW), 
     including sharing ROW with the city's existing downtown 
     trolley system. The south corridor is an area generally 
     paralleling I-77 along NS railroad ROW in the City of 
     Charlotte and Mecklenburg County. A 3.7-mile portion of the 
     proposed system--between Uptown and Scaleybark Road--would 
     operate on abandoned NS ROW owned by the City of Charlotte. 
     The remainder of the planned system (7.3 miles) would operate 
     on separate tracks generally paralleling NS ROW. The proposed 
     project also includes construction of 16 stations, purchase 
     of up to 15 light rail vehicles and the construction of a 
     light rail vehicle maintenance and storage facility. Seven 
     proposed stations from I-485 north to Scaleybark Road will 
     include park-and-ride lots and serve as transfer points for 
     local and express bus service. Total capital costs for the 
     south corridor project are estimated at $348,200,000. The 
     Federal share is estimated to be $174,000,100. Through fiscal 
     year 2002, Congress has appropriated $19,780,000 in section 
     5309 New Starts funds for this effort. It has also been 
     authorized under TEA21. The Committee has recommended 
     $8,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Chicago, Illinois, Douglas Branch reconstruction project.--
     The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) has implemented a 
     complete reconstruction of the approximately 6.6-mile length 
     of the existing Douglas Branch heavy rail line. The line 
     extends from just west of downtown Chicago to its terminus at 
     Cermak Avenue. The Douglas Branch was built in the late 19th 
     and early 20th centuries. Due to its age, the line has become 
     seriously deteriorated resulting in high maintenance and 
     operating costs and declining service. The Douglas Branch 
     currently carries approximately 27,000 average weekday 
     boardings utilizing 11 stations. In the year 2020, CTA 
     expects that the project would serve 6,000 daily new riders. 
     It serves one of the most economically distressed areas in 
     Chicago; low income households make up 30 percent of the 
     total number of households within walking distance of the 
     stations. The line has been in operation for over 100 years, 
     and serves neighborhoods that originally developed along the 
     system. The corridor contains an estimated 54,000 jobs and 
     115,000 residents within one-half mile of the stations, and 
     serves the University of Illinois at Chicago (25,000 
     students) and a large, dense central business district with 
     an estimated 339,000 jobs. Population and employment 
     densities are high, averaging 9,100 jobs and nearly 20,000 
     people per square mile. After ``looping'' through the central 
     business district, the Blue Line also extends to O'Hare 
     International Airport and the Medical Center Complex. The 
     total capital cost of the Douglas Branch reconstruction 
     project is estimated at $482,500,000. The Douglas Branch is 
     authorized for final design and construction by section 
     3030(a)(106) of TEA21. FTA and CTA entered into an FFGA in 
     January 2001 committing $320,100,000 in Section 5309 New 
     Starts funds to this project. A total of $52,200,000 has been 
     appropriated through fiscal year 2002. This leaves 
     $267,900,000 needed to fulfill the FFGA. The Committee has 
     recommended $55,000,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Chicago, Illinois, Metra North Central, Southwest Corridor 
     Commuter Rails, and Union Pacific West line extension 
     project.--Metra, the commuter rail division of the Regional 
     Transportation Authority (RTA) of northeastern Illinois, will 
     construct 16.3 miles of a second mainline track, including a 
     2.3-mile stretch of third track, along the existing 55-mile 
     North Central Service (NCS) commuter rail line to accommodate 
     increased service and operating speeds. The project also 
     includes the construction of five new stations, parking 
     facilities and the purchase of two diesel locomotives. The 
     North Central Corridor extends from downtown Chicago to 
     Antioch on the Illinois-Wisconsin border, traversing suburban 
     Cook and Lake counties. Metra estimates that 8,400 average 
     weekday boardings will occur on the NCS line in the year 
     2020. The total capital cost of the North Centeral project is 
     estimated at $225,520,000, of which Metra is expected to seek 
     $135,320,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. The North 
     Central Corridor extends from downtown Chicago to Antioch on 
     the Illinois-Wisconsin border, and traverses suburban Lake 
     County. It includes the two most significant hubs of 
     employment in the six-county northeastern Illinois region, 
     the Chicago CBD and the area surrounding O'Hare International 
     Airport. Metra estimates that this project will serve an 
     average of 8,400 average weekday boardings by 2020, with 
     8,000 daily new riders. This project has been rated 
     ``medium'' for both project justification and finance, 
     earning an overall rating of ``recommended.'' FTA approved 
     entry into the final design stage of development in October 
     2000. Section 3030(a)(10) of TEA21 authorizes the North 
     Central project for final design and construction. The North 
     Central Full Funding Grant Agreement was signed on November 
     5, 2001. Through fiscal year 2002, a total of $51,260,000 was 
     provided for the Metra North Central project. Metra, the 
     commuter rail division of the RTA of Northeast Illinois (NE 
     IL), will construct an additional 12 miles of trackage within 
     an existing 33-mile corridor connecting Union Station in 
     downtown Chicago to 179th Street in Orland Park, Illinois. 
     The Southwest Corridor (SWC) commuter rail project would 
     extend commuter rail service from Orland Park southwest to 
     Manhattan, Illinois. The project also includes the 
     construction of 3.3 miles of a second mainline, three 
     additional stations, parking facilities and multiple 
     improvements to tracks, signals, stations, and other 
     facilities. Section 3030(a)(12) of TEA21 authorized the 
     ``Southwest extension''. The total cost of the Southwest 
     Corridor commuter rail project is estimated at $198,176,649. 
     Through fiscal year 2002, $38,500,000 was provided for the 
     Southwest Corridor project. Metra and FTA entered into a FFGA 
     in November 2001 committing $103,020,000 in section 5309 New 
     Starts funds to the project. Metra, the commuter rail 
     division of the RTA of NE IL, is implementing an 8.5-mile 
     extension to the existing 35-mile Union Pacific West Line 
     (UPW). The project would extend the line approximately 8.5 
     miles west from Geneva to Elburn, Illinois. The project also 
     includes multiple improvements to track and signals, 
     construction of two new stations, parking facilities, the 
     purchase of two diesel locomotives and the construction of a 
     new overnight train storage yard. Section 3030(a)(13) of 
     TEA21 authorizes this project as the Chicago ``west line 
     extension''. The total capital costs of the Union Pacific 
     West Line Extension is estimated at $134,603,334 (escalated 
     dollars) in Federal New Starts funding. Through fiscal year 
     2002, a total of $34,840,000 has been appropriated for the 
     UPW project. The Committee has recommended a combined amount 
     of $52,000,000 in New Starts funding for these three projects 
     in fiscal year 2003.
       Chicago, Illinois, Ravenswood reconstruction project.--The 
     Chicago Transit Authority is proposing to reconstruct 
     existing platforms and expand stations along the Ravenswood 
     (Brown) Line to accommodate eight-car trains, increasing the 
     overall capacity of the line. The Ravenswood Line extends 9.3 
     miles from the north side of Chicago to the ``Loop elevated'' 
     in downtown Chicago and includes 19 stations. The majority of 
     the Brown line is operated on an elevated structure except 
     one portion near the north end of the line, which operates at 
     grade. The Brown line was built between 1900 and 1907. CTA 
     anticipates approximately 68,000 average weekday boardings, 
     including 12,300 daily new riders, in the year 2020 on the 
     Ravenswood Line. The proposed project would expand stations 
     and platforms and straighten curves to allow CTA to operate 
     longer trains, which would increase the capacity of the line. 
     Section 3030(a)(11) of TEA21 authorized the project. In 
     November 1997, CTA included the Ravenswood line expansion 
     project in the region's financially constrained long-range 
     transportation plan. The environmental review process for the 
     Ravenswood Line Expansion Project was completed in July 2002. 
     A Finding of No Significant Impact was determined. An 
     evaluation is now being done to determine whether the project 
     is eligible to enter into Final Design. Total capital costs 
     are currently estimated at $476,000,000 (escalated dollars), 
     including a requested $245,500,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
     funds. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated 
     $7,890,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds to the project. 
     The Committee has recommended $2,000,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Cleveland, Ohio, Euclid Corridor Transportation Project 
     (ECTP).--The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 
     (GCRTA) is proposing to implement a 9.8-mile transit corridor 
     incorporating exclusive bus rapid transit lanes and related 
     capital improvements on Euclid Avenue from Public Square in 
     downtown Cleveland east to University Circle. The proposed 
     project is known as the Euclid Corridor Transportation 
     Project (ECTP). The ECTP incorporates a series of transit 
     improvements including an exclusive center median busway 
     along Euclid Avenue from Public Square to University Circle 
     area into the city of East Cleveland, terminating

[[Page 981]]

     at the Stokes/Windermere rapid transit station. GCRTA 
     proposes to operate 60-foot articulated electric trolley 
     buses (ETB) with both left and right-hand side doors for 
     access and egress of patrons on the corridor. The ETBs will 
     have access to the entire length of the proposed corridor. 
     However, conventional buses will not be able to access Euclid 
     Avenue in the central business district. GCRTA estimates that 
     29,500 average weekday boardings, including 2,400 daily new 
     riders, will use the ECTP in the year 2025. Section 3035 of 
     ISTEA authorized FTA to enter into a multiyear grant 
     agreement for development of the Dual Hub Corridor. In 
     November 1995, the GCRTA Board of Trustees selected the ETCP 
     as the locally preferred alternative (LPA), which included a 
     busway and the rehabilitation and relocation of several 
     existing rapid rail stations. In December 1995, the Northeast 
     Ohio areawide coordinating agency (local metropolitan 
     planning organization) adopted a resolution supporting the 
     ECTP. In mid-1999, GCRTA reconfigured the scope of the ECTP 
     to incorporate only the construction of a busway along Euclid 
     Avenue. The rapid rail elements have been eliminated from the 
     ECTP proposal for section 5309 New Starts funding. The 
     environmental review process was completed in September 2001. 
     A Finding of No Significant Impact was determined. FTA 
     approved the ECTP into final design. Total capital costs for 
     the ECTP are estimated at $228,600,000 (escalated dollars), 
     of which Cleveland is expected to seek $135,000,000 in 
     section 5309 New Starts funding for the project. Through 
     fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $19,390,000 in 
     section 5309 New Starts funds for the Euclid corridor 
     transportation project. Of this amount, Congress reprogrammed 
     $4,720,000 to other projects. The Committee has recommended 
     $6,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Dallas, Texas, North Central LRT extension project.--Dallas 
     Area Rapid Transit (DART) is constructing a 12.5-mile, 9-
     station extension of its light rail system from the Park Lane 
     Station north to the City of Plano. DART estimates that 
     approximately 17,000 riders will use this extension by 2020, 
     of which 6,800 will be new riders. The total cost of this 
     project is estimated at $517,200,000. DART began contracting 
     for construction and purchasing vehicles and necessary right-
     of-way in May 1998, and expects to open the North Central 
     extension for revenue service in December 2003. The North 
     Central extension is authorized for final design and 
     construction under section 3030(a)(20) of TEA21. FTA issued 
     an FFGA for this project on October 6, 1999, which will 
     provide a total of $333,000,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
     funding. Through fiscal year 2002, a total of $230,910,000 
     has been provided to this project. The Committee has 
     recommended $60,000,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, Tri-Rail Commuter Rail Upgrade.--
     The Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail) is 
     proposing a number of system improvements to the 71.7-mile 
     regional transportation system it operates between Palm 
     Beach, Broward and Dade Counties in South Florida. This area 
     has a population of over 4 million, nearly one-third of the 
     total population of Florida. The planned improvements include 
     construction of a second mainline track, rehabilitation of 
     the signal system, station and parking improvements, 
     acquisition of new rolling stock, improvements to the Hialeah 
     Maintenance Yard facility, and construction of a new, 
     northern layover facility. The proposed double-tracking will 
     improve service by a factor of three, permitting 20-minute 
     intervals between trains during peak commuter hours instead 
     of the current 1-hour headways. Tri-Rail estimates that these 
     improvements will serve 42,100 average daily boardings by 
     2015, including 10,200 daily new riders. On May 16, 2000, FTA 
     issued an FFGA for Segment 5 of the Double Track Corridor 
     Improvement Program, which includes construction of 44.3 
     miles of the second mainline track and upgrades to the 
     existing grade crossing system along the entire 71.7-mile 
     South Florida Rail Corridor. It is expected to open for 
     revenue service on March 21, 2005. The first four segments, 
     upgrading the Hialeah Maintenance Yard and replacing the New 
     River Bridge, while part of the overall Double Track Corridor 
     Improvement Program, are not included in the scope of this 
     project. Total capital costs for the Segment 5 project are 
     estimated at $327,000,000. The FFGA for the Double Track 
     Corridor Improvement Program Segment 5 Project will provide a 
     total of $110,500,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. 
     Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated 
     $52,400,000 for this project. This project has been 
     authorized in TEA21. The Committee has recommended 
     $18,500,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Houston, Texas, Metro advanced transit plan project.--The 
     Advanced Transit Program (ATP) is Houston METRO's plan for 
     advanced high capacity transit in its 1,285 square mile 
     service area. The first component to begin operation will be 
     the locally funded 7.5-mile METRO Rail light rail project 
     from downtown to Reliant Park. The next projects will flow 
     from ongoing implementation of the METRO Mobility 2025. 
     Adopted by the Board of Directors in May 2001, this is 
     METRO's long-range transit plan for the region. The next 
     steps in the ATP will be studies in the corridors designated 
     for consideration of advanced high capacity transit. The four 
     highest priority corridors will be subject to detailed 
     alternatives analysis studies, defining mode and general 
     alignment of the proposed advanced high capacity transit 
     improvements. As a result of those studies, preferred 
     alternatives for each corridor will be adopted and moved 
     forward to implementation. By 2025, the ATP will have 
     introduced advanced high capacity into many of the region's 
     major travel corridors. The specific mode will be tailored to 
     meet individual corridor travel needs while maintaining 
     system connectivity. This project has been authorized in 
     TEA21. The Committee has recommended $20,000,000 in New 
     Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Johnson County, Kansas, commuter rail project engineering 
     and design.--Johnson County, Kansas is proposing to implement 
     a 5 station, 23-mile Commuter Rail line extending from 
     downtown Kansas City, Missouri, southwest to Olathe, Kansas, 
     in Johnson County. The proposed commuter rail project would 
     parallel Interstate 35, the major highway connecting Kansas 
     City with Olathe, and would share existing Burlington 
     Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad track (except for the 
     line's northern-most mile segment, which would require either 
     new track or existing Kansas City Terminal Railway trackage). 
     Park and ride facilities are being planned for each proposed 
     station. The commuter rail line will terminate in Kansas City 
     at its historic Union Station. Ridership estimates for the I-
     35 commuter rail project range from 1,400 to 3,800 trips per 
     day. These estimates will be refined during subsequent phases 
     of project development. TEA21 section 5309(e)(8)(A) applies 
     to this project. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has 
     appropriated $4,450,000 for this project. The Committee has 
     recommended $400,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
     in fiscal year 2003.
       Largo, Maryland, Metrorail, extension project.--The 
     Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) is 
     constructing a 3.1-mile heavy rail extension of the Metrorail 
     blue line. The Largo Metrorail Extension will be from the 
     existing Addison Road Station to Largo town center, located 
     just beyond the Capital beltway in Prince George's County, 
     Maryland. The project follows an alignment that has been 
     preserved as a rail transit corridor in the Prince Georges's 
     County master plan. The 3.1-mile alignment will contain at-, 
     above-, and below-grade segments. Two new stations will be 
     provided at Summerfield and at the Largo town center station. 
     The stations will provide 500 and 2,200 park-and-ride spaces 
     and 11 bus bays each. A number of local bus routes will 
     connect to the two new stations; shuttle bus service is 
     proposed between both stations and the FedEx Field, a major 
     sports complex with entertainment and retail uses. Maryland 
     Transit Administration (MTA) will manage the project through 
     preliminary engineering, with WMATA undertaking final design 
     and construction. The project is anticipated to open for 
     service by December 2004, with a total capital cost estimated 
     at $433,900,000. In December 2000, FTA entered into an FFGA 
     with WMATA that commits a total of $260,300,000 in section 
     5309 New Starts funds to this project. Through fiscal year 
     2002, Congress has appropriated $67,530,000 to this project. 
     This project has been authorized in TEA21. The Committee has 
     recommended $60,000,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Las Vegas/Resort Corridor.--The Las Vegas Regional 
     Transportation Commission (RTC) is in the process of 
     conducting preliminary engineering on the proposed 3.1-mile 
     Resort Corridor Automated Guideway Transit (elevated 
     monorail) project. The monorail will serve the Las Vegas 
     central business district and the northern part of the resort 
     corridor along the Las Vegas ``strip'' from Freemont Avenue 
     to Sahara Avenue. The Resort Corridor represents the region's 
     largest primary employment center, as about 50 percent of the 
     regional jobs (206,000) are located in this corridor. There 
     are an estimated 69,300 jobs and 21,800 residents within a 
     one-half mile from the proposed monorail boarding points. The 
     RTC estimates the proposed system will carry approximately 
     58,500 weekday boardings, including 19,880 daily new riders 
     in 2020. Based in the 1990 census data, there are an 
     estimated 1,690 low-income households within a one-half mile 
     radius of the proposed six stations. Revenue operations are 
     scheduled to begin in January 2004. This project represents 
     an extension to a 4-mile fully automated monorail that is 
     currently under construction by the Las Vegas Monorail 
     Company (LVMC). The estimated capital cost for the 3.1-mile 
     Resort Corridor monorail project is estimated to be 
     $440,000,000, of which the RTC is seeking $130,000,000, or 30 
     percent, in New Starts funding. Through fiscal year 2002, 
     Congress has appropriated $13,880,000 for this project. The 
     Committee is recommending $9,000,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Little Rock, Arkansas, river rail project.--The Central 
     Arkansas Transit Authority (CATA) is planning the 
     implementation of a vintage

[[Page 982]]

     streetcar circulator system on existing right-of-way 
     connecting the Alltel Arena, the River Market, and the 
     Convention Center in downtown Little Rock to the communities 
     of North Little Rock and Pulaski County. CATA proposes that 
     service be provided by seven replica streetcars operating on 
     a single track powered by overhead catenary. The proposed 
     system includes a 2.1-mile alignment, purchase of vehicles, 
     and construction of a maintenance facility. Ridership 
     projections estimate 1,000 to 1,200 average weekday boardings 
     with an additional 1,000 to 1,800 riders on special event 
     days. A future 0.4-mile extension to the William Jefferson 
     Clinton Presidential Library site has been proposed. Revenue 
     service is planned to begin in December 2002. This project is 
     addressed in the TEA21 section 5309(e)(8)(A). The Committee 
     has appropriated $7,930,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project through fiscal year 2002 and has recommended 
     $2,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Long Island Rail Road, New York, East Side access 
     project.--The New York Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) 
     is currently in final design on a proposed direct access for 
     Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) passengers to a new passenger 
     concourse in Grand Central Terminal (GCT) in east Midtown 
     Manhattan. The proposed 4-mile, 2 station, commuter rail 
     extension under the East River, using an existing rail 
     tunnel, is anticipated to alleviate LIRR tunnel capacity 
     constraints and enable the overall growth of the Nation's 
     largest commuter rail system. The project would provide 
     access to the eastern part of midtown Manhattan for users of 
     the LIRR who now must get to east midtown by subway or 
     walking from Penn Station. By allowing some LIRR passengers 
     to use GCT, the project would also free up capacity at Penn 
     Station for New Jersey Transit and Amtrak trains. The LIRR 
     ESA project would serve one of the strongest transit markets 
     in the country. By the year 2020, MTA/LIRR projects that the 
     LIRR ESA project will serve approximately 167,000 average 
     weekday boardings including 15,400 daily new riders. Based on 
     1990 census data, MTA/LIRR estimates that there are 
     approximately 4,443 low-income households within a one-half 
     mile radius of proposed station areas. MTA/LIRR estimates 
     that the LIRR ESA project would yield 7.4 million hours of 
     travel-time savings. MTA estimates that the LIRR ESA would 
     serve approximately 698,200 jobs that are located within a 
     one-half mile radius of the proposed station areas. The 
     project is scheduled for completion by December 2012 at a 
     projected cost of $4,350,000,000. MTA is proposing a request 
     for $2,170,000,000 in New Starts funding. In fiscal year 
     2002, Congress appropriated $14,600,000 in section 5309 New 
     Starts funds for the continued development of the LIRR ESA 
     project. The Committee has recommended $12,000,000 in New 
     Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Los Angeles, California, North Hollywood extension 
     project.--The Los Angeles Metro Rail Red Line rapid-rail 
     system is being planned, programmed and constructed in 
     phases, through a series of ``Minimum Operable Segments'' 
     (MOSs). The first of these segments (MOS 1), a 4.4-mile, 5-
     station segment, opened for revenue service in January 1993. 
     A 2.1-mile, 3-station segment of MOS 2 opened along Wilshire 
     Boulevard in July 1996; an additional 4.6-mile, 5-station 
     segment of MOS 2 opened in June 1999, and the Federal funding 
     commitment has been fulfilled. On May 14, 1993, an FFGA was 
     issued to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation 
     Authority (LACMTA) for the third construction phase, MOS 3. 
     MOS 3 was defined under ISTEA (section 3034) to include three 
     segments: the North Hollywood segment, a 6.3-mile, 3-station 
     subway extension of the Hollywood branch of MOS 2 to North 
     Hollywood through the Santa Monica mountains; the Mid-City 
     segment, a 2.3-mile, 2-station western extension of the 
     Wilshire Boulevard branch; and an undefined segment of the 
     Eastside project, to the east from the existing Red Line 
     terminus at Union Station. LACMTA later defined this eastern 
     segment as a 3.7-mile, 4-station extension under the Los 
     Angeles River to First and Leona in East Los Angeles. On 
     December 28, 1994, the FFGA for MOS 3 was amended to include 
     this definition of the eastern segment, bringing the total 
     commitment of Federal New Starts funds for MOS 3 to 
     $1,416,490,000. In January 1997, FTA requested that LACMTA 
     submit a recovery plan to demonstrate its ability to complete 
     MOS 2 and MOS 3, while maintaining and operating the existing 
     bus system. On January 14, 1998, the LACMTA Board of 
     Directors voted to suspend and demobilize construction on all 
     rail projects other than MOS 2 and the MOS 3 North Hollywood 
     Extension. The MTA submitted a recovery plan to FTA on May 
     15, 1998, which was approved by FTA on July 2, 1998. In 1998, 
     LACMTA undertook a Regional Transportation Alternatives 
     Analysis (RTAA) to analyze and evaluate feasible alternatives 
     for the Eastside and Mid-City corridors. The RTAA addressed 
     system investment priorities, allocation of resources to 
     operate existing transit services at a reliable standard, 
     assessment and management of financial risk, countywide bus 
     service expansion, and a process for finalizing corridor 
     investments. On November 9, 1998, the LACMTA Board reviewed 
     the RTAA and directed staff to reprogram resources previously 
     allocated to the Eastside and Mid-City Extensions to the 
     implementation of RTAA recommendations, including the LACMTA 
     Accelerated Bus Procurement Plan. LACMTA continued to study 
     transit investment options for the Eastside and Mid-City 
     corridors. In October 2000, FTA approved entry into 
     preliminary engineering for a 5.9-mile, 8-station light rail 
     line in the Eastside Corridor between downtown Los Angeles 
     and East Los Angeles. The Mid-City corridor is still 
     undergoing alternatives analysis. FTA will consider the prior 
     Federal commitment under the MOS 3 FFGA as an ``other 
     factor'' for rating and evaluation purposes for these 
     projects, as long as the identified projects otherwise meet 
     the requirements of the New Starts program. On June 9, 1997, 
     FTA and LACMTA negotiated a revised FFGA covering the North 
     Hollywood segment (Phase 1-A) of MOS 3, which opened in June 
     2000. The total capital cost of the North Hollywood project 
     is estimated at $1,310,820,000 of which the revised FFGA 
     commits $681,040,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds. 
     Through fiscal year 2002, a total of $640,550,000 has been 
     appropriated for the North Hollywood segment of MOS 3. This 
     project has been authorized in TEA21. The Committee has 
     recommended $40,490,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Maryland, MARC commuter rail improvement projects.--The 
     Maryland Mass Transit Administration is proposing three 
     projects for the Maryland Commuter Rail (MARC) system serving 
     the Baltimore, MD and Washington, DC metropolitan areas. 
     These projects are (1) Mid-Day Storage Facility, (2) Penn-
     Camden Connection, and (3) Silver Spring Intermodal Transit 
     Center. The proposed Mid-Day Storage Facility would be used 
     for daytime equipment layover, minor repair, daily servicing 
     and inspections of commuter rail train sets within the Amtrak 
     Yard at Washington, DC's Union Station. Platforms that are 
     currently used to store these trains at Union Station will no 
     longer be available following the introduction of high-speed 
     Amtrak service, and the new facility will avoid the operating 
     cost of sending trains back to Baltimore for mid-day storage. 
     MTA will lease the 5-acre site owned by Amtrak. Estimated 
     capital costs for the Mid-Day Storage Facility project totals 
     $26,600,000. The Penn-Camden Connection is a 6-mile 
     connection between the MARC Camden Line and MARC Penn Line/
     Amtrak Northeast Corridor in southwest Baltimore. The 
     connection of these two commuter rail lines is designed to 
     achieve many benefits: the opportunity to remove trains from 
     the congested Camden line for reverse peak movements; access 
     to the planned MARC Maintenance Facility to be located along 
     the connection; and, increased operating flexibility on both 
     commuter rail lines, allowing redirection of MARC service 
     during periods of CSX freight operations. Estimated capital 
     costs for the Penn-Camden Connection project totals 
     $33,300,000. The proposed Silver Spring Intermodal Transit 
     Center, located in suburban Washington, DC, will construct an 
     intermodal transit facility that relocates the Silver Spring 
     MARC Station to the Silver Spring Metrorail station. The 
     transit center would allow convenient passenger transfers 
     between several modes of travel, including commuter rail, 
     heavy rail, commuter and local bus service, taxi, bicycle, 
     auto, and walking. The center will also accommodate the 
     proposed Georgetown Branch Trolley to operate between Silver 
     Spring and Bethesda. Located in the Silver Spring, MD central 
     business district, a major transit hub for lower Montgomery 
     County, the intermodal transit center will more efficiently 
     meet existing and future transit needs of this area. 
     Estimated capital costs for the Silver Spring Intermodal 
     Transit Center project totals $33,300,000. Section 3030(g)(2) 
     of TEA21 authorizes these projects as part of the Frederick 
     extension, and will permit service improvements necessary to 
     take full advantage of that extension. The proposed share of 
     Federal funding from the section 5309 New Starts program is 
     less than $25,000,000 for each of the individual 
     improvements, which renders them exempt from evaluation. The 
     Committee has recommended $12,000,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Memphis, Tennessee Medical Center Extension project.--The 
     Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA), in cooperation with 
     the City of Memphis, is proposing to build a 2-mile light 
     rail extension to the Main Street Trolley/Riverfront Loop 
     village rail system. The extension would expand service from 
     the central business district (CBD) east to the Medical 
     Center area. The line would operate on city streets in mixed 
     traffic and would connect with the Main Street Trolley, 
     sharing a lane with automobile traffic on Madison Avenue 
     between Main Street and Cleveland Street. Six new stations 
     would be located along the route. The line will be designed 
     to accommodate light rail vehicles, but vintage rail cars 
     would be used until a proposed regional LRT line is 
     implemented and a fleet of modern LRT vehicles is acquired. 
     The total capital cost of this project is estimated at 
     $74,580,000. This project would be the last segment of the 
     downtown rail circulation system as well as the first segment

[[Page 983]]

     of a regional light rail line. This project is included in 
     the City of Memphis' Capital Improvement Program, the Memphis 
     MPO Transportation Improvement Program, and the State 
     Transportation Improvement Program. A Major Investment Study/
     Environmental Assessment was completed in May 1997, 
     fulfilling the statutory requirement for an alternatives 
     analysis. FTA approved this project for entry into final 
     design in May 2000. The Memphis Corridor was authorized for 
     final design and construction by section 3030(a)(43) of 
     TEA21. On December 12, 2000 FTA issued an FFGA committing a 
     total of $59,670,000 in section 5309 new start funds to the 
     Medical Center Extension. A total of $35,310,000 has been 
     appropriated for this project through fiscal year 2002. The 
     Committee has recommended $15,610,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Twin Cities/Hiawatha Corridor LRT and Northstar Corridor 
     Projects.--Metro Transit and the Metropolitan Council of 
     Minneapolis (the local metropolitan planning organization), 
     in cooperation with the Minnesota Department of 
     Transportation (MnDOT), Hennepin County, and the Metropolitan 
     Airports Commission (MAC), are constructing an 11.6-mile, 17-
     station light rail line linking downtown Minneapolis, the 
     Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, and the Mall of 
     America in Bloomington. The line would operate along the 
     corridor following Hiawatha Avenue and Trunk Highway 55. The 
     line begins in the central business district and travels 
     south on the existing transit mall along 5th Street, follows 
     the former Soo Line Railroad from the Metrodome to Franklin 
     Avenue, and then runs parallel with Hiawatha Avenue towards 
     the airport. The line will tunnel under the runways and 
     taxiways for 1.8 miles, with 1 station, emerge on the west 
     side of the airport, and continue south to the vicinity of 
     the Mall of America in Bloomington. The project is expected 
     to serve 24,800 average weekday boardings by the year 2020; 
     19,300 average weekday boardings are projected in the opening 
     year. Revenue service is scheduled to commence in December 
     2004. The total capital cost of the Hiawatha Corridor LRT is 
     estimated at $675,400,000. Section 3030(a)(91) of TEA21 
     authorizes the ``Twin Cities--Transitway Corridors'' for 
     final design and construction. In January 2001, FTA issued an 
     FFGA that commits a total of $334,300,000 in section 5309 New 
     Starts funds to the Hiawatha Corridor LRT. Of this amount, 
     $168,350,000 has been provided through fiscal year 2002. The 
     Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) is currently 
     undertaking preliminary engineering on a proposal to design 
     and construct an 82-mile commuter rail line within the 
     Northstar Corridor that extends from downtown Minneapolis 
     northwest to Rice, Minnesota. The Northstar Corridor project 
     also includes the construction of a 1,750-foot light rail 
     transit extension of the Hiawatha Corridor LRT project 
     currently under construction. The proposed commuter rail 
     project would serve one of the fast growing regions of the 
     State. Ridership on the proposed commuter rail line is 
     expected to be 10,800 average weekday boardings, including 
     5,400 daily new riders. Based on 1990 census data, the MNDOT 
     estimates that there are approximately 1,100 low-income 
     households within a one-half mile radius of the proposed 11 
     stations. In the forecast year 2020, MNDOT estimates that the 
     proposed commuter rail would yield approximately 0.4 million 
     hours of travel-time savings. In addition, The proposed 
     project would serve approximately 35,700 jobs located within 
     a one-half mile radius of the proposed station areas, 
     encompassing the Minneapolis, St. Cloud and Rice central 
     business districts. During the Spring 2002 legislative 
     session, the Minnesota State legislature was not able to 
     reach a consensus on the provision of the State's share of 
     the project's total estimated capital cost. The State was to 
     provide approximately $120,000,000. Total capital costs for 
     this project are estimated to be $294,000,000 including 
     $147,000,000 in requested section 5309 New Starts funding. 
     Congress provided $9,900,000 to this project in fiscal year 
     2002. This project has been authorized in TEA21. The 
     Committee has recommended $48,000,000 in New Starts funding 
     for the Hiawatha Corridor LRT and the Northstar Corridor 
     Projects in fiscal year 2003.
       Nashua, New Hampshire-Lowell, Massachusetts, commuter rail 
     project.--The New Hampshire Department of Transportation is 
     planning on constructing an 11-mile commuter rail extension 
     project. The rail line would connect Lowell, Massachusetts 
     and Nashua, New Hampshire. The project includes the 
     rehabilitation of track and appurtenances, construction of 
     new track where necessary, as well as construction of a park-
     and-ride lot with a boarding platform. The new service 
     extension will provide an alternative to a highly congested 
     highway corridor. This project received funding through the 
     TEA21 authorization as well as through other appropriations. 
     Through fiscal year 2002, the Committee has appropriated 
     $5,930,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. The Committee 
     has recommended $500,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Nashville, Tennessee, regional commuter rail project.--
     Nashville's Regional Transportation Authority, the 
     Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the Metropolitan 
     Transit Authority have completed the preliminary engineering 
     and environmental studies. The project is currently in final 
     design. This project has been authorized in TEA21. Through 
     fiscal year 2002, $11,870,000 has been appropriated for this 
     project. The Committee has recommended $3,500,000 in New 
     Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       New Jersey/Hudson-Bergen light rail transit project (MOS-
     1).--The New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) is 
     constructing a 9.6-mile, Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) of an 
     eventual 20.1-mile at-grade Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit 
     System (HBLRTS) that will extend from the Vince Lombardi 
     park-and-ride lot in Bergen County to West Fifth Street in 
     Bayonne in Hudson County, New Jersey. HBLRTS MOS-1 will 
     connect the Hoboken Terminal to 34th Street in Bayonne and 
     West Side Avenue in Jersey City. The core of the completed 
     system will serve the high-density commercial centers in 
     Jersey City and Hoboken, and provide connections with NJ 
     Transit commuter rail service, PATH trains to Newark and 
     Manhattan, and the Port Imperial ferry from Weehauken to 
     Manhattan. This minimum operable segment (MOS) is being 
     constructed under a turnkey contract to design, build, 
     operate, and maintain the system, which was awarded in 
     October 1996. Total costs are expected to be $992,140,000 for 
     MOS-1; construction began in December 1996. In August 1996, 
     FTA and NJ TRANSIT executed a FFGA, committing $604,090,000 
     in section 5309 New Starts funding for HBLRTS MOS-1. NJ 
     TRANSIT is currently providing initial revenue service on 
     HBLRTS MOS-1 from Pavonia-Newport to West Side Avenue and 
     East 34th Street. Construction on HBLRTS MOS-1 is 
     approximately 85 percent complete. Full revenue service is 
     scheduled to commence in September 2002. Through fiscal year 
     2002, a total of $584,890,000 has been appropriated for this 
     project. This project has been authorized in TEA21. The 
     Committee has recommended $19,200,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       New Jersey/Hudson-Bergen light rail transit project (MOS-
     2).--The second Minimum Operable Segment (MOS-2) of the NJ 
     Transit Hudson-Bergen LRT system is a 5.1-mile, 7-station 
     segment running north from Hoboken Terminal to the Tonnelle 
     Avenue park-and-ride lot in North Bergen, and south to 22nd 
     Street in Bayonne. The Hudson-Bergen MOS-2 line will serve an 
     area with one of the highest residential densities in the 
     region, and the downtown Jersey City area contains the 
     largest concentration of office development in Hudson County. 
     By providing connections to ferry and commuter rail service, 
     the line will also serve the Manhattan central business 
     district. MOS-2 is scheduled for completion in 2005 and is 
     anticipated to carry 34,900 average weekday boardings in 
     2010. Total costs for MOS-2 are estimated at $1,215,400,000. 
     FTA issued an FFGA for this project on October 31, 2000, 
     committing a total of $500,000,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
     funds. The MOS-2 project does not require funding from the 
     section 5309 New Starts program until fiscal year 2003; the 
     issuance of the FFGA at this point provided NJ Transit with 
     the authority to borrow funds to begin construction while the 
     MOS-1 is being completed, under the same turnkey contract. 
     This permits the entire Hudson-Bergen project to be 
     constructed at a lower cost by avoiding the significant costs 
     associated with stopping and then restarting a major 
     construction project. No prior year funding has been 
     appropriated for MOS-2 from the section 5309 New Starts 
     program. This project has been authorized in TEA21. The 
     Committee has recommended $50,000,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Newark, New Jersey--Newark Rail Link (MOS-1) Project.--The 
     New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) is constructing a 
     1-mile, 5-station initial Minimum Operable Segment (MOS-1) of 
     a proposed 8.8-mile, 16-station light rail transit (LRT) 
     system between Newark and downtown Elizabeth, New Jersey. 
     MOS-1) will function as an extension of the existing 4.3-mile 
     Newark City Subway light rail line, running from Board Street 
     in Newark to Newark's Penn Station. In August 2000, FTA and 
     NJ TRANSIT executed a FFGA committing $141,950,000 in section 
     5309 New Starts funds. NJ transit is preparing a Supplemental 
     Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) to analyze the 
     effects of an alignment modification on the segment contained 
     within the City of Elizabeth (NERL MOS-3) to support 
     extensive commercial and retail development that has been 
     initiated since the completion of the original 1997 DEIS for 
     the full 8.8-mile NERL project. The total cost of the MOS-1 
     segment is estimated at $207,700,000 (escalated dollars). 
     Section 3030(a)(57) of TEA21 authorized the New Jersey Urban 
     Core Project, which consists of eight separate elements 
     including the Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link, for final design 
     and construction. On August 2, 2000 FTA issued an FFGA 
     committing a total of $141,950,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
     funds to the Newark Rail Link MOS 1 project. Congress has 
     appropriated a total of $59,390,000 for this project. The 
     Committee has recommended $60,000,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       New Orleans, Louisiana, Canal Streetcar project.--The New 
     Orleans Regional Transit

[[Page 984]]

     Authority (RTA) is developing a 5.5-mile streetcar project in 
     the downtown area, along the median of Canal Street. The 
     Canal Streetcar spine will extend from the Canal Ferry at the 
     Mississippi River in the central business district, through 
     the Mid-City neighborhood to Carrollton Avenue, where one 
     branch will continue on Canal Street to the Cemeteries and 
     another will follow Carrollton Avenue to City Park/Beauregard 
     Circle. The corridor is located in an existing, built-up area 
     that was originally developed in the streetcar era. Much of 
     the corridor lies within the central business district and 
     historic areas. The central business district includes a 
     high-density mix of office, retail, hotels and leisure 
     attractions. The total capital cost of this project is 
     estimated at $161,300,000, of which RTA is seeking 
     $129,050,000 (80 percent) in section 5309 New Starts funding 
     as recommended by FTA. Final design is essentially complete, 
     contracts for vehicle assembly have been awarded, and 
     construction contracts are pending award. FTA awaits 
     completion of the congressional review of the proposed FFGA. 
     Section 3030(a)(51) of TEA21 authorizes the New Orleans Canal 
     Streetcar Project for final design and construction. Through 
     fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated a total of 
     $70,030,000 for this project. The Committee has recommended 
     $30,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Pawtucket, Rhode Island, commuter rail and maintenance 
     facility project.--The existing Massachusetts Bay Transit 
     Authority layover/storage yard at East Junction, located in 
     the heavily residential area in Attleboro, needs to be 
     relocated to a 9-acre parcel located in the northwest 
     quadrant of Interstate 95 and Smithfield Avenue in Pawtucket. 
     A six-track yard with light servicing capabilities will be 
     constructed initially. The yard will be designed to 
     accommodate eight tracks and an electrified maintenance 
     facility in the future. The Federal share of the project is 
     $14,700,000 (50 percent), consisting of $10,000,000 in 
     section 5309 New Starts funding and $4,700,000 in Fixed 
     Guideway Modernization funding, the rest of the project is 
     being funded through the Rhode Island Department of 
     Transportation (RIDOT) and the Massachusetts Bay Transit 
     Authority. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has 
     appropriated $5,450,000 in section 5309 in the FTA New Start 
     funds. The Committee has recommended $4,500,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Schuylkill Valley Metro 
     Project.--The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation 
     Authority (SEPTA) and the Berks Area Reading Transportation 
     Authority (BARTA) propose to develop the Schuylkill Valley 
     Metro Rail project. The proposed project extends 
     approximately 74 miles from Philadelphia to Reading and 
     parallels the following major congested roadways: Schuylkill 
     Expressway (Interstate 76), US 422 Expressway and US Route 
     202. The corridor includes the smaller cities of Norristown, 
     Pottstown and Phoenixville. The corridor also includes 
     suburban centers of King of Prussia and Great Valley, as well 
     as regional activity centers and attractions including Center 
     City Philadelphia, Art Museum, Philadelphia Zoo, King of 
     Prussia Malls, Valley Forge National Park and Reading 
     outlets. The corridor encompasses three transit authorities: 
     SEPTA, BARTA and Pottstown Urban Transit (PUT) and two 
     metropolitan planning regions: Delaware Valley and Berks 
     County. Commuter rail service currently operates in the 
     eastern portion of the corridor with rail freight service 
     operations in the western portion of the corridor. SEPTA and 
     BARTA have selected a locally preferred alternative (LPA) 
     that would employ rail vehicles suitable for operation on 
     mixed-use (passenger or freight) track, capable of one-man 
     operation and with 15 and 30-minute headways in the peak and 
     off peak, respectively. Total capital cost for the project is 
     estimated at $1,831,700,000. The DEIS was published in 
     December 2001. FTA approved entry into preliminary 
     engineering in January 2002. Through fiscal year 2002, 
     Congress has provided $25,720,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
     funds for the proposed project. The Committee has recommended 
     $15,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, North Shore Connector light rail 
     transit project.--The Port Authority of Allegheny County 
     (PAAC) proposes to construct a 1.6-mile light rail transit 
     system extension connecting the Golden Triangle and the North 
     Shore wholly within downtown Pittsburgh. The project would 
     extend the existing LRT service from the Gateway center LRT 
     station and the Convention Center. The North Shore Connector 
     LRT project involves the construction of four new stations 
     and modifications of the Gateway Center and Steel Plaza 
     stations, and the acquisition of 10 new light rail vehicles. 
     FTA approval to initiate preliminary engineering was granted 
     in January 2001. Project capital costs are estimated at 
     $389,900,000 (escalated); revenue service start-up is planned 
     in 2006. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated 
     $23,670,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds for this effort. 
     The Committee has recommended $7,025,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Stage II LRT Reconstruction 
     project.--The Port Authority of Allegheny County (``Port 
     Authority'') is reconstructing Pittsburgh's old 25-mile 
     trolley lines to modern light rail standards. The 
     reconstruction is taking place in two stages. The Stage I 
     Light Rail Transit (LRT) project, undertaken in the 1980s, 
     included reconstruction of the first segment and construction 
     of Pittsburgh's first subway. Ground was broken on the Stage 
     I LRT project in December 1980, and the reconstruction of 
     this segment was completed in 1987. The Stage II LRT project 
     includes reconstruction of the remaining 12 miles of the 
     system, which consists of the Overbrook, Library and Drake 
     trolley lines, to modern LRT standards. Single-track segments 
     will be double-tracked, the Overbook and Drake lines (which 
     are currently closed) will be reopened, and 28 new light rail 
     vehicles are being purchased. In order to prioritize program 
     needs against financing requirements, Port Authority 
     reconfigured its rail improvement program in 1999. As a 
     result, the Stage II LRT project will itself be undertaken in 
     segments. The revised Stage II LRT Priority Program includes 
     reconstruction of 10.7 miles on both the Overbrook Line and a 
     portion of the Library Line, construction of 2,400 park-and-
     ride spaces, and the purchase of 28 light rail vehicles. The 
     total capital cost of the Stage II Priority Program is 
     estimated at $386,460,000. The remaining portions of the 
     original Stage II LRT project will be undertaken as local 
     funding becomes available. Section 3030(a)(98) authorizes the 
     ``Pittsburgh--Stage II Light Rail'' project for final design 
     and construction. In January 2001, FTA issued an FFGA for 
     this project that would commit a total of $100,200,000 in 
     section 5309 New Starts funding. Through fiscal year 2002, a 
     total of $41,530,000 has been appropriated in New Starts 
     funds for this project, and an additional $96,500,000 has 
     been appropriated in section 5309 Fixed Guideway 
     Modernization funds. The Committee has recommended 
     $26,250,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Portland, Oregon Interstate MAX LRT Extension project.--The 
     Tri-County Metropolitan Transit District of Oregon (Tri-Met) 
     is constructing a 5.8-mile, 10-station extension of the 
     Metropolitan Area Express (``MAX'') light rail system, which 
     will connect Portland's central business district with the 
     regional Exposition Center in north Portland. Riders will be 
     able to transfer between the Interstate MAX extension and the 
     existing 33-mile East/West MAX line at the Rose Quarter 
     station. This line will complement regional land use plans by 
     connecting established residential, commercial, entertainment 
     and other major activity centers, and will provide a key 
     transportation link in the region's welfare-to-work programs. 
     The total cost of the Interstate MAX project is estimated at 
     $350,000,000. Tri-Met estimates that the Interstate MAX 
     extension will serve 18,100 average weekday boardings and 
     8,400 daily new riders by 2020. On September 20, 2000, FTA 
     and Tri-Met entered into an FFGA that commits a total of 
     $257,500,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds to the 
     Interstate MAX project. This does not include funding 
     appropriated in prior years that were allocated to Portland 
     Metro for the 12-mile South-North light rail line originally 
     proposed for this corridor. Through fiscal year 2002, the 
     Committee appropriated $76,750,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
     funds for the Interstate MAX light rail extension. This 
     figure includes $70,000,000 in prior years' section 5309 New 
     Starts funds that are not included in the FFGA commitment. 
     The Committee has recommended $70,000,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Puget Sound, Washington, Sounder Commuter Rail project.--
     Sound Transit, the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit 
     Authority, is implementing commuter rail service along the 
     82-mile existing rail corridor between Lakewood and Everett, 
     Washington. When the Sound Move enabling legislation is fully 
     implemented, Sounder will serve 13 stations along the 
     corridor, connecting commuters with local and regional bus 
     service, the Washington State ferry system, Amtrak, the 
     Central Link light rail system, and Tacoma Link. Currently, 
     Sounder commuter rail is providing weekday service during 
     peak hours at seven stations between downtown Tacoma and 
     Seattle. Once in full operation, 18 trains will serve the 
     Lakewood-Tacoma-Seattle Sounder segment, and 12 trains will 
     serve the Everett-Seattle segment. By 2020, Sounder is 
     estimated to carry 18,800 daily riders. To date, $79,320,000 
     has been appropriated for the 82-mile corridor. The Committee 
     has recommended $30,000,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Raleigh, North Carolina, triangle transit project.--The 
     Phase I Regional Rail project is the first proposed segment 
     of a three-phased regional transit plan for linking the three 
     counties--Wake, Durham, and Orange--in the Triangle Region of 
     North Carolina. In Phase I, the Triangle Transit Authority 
     (TTA) intends to initiate regional rail service from Durham 
     to downtown Raleigh and from downtown Raleigh to North 
     Raleigh. TTA proposes to use Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) rail 
     vehicles to serve the 16 stations proposed for the Phase I of 
     the project. TTA has proposed that the Phase I Regional Rail 
     Project will use the existing North Carolina Railroad and CSX 
     rail corridors to connect

[[Page 985]]

     Duke University, downtown Durham, Research Triangle Park, RDU 
     Airport, Morrisville, Cary, North Carolina State University, 
     downtown Raleigh, and North Raleigh. The proposed project is 
     estimated to serve 31,700 average weekday boardings by the 
     year 2025. The most recent capital cost estimate for Phase I 
     is $754,700,000 (escalated dollars). The cost estimate 
     includes final design, acquisition of right-of-way (ROW) and 
     rail vehicles, station construction, park and ride lots, and 
     construction of storage and maintenance facilities. The 
     corridor proposed to be used by TTA for the project is shared 
     among a number of railroads; thus, TTA is considering a 
     number of track realignments to accommodate proposed inter-
     city and high-speed rail improvements. This project has been 
     authorized in TEA21. Through fiscal year 2002, $50,550,000 
     has been appropriated for this project. The Committee has 
     recommended $11,000,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       St. Louis, Missouri, Metrolink St. Clair Extension 
     project.--The Bi-State Development Agency (Bi-State) is 
     developing a 26-mile extension of the Metrolink light rail 
     line from downtown East St. Louis, Illinois to the Mid-
     America Airport in St. Clair County. A 17.4-mile Minimum 
     Operable Segment (MOS), extending from the current Metrolink 
     terminal in downtown East St. Louis to Belleville Area 
     College (now known as Southwest Illinois College), began 
     revenue service in May 2001. This segment consists of 8 
     stations, 7 park-and-ride lots, 20 new light rail vehicles, 
     and a new maintenance facility in East St. Louis. The route 
     makes extensive use of abandoned railroad rights-of-way. 
     Right-of-way and real estate acquisition is proceeding as 
     scheduled, and revenue service is scheduled to begin in 2001. 
     The total capital cost of the St. Clair MOS is estimated at 
     $339,200,000. On October 17, 1996, FTA and Bi-State entered 
     into an FFGA that commits a total of $243,930,000 in section 
     5309 New Starts funding to complete the 17.4-mile MOS to 
     Southwest Illinois College, and provides for extending the 
     system to Mid-America Airport should funding become available 
     at a later date. The funding committed to the MOS does not 
     include $8,490,000 in Federal New Starts funding provided 
     prior to fiscal year 1996, which brings total Federal funding 
     for this project to $252,410,000 under the New Starts 
     program. Through fiscal year 2002, a total of $240,560,000 
     has been appropriated for this project. The Committee has 
     recommended $3,370,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
     in fiscal year 2003.
       Salt Lake City, Utah, CBD to University LRT project.--The 
     Utah Transit Authority (UTA) is implementing a 2.5-mile, 4-
     station light rail line in eastern Salt Lake City, from the 
     downtown area to Rice-Eccles Stadium on the University of 
     Utah campus. The line would connect with the existing North/
     South line at Main Street and travel east along 400 South and 
     500 South to the stadium. Light rail vehicles would operate 
     on city streets and property owned by Salt Lake City, the 
     Utah Department of Transportation, and the University. The 
     line is intended to significantly improve access to jobs, 
     educational opportunities, health care, and housing 
     throughout the 400 South corridor. The CBD to University line 
     is scaled back from the originally proposed 10.9-mile West/
     East line from the airport to the university. Total capital 
     costs are estimated at $118,500,000. FTA issued an FFGA for 
     the CBD to University LRT project on August 17, 2000, 
     committing a total of $84,600,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
     funds. This does not include $4,960,000 appropriated for the 
     project in prior years, but not included in the FFGA scope. 
     Through fiscal year 2002, $20,800,000 in section 5309 New 
     Starts funds has been appropriated for this project. The 
     Committee has recommended $68,760,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Salt Lake City, Utah, North-South LRT.--The Utah Transit 
     Authority (UTA) has completed construction of a 15-mile light 
     rail transit (LRT) line from downtown Salt Lake City to the 
     southern suburbs. The line opened for regular weekday service 
     on December 6, 1999. The system operates on city streets 
     downtown for 2 miles and then follows a lightly-used railroad 
     alignment owned by UTA to the suburban community of Sandy for 
     13 miles. This project is one component of the Interstate 15 
     corridor improvement initiative, which includes 
     reconstruction of a parallel segment of Interstate 15. Though 
     original ridership projections for the South LRT system 
     estimated daily ridership at 14,000 daily passengers in 2000 
     and 23,000 passengers by 2010, current ridership averages 
     19,000 weekday passengers. Total capital costs for this 
     project were $312,490,000. For the 2002 Winter Olympic and 
     Paralympic Games, this project connected major hotels and 
     local residential areas with the Olympic venues for figure 
     skating, medal rounds for ice hockey, and the International 
     Broadcast Center, and connects with bus service to venues for 
     speed skating, curling, and the Nordic alpine events. On 
     August 2, 1995, FTA issued an FFGA for this project that 
     committed a total of $237,390,000 in Federal New Starts 
     funding. This does not include $6,600,000 in prior year funds 
     that were provided before the FFGA was issued, which brings 
     the total amount of section 5309 New Starts funding to 
     $243,990,000. A total of $236,678,000 has been appropriated 
     through fiscal year 2002. The Committee has recommended 
     $720,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Salt Lake City, Utah, University Medical Center LRT 
     extension project.--The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) provides 
     light rail service on two lines: the has completed 
     construction of a 15-mile North-South light rail transit 
     (LRT) line from Sandy City to downtown Salt Lake City to the 
     southern suburbs. The line opened for regular weekday service 
     on December 6, 1999. The system operates on city streets 
     downtown (2 miles) and then follows a lightly used railroad 
     alignment owned by UTA to the suburban community of Sandy (13 
     miles). The University light rail line operates on a 2.5-mile 
     alignment from downtown Salt Lake City to Rice-Eccles stadium 
     located at the western edge of the University of Utah campus. 
     The University Medical Center and associated facilities 
     constitute one of Utah's largest traffic generation points. 
     Significant ridership will be served by this project, which 
     will add 3 stations and 1.5 miles of track to the existing 
     UTA LRT system, extending from Rice-Eccles stadium to the 
     University Medical Center. Revenue operation date is 
     projected for December 2004. FTA and UTA signed an FFGA in 
     May 2002 for $53,600,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds. 
     The Committee has recommended $10,000,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Salt Lake City, Utah, Salt Lake City-Ogden-Provo Commuter 
     Rail project.--The Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) and 
     the Moutainlands Association of Governments (MAG), the two 
     metropolitan planning organizations that oversee 
     transportation planning for more than 85 percent of the State 
     of Utah's population, along with the Utah Transit Authority 
     and the Utah Department of Transportation, have completed an 
     Inter-Regional Corridor Alternatives Analysis study to 
     evaluate transportation improvements in a 120-mile corridor 
     from Brigham City to Payson. The corridor encompasses the 
     Ogden, Salt Lake City and Provo/Orem urbanized areas. The 
     study evaluates highway and transit alternatives in the 
     corridor. WFRC and MAG completed a Long-Range Transit 
     Analysis in 1998, identifying commuter rail as an effective 
     means of serving the transportation demands in the corridor 
     between Brigham City and Payson. A commuter rail line, with 
     12 stations, has been identified and evaluated and 
     subsequently included in the region's Long Range 
     Transportation Plan. Discussions are underway with the Union-
     Pacific Railroad concerning the acquisition of railroad 
     right-of-way to implement commuter rail, light rail or other 
     transportation improvements. Total capital costs are 
     estimated at $587,000,000, with $272,000,000 for Ogden to 
     Salt Lake City and $315,000,000 for Salt Lake City to Provo. 
     Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated 
     $3,900,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds for this effort. 
     The Committee has recommended $6,000,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       San Diego, California, Oceanside-Escondido Rail Corridor 
     project.--The North County Transit District (NCTD) in 
     northern San Diego County, California is planning to convert 
     an existing 22-mile freight railroad corridor between 
     Oceanside and Escondido into a rail transit line. The line 
     would run east from the City of Oceanside through the cities 
     of Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated portions of San 
     Diego County, to the City of Escondido, using diesel multiple 
     unit (DMU) rail vehicles. The alignment also includes 1.7 
     miles of new right-of-way to serve the campus of California 
     State University San Marcos (CSUSM). The line is located 
     along the State Route 78 corridor, the principal east-west 
     corridor in the county. The complete 23.7-mile system will 
     serve 15 stations, 4 of which would be located at existing 
     transit centers. Passenger rail service would have exclusive 
     use of the rail line during pre-defined hours of operation. 
     An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Oceanside-
     Escondido project was certified in 1990, and a separate EIR 
     for the CSUSM alignment was certified in 1991. A major 
     investment study was not required under the procedures in 
     effect at the time, based on concurrence from FTA, FHWA, the 
     San Diego Association of Governments, Caltrans, the City of 
     San Marcos, and NCTD. Advance planning was completed in 
     December 1995, and the Environmental Assessment/Supplemental 
     Environmental Impact Report was completed in early 1997. FTA 
     approved NCTD's request to enter final design in February 
     2000. The total capital cost for this project is estimated at 
     $332,300,000, of which NCTD is seeking $152,100,000 in 
     section 5309 New Starts funds. Ridership is estimated at 
     15,100 average weekday boardings in 2015, of which 8,600 
     would be daily new riders. Revenue operations are scheduled 
     to begin in January 2004. This project will help to alleviate 
     the heavy congestion of northern San Diego County along the 
     Route 78 corridor. The project will serve large intermodal 
     transit centers in both Oceanside and Escondido, and the 
     corridor between contains a dispersed mix of commercial, 
     industrial, and single-and multiple-family residential 
     developments. This project is rated ``medium-high'' for both 
     finance and justification,

[[Page 986]]

     earning an overall rating of ``highly recommended.'' Section 
     3030(a)(77) of TEA21 authorized this project for final design 
     and construction. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has 
     appropriated $24,280,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds for 
     this project. FTA anticipates that NCTD will be ready for an 
     FFGA for this project by fall fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
     has recommended $12,200,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       San Diego, California, Mission Valley East LRT Extension 
     project.--The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) 
     is constructing a 5.9-mile, 4-station light rail extension of 
     its existing Blue Line, from east of Interstate 15 to the 
     City of La Mesa, where it will connect to the existing Orange 
     Line near Baltimore Drive. The Mission Valley East line will 
     serve four new and two existing stations, and would include 
     elevated, at-grade, and tunnel portions. The project includes 
     two park and ride lots and a new access road between Waring 
     Road and the Grantville Station. The corridor runs parallel 
     to Interstate 8 in eastern San Diego and La Mesa, and is 
     characterized by a mix of low- to moderate-density 
     industrial, residential, and commercial uses as well as by 
     several major activity centers such as San Diego State 
     University, the Grossmont regional shopping center, Kaiser 
     Hospital, the Alvarado Medical Center, and the Grantville 
     employment area. Over 24,000 jobs and nearly 10,000 
     residences are located within walking distance of the 
     proposed stations, and existing zoning is generally 
     supportive of transit. Total capital costs are estimated at 
     $431,000,000. On June 22, 2000, FTA issued an FFGA committing 
     a total of $329,960,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding to 
     this project. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has 
     appropriated $112,720,000 for this project. The Committee has 
     recommended $65,000,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       San Francisco, California, BART Extension to SFO Airport 
     project.--Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) in San Francisco and 
     the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) are 
     constructing an 8.7-mile, 4-station extension of the BART 
     rapid transit system to serve San Francisco International 
     Airport (SFO). The project consists of a 7.5-mile mainline 
     extension from the existing BART station at Colma, through 
     Colma, south San Francisco, and San Bruno, terminating at the 
     Millbrae Avenue BART/CalTrain Station. An additional 1.2-mile 
     spur from the main line north of Millbrae will take BART 
     trains directly into the airport, to a station adjoining the 
     new International Terminal. The San Francisco International 
     Airport is a major partner in this project. All structures 
     and facilities to be constructed on airport property and 
     installation of related equipment are being funded, designed 
     and constructed for BART by the airport. This project is also 
     part of the FTA Turnkey Demonstration Program to determine if 
     the design/build approach will reduce implementation time and 
     cost. On July 24, 1997, the first contract was awarded for 
     site preparation and utility relocation associated with this 
     project. Bids for the main contract for construction of the 
     line, trackwork and related systems were opened on November 
     25, 1997. On June 30, 1997, FTA entered into an FFGA for the 
     BART SFO extension, committing a total of $750,000,000 in 
     Federal New Starts funds to the project; total capital costs 
     at that time were estimated at $1,054,000,000. The total cost 
     has since increased to an estimated $1,510,200,000; a surge 
     in local construction activity has resulted in higher than 
     estimated costs for construction of this project. Per the 
     terms of the FFGA, any cost increases are the responsibility 
     of the local project sponsors. Thus, the original Federal 
     commitment is unchanged at $750,000,000. Through fiscal year 
     2002, a total of $317,370,000 has been appropriated for this 
     project. This project has been authorized in TEA21. The 
     Committee has recommended $100,000,000 in New Starts funding 
     for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       San Juan/Tren Urbano.--The Puerto Rico Department of 
     Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) is constructing a 
     10.7-mile, 16-station rapid rail line between Bayamon Centro 
     and the Sagrado Corazon area of Santurce in the San Juan 
     metropolitan area. The system consists of a double-track line 
     operating over at-grade and elevated rights-of-way with a 
     short below-grade segment, and a maintenance facility. When 
     complete, this system is expected to carry 113,300 riders per 
     day by 2010. This project has been selected as one of FTA's 
     turnkey demonstration projects, which incorporates contracts 
     to design, build, operate, and maintain the system. During 
     1996 and 1997, seven contracts were awarded under the turnkey 
     procurement. The total capital cost of this project is now 
     estimated at $1,653,600,000. On March 13, 1996, FTA entered 
     into an FFGA committing $307,410,000 in section 5309 New 
     Starts funds to this project, out of a total project cost of 
     $1,250,000,000. This did not include $4,960,000 in Federal 
     New Starts funding provided prior to fiscal year 1996, which 
     brings total Federal New Starts funding for this project to 
     $312,370,000. This FFGA was amended in July 1999 to include 2 
     additional stations and 10 additional railcars. This 
     amendment included $141,000,000 in section 5307 funds and 
     $259,900,000 in flexible funding; no additional section 5309 
     New Starts funds were committed. A total of $193,560,000 in 
     section 5309 funds has been allocated to the Tren Urbano 
     project through fiscal year 2002. The Committee has 
     recommended $30,038,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.
       Scranton, Pennsylvania, rail service to New York City.--
     Morris, Sussex, and Warren Counties, all located in New 
     Jersey, in cooperation with the New Jersey TRANSIT 
     Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) conducted a Major Investment Study/
     Environmental Assessment (MIS/EA) to examine the feasibility 
     of re-instituting rail service on the Lackawanna Cut-off 
     Corridor between Scranton, Pennsylvania and Hoboken, New 
     Jersey. In addition, in 1998, a planning study was undertaken 
     by Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania to preliminarily define 
     the State's portion of the project. Commuter rail was 
     selected as the locally preferred alternative. The potential 
     rail service would connect to the NJ TRANSIT Boonton Line at 
     Port Morris in Roxbury, New Jersey. Trains would operate to 
     Hoboken and connect to Midtown Direct trains traveling to New 
     York's Penn Station. The proposed project would include track 
     and signal improvements, new stations, parking facilities, 
     train storage yard, and rail equipment acquisition. 
     Information on mobility improvements, environmental benefits, 
     cost effectiveness, operating efficiencies, transit-
     supportive land use and other factors are being developed. 
     Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $990,000 
     in section 5309 New Starts funds for this effort. These funds 
     will be used for conceptual design and completion of the EA. 
     The Committee has recommended $3,000,000 in New Starts 
     funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Seattle, Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail.--The 
     Committee takes note of the significant progress made by the 
     Federal Transit Administration and Sound Transit in 
     addressing the concerns about light rail developments in the 
     Puget Sound region raised by the Department of Transportation 
     Inspector General's Interim Report of April, 2001. Since that 
     time, the FTA and regional leaders have worked to make 
     necessary improvements in the project plans and in oversight 
     of the project. Sound Transit's Board of Directors in 
     November, 2001 adopted a new initial segment for Central Link 
     light rail. This 14-mile line will run south from downtown 
     Seattle to just north of Sea-Tac Airport. Sound Transit has 
     implemented management improvements which have improved its 
     cost estimation and financial management capabilities. The 
     FTA has stepped-up its oversight of the project as well. The 
     Committee encourages the ongoing efforts of Sound Transit and 
     the FTA and looks forward to continuing to work with the FTA 
     and Sound Transit in addressing the Puget Sound region's 
     significant transit needs.
       Stamford, Connecticut, urban transitway project.--The City 
     of Stamford, in coordination with the Connecticut Department 
     of Transportation (ConnDOT), and the Southwestern Regional 
     Planning Agency, is proposing to design and construct a 1-
     mile Urban Transitway. This will consist of a bus lane, 
     shared with high occupancy vehicles, that will provide a 
     direct link from Interstate 95 to the Stamford Intermodal 
     Transportation Center (SITC). The Urban Transitway project 
     will include changes to the bus routes serving the SITC, 
     improved pedestrian access, and the implementation of 
     intelligent transportation systems (ITS). The SITC serves as 
     a major transfer point for local bus and employer shuttle 
     service and provides access to existing Amtrak and Metro-
     North rail service in the Northeast corridor. Currently, 
     Metro-North operates 190 daily trains that stop at the SITC 
     and approximately 2,500 riders use the service in the peak 
     hours to commute from Stamford to New York City, while 1,500 
     riders travel inbound to employment opportunities in 
     Stamford. To accommodate additional commuter capacity at the 
     SITC, the City is expanding rail platform capacity and 
     constructing a 1,200-space parking facility. This project has 
     been authorized in TEA21 under section 5309(e)(8)(A). Through 
     fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $14,850,000 for 
     this project. The Committee has recommended $12,000,000 in 
     New Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
       Stockton, California, Altamont Commuter Rail project.--The 
     San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC), the Alameda 
     Congestion Management Agency, and the Santa Clara Valley 
     Transportation Authority have implemented a commuter rail 
     system along an existing Union-Pacific Railroad right-of-way 
     between the three counties. A Joint Powers Board comprised of 
     members from each of the three agencies was also created to 
     operate the proposed Altamont Commuter Express. The SJRRC 
     would be the managing agency for the initial 36-month term of 
     an agreement executed between the three agencies. In addition 
     to identifying potential sources for capital and operating 
     funds, the member agencies will define the methods for 
     allocating future costs and the shares of future capital 
     improvement contributions from the member agencies. Through 
     fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $6,910,000 in 
     section 5309 New Starts funds for this effort. The Committee 
     has recommended

[[Page 987]]

     $1,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Wilmington, Delaware, Wilmington Train Station.--The 
     Delaware Department of Transportation is proposing several 
     improvements to the Wilmington train station which serves 
     approximately 5,000 passengers daily in the Nation's busiest 
     rail corridor. The proposed improvements would allow 
     convenient passenger transfers between several modes of 
     travel, including commuter rail passenger rail, commuter and 
     local bus service, taxi, bicycle, auto and pedestrian. The 
     planned improvements include platform modernization, 
     concourse improvements, construction of a station entrance 
     and platform ramp, and rehabilitation to elevators, 
     escalators and restrooms. Through fiscal year 2002 a total of 
     $3,470,000 has been provided to this project. The Committee 
     has recommended $3,000,000 in New Starts funding for this 
     project in fiscal year 2003.

                 Job Access and Reverse Commute Grants

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   General fund     Trust fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............................................     $25,000,000    $100,000,000    $125,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................      30,000,000     120,000,000     150,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      30,000,000     120,000,000     150,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       The Committee recommends $150,000,000 for the Job Access 
     and Reverse Commute Grants program, the level guaranteed 
     under the TEA21 transit category firewall. The Committee has 
     included bill language transferring $25,000,000 to the 
     ``Capital investment grants'' account. This level of funding 
     is the same as the fiscal year 2002 appropriated level. This 
     program is meant to help welfare reform efforts succeed by 
     providing enhanced transportation services for low-income 
     individuals, including former welfare recipients, traveling 
     to jobs or training centers.
       The program makes competitive grants to qualifying 
     metropolitan planning organizations, local governmental 
     authorities, agencies, and nonprofit organizations. Grants 
     may not be used for planning or coordination activities.
       The Committee recommends the following allocations of job 
     access and reverse commute grant program funds in fiscal year 
     2003:

        Project                                                  Amount

AC Transit--CalWORKS Recipient Job Center, CA..................$750,000
Alabama Jefferson County, JARC, AL............................4,000,000
Alaska Mobility Coalititon, AK..................................500,000
Allegheny Port Authority JARC, PA.............................3,000,000
Austin Capital Metros Access to JARC, TX......................3,000,000
Brockton Area Transit Authority, MA.............................225,000
Capital District Transportation Authority, Albany, NY...........550,000
Central Ohio, Mobility Management, COTA, OH.....................600,000
Chatham JARC Program, GA........................................550,000
Chautauqua Area Rural Transportation System, NY.................100,000
Chemung County Transit, NY......................................150,000
Columbia, Expanded Service to Rural Welfare Recipients, NY......100,000
Connecticut, JARC, CT.........................................3,000,000
Corpus Christi JARC Program, TX.................................750,000
Delaware Welfare to Work Initiative.............................750,000
El Paso, JARC Program, TX.......................................500,000
Flint Job Access Program, MI....................................750,000
Fort Wayne's Hanna Creighton Transit Center, IN...............1,500,000
Franklin County Expansion of Hour Service, NY...................150,000
Grand Rapids Reverse Commute Program, MI........................675,000
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority JARC, OH.........1,000,000
Hornell, Trans. Alternatives for Special Needs, NY..............100,000
Illinois, Ways To Work..........................................550,000
IndyGo Multi-use Downtown Transit Center, IN....................550,000
Iowa Statewide JARC...........................................2,000,000
Jackson-Josephine County JARC Project, OR.......................325,000
Jacksonville Trans. Authority, Choice Ride Program, FL..........750,000
Kenai Peninsula, Transit Planning, AK...........................500,000
KW, Paratransit Vehicle Replacement, KS..........................60,000
LA County, UTRANS, CA.........................................1,000,000
Lafayette Ways to Work Program, LA..............................200,000
Lancaster-Littleton Transit Project, NH.........................100,000
Low-Income LIFT Program, SF MTC, CA...........................2,000,000
LYNX, Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, FL.....400,000
Macon-Bibb County Reverse Commute Program, GA...................550,000
Maricopa County Worklinks Project, AZ...........................500,000
Maryland Statewide JARC, (Montgomery County--$600,000)........4,000,000
MASCOT Matanuska-Susitna Valley, AK.............................200,000
Metrolink Corridor Access to Jobs, MO.........................3,000,000
Missouri Statewide JARC Grants, MO............................2,800,000
New Jersey JARC Program.......................................4,000,000
Northwest Ohio Commuter LINK, Toledo, OH........................250,000
Oklahoma Statewide Access to Jobs Program.....................4,000,000
Oregon Ways to Work Loan Program................................500,000
Portland Metropolitan Region JARC Program, OR.................1,500,000
Rhode Island Deployment of Flexible Services..................1,500,000
Rhode Island Statewide JARC...................................2,000,000
Ride Share Program--MTA, CA.....................................750,000
Rochester-Genesseee Regional Transportation Authority, NY.......400,000
SACOG, Sacramento Region JARC Projects, CA....................1,500,000
San Antonio, Access to Jobs Program, TX.........................925,000
Santa Clara Valley, Guaranteed Ride Home Program, CA............350,000
SEPTA JARC, PA................................................3,500,000
Service for Ithaca, NY..........................................150,000
Southern California Regional Rail Authority Metroline Double Tracking 
  Project.....................................................2,000,000
Anchorage People Mover, AK......................................200,000
STEP-UP Job Access Project, Dayton, OH..........................250,000
Valley Metro/RPTA Job Access Program, AZ......................1,200,000
Wake County Transportation Services (WCTS) Expansion, NC........550,000
Ways to Work, Missouri..........................................450,000
Ways to Work, Yakima, WA........................................500,000
West Virginia Statewide, JARC, WV.............................1,000,000
Wisconsin Statewide JARC......................................4,000,000
WMATA JARC, VA................................................1,750,000
WorkFirst transportation initiative, WA.......................3,500,000
Wyandotte Co. JARC, KS........................................1,750,000
  


             SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

       The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (the 
     Corporation) is a wholly owned Government corporation 
     established by the Saint Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 1954. 
     The Corporation is responsible for the operation, 
     maintenance, and development of the United States portion of 
     the Saint Lawrence Seaway between Montreal and Lake Erie. The 
     Corporation's major priorities include: safety, reliability, 
     trade development, and management accountability.

                       Operations and Maintenance


                    (Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund)

Appropriations, 2002\1\.....................................$13,345,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\.....................................14,086,000
Committee recommendation.....................................13,345,000

\1\Does not reflect reduction of $11,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $10,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117.
\2\Excludes $702,000 CSRS/FEHB accruals.

       Appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and 
     revenues from non-federal sources finances the operation and 
     maintenance of the Seaway for which the corporation is 
     responsible.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommendation includes $13,345,000 to fund 
     the operations and maintenance of the Corporation. The 
     Committee recommendation provides sufficient funding for the 
     Corporation's highest capital priorities and the projects 
     recommended by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers after its 
     survey and evaluation of the Corporation's lock and 
     maintenance practices. Based on independent security 
     assessments, the Corporation plans to implement additional 
     security measures for the Saint Lawrence Seaway in 2003. The 
     Corporation anticipates $820,000 in new and revised security 
     measures.
       The Committee notes the efforts made by the Saint Lawrence 
     Seaway Development Corporation to enhance the security of 
     Seaway infrastructure and maintain an open, yet secure 
     waterway. Following the events of September 11, 2001, the 
     SLSDC developed new security protocols that enhanced the 
     security of the locks and other critical infrastructure along 
     the Seaway. Additionally, in coordination with their Canadian 
     counterparts, the SLSDC conducted a vulnerability assessment 
     and developed a new Risk Assessment Inspection for certain 
     high risk foreign-flag vessels that met the needs of the 
     United States but was conducted while the vessel was in 
     Canadian waters. The Committee applauds these efforts and 
     directs the SLSDC to transmit this information to the

[[Page 988]]

     Transportation Security Administration and provide a report 
     to both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees on the 
     status of these initiatives and any further recommendations 
     that the TSA may have to ensure consistent security 
     initiatives are present to protect and secure the nation's 
     borders and waterways. Any such recommendations should be 
     appropriately noted in the subsequent fiscal year 2004 budget 
     request.

              RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

       The Research and Special Programs Administration [RSPA] was 
     established by the Secretary of Transportation's 
     organizational changes dated July 20, 1977, and serves as a 
     research, analytical, and technical development arm of the 
     Department for multimodal research and development, as well 
     as special programs. Particular emphasis is given to pipeline 
     transportation and the transportation of hazardous cargo by 
     all modes. In 2003, resources are requested for the 
     management and execution of the Offices of Hazardous 
     Materials Safety, Emergency Transportation, Pipeline Safety, 
     and program and administrative support. Funds are also 
     requested for the emergency preparedness grants program. 
     RSPA's two reimbursable programs--Transportation Safety 
     Institute [TSI] and the Volpe National Transportation Systems 
     Center [VNTSC]--support research safety and security programs 
     for all modes of transportation.

                     Research and Special Programs

Appropriations, 2002\1\\2\..................................$37,279,000
Budget estimate, 2003\3\\4\..................................38,391,000
Committee recommendation.....................................43,725,000

\1\Does not reflect rescissions of $113,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-
87 and $97,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\Does not reflect emergency supplemental funding of $2,500,000 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\3\Does not include $5,987,000 in proposed new user fees.
\4\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals of $1,316,000.

       The Committee has provided a total of $43,725,000 for the 
     ``Research and special programs'' account, which is the same 
     as the budget request.
       The following table summarizes the Committee 
     recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee
                                                               2002 enacted\1\   2003 estimate    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous materials safety...................................      $21,217,000      $23,079,000      $23,079,000
New hazardous materials user fees............................  ...............       $5,987,000  ...............
    (FTE)....................................................            (132)            (136)            (136)
Emergency transportation.....................................       $1,897,000       $2,058,000       $2,058,000
    (FTE)....................................................              (9)             (10)             (10)
Research and technology......................................       $2,784,000       $2,854,000       $2,854,000
    (FTE)....................................................              (9)              (9)              (9)
Program and administrative support...........................      $11,381,000      $16,387,000      $15,734,000
    (FTE)....................................................             (50)             (60)             (59)
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, research and special programs...................      $37,279,000      $38,391,000      $43,725,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect rescissions of $113,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and $97,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-
  117.
\2\Does not reflect emergency supplemental funding of $2,500,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

                       hazardous materials safety

       The Office of Hazardous Materials Safety [OHMS] administers 
     a nationwide program of safety regulations to fulfill the 
     Secretary's duty to protect the Nation from the risks to 
     life, health, and property that are inherent in the 
     transportation of hazardous materials by water, air, highway, 
     and railroad. OHMS plans, implements, and manages the 
     hazardous materials transportation program consisting of 
     information systems, research and analysis, inspection and 
     enforcement, rulemaking support, training and information 
     dissemination, and emergency procedures.
       The Committee recommends $23,079,000 for hazardous 
     materials safety, which is the same as the budget request.
       Hazardous Materials Registration Fee Increase.--The 
     Committee does not support the requested bill language to 
     increase the Hazardous Materials Registration Fee that would 
     result in an estimated additional collection of $6,000,000 in 
     fiscal year 2003. The intended purpose of this increase is to 
     finance part of the Hazardous Materials Safety Program. The 
     Committee has denied the use of industry assessed fees to 
     fund the Hazardous Materials Safety Program in the past and 
     again denies this request.


                        Emergency transportation

       Emergency transportation (ET) programs provide support to 
     the Secretary of Transportation for his statutory and 
     administrative responsibilities in the area of transportation 
     civil emergency preparedness and response. This program 
     develops and coordinates the Department's policies, plans, 
     and programs, in headquarters and the field to provide for 
     emergency preparedness.
       ET is responsible for implementing the Transportation 
     Department's National Security Program initiatives, including 
     an assessment of the transportation implications of the 
     changing global threat. The Office also coordinates civil 
     emergency preparedness and response for transportation 
     services during national and regional emergencies, across the 
     entire continuum of crises, including natural catastrophes 
     such as earthquakes, hurricanes and tornados, and 
     international and domestic terrorism. The Office of Emergency 
     Transportation develops crisis management plans to mitigate 
     disasters and implements these plans nationally and 
     regionally in an emergency.
       The Committee recommends $2,058,000 for emergency 
     transportation, which is the same as the budget request.


                        Research and technology

       The Committee recommends $2,854,000 for the Office of 
     Research and Technology, which is the same as the budget 
     request. The funds provided will help the Department 
     coordinate and strengthen its responsibilities under TEA21, 
     and will help support the R&T organizational excellence 
     strategy specified in the Department's strategic plan, allow 
     RSPA to support the intergovernmental transportation research 
     coordination responsibilities of the National Science and 
     Technology Council, and support a limited intermodal research 
     program.
       The Committee supports the request for R&D planning. These 
     funds are used to conduct a diversity of activities of 
     fundamental importance to the Department and to help 
     coordinate transportation-related research throughout the 
     Government. For example, these funds are used to support 
     technology transfer and in particular to ensure that R&T 
     advances made in the international arena are made available 
     to various modes within the Department. In addition, these 
     funds are used to support research and education planning 
     that applies to all of the modes. Most importantly, one of 
     the key purposes of these funds is to eliminate any 
     duplication of research within the DOT.


                   Program and administrative support

       The program support function provides legal, financial, 
     management, and administrative support to the operating 
     offices within RSPA. These support activities include 
     executive direction (Office of the Administrator), program 
     and policy support, civil rights and special programs, legal 
     services and support, and management and administration.
       The Committee has provided $15,734,000 for program and 
     administrative support, which is consistent with the budget 
     request.


                     RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS

       Business Modernization.--Public Law 107-87 directed RSPA to 
     develop an Information Technology Strategic Plan outlining 
     improvements in information technology and business 
     modernization. In advance of this plan, the administration 
     requested $3,616,000 for IT infrastructure improvements and 
     identified RSPA's need to remedy its weak IT infrastructure 
     as its number one priority for fiscal year 2003. The 
     Committee supports the need to overhaul RSPA's Information 
     Management Program but remains exceedingly concerned by 
     RSPA's inability to develop a true Information Technology 
     Strategic Plan that identifies what RSPA's information needs 
     are, identifies who needs access to the information, and 
     identifies the resulting system infrastructure requirements.
       The Strategic Plan, dated February 1, 2002, does none of 
     these things. It does, however, call for an additional 
     $3,500,000 dollars for further IT consulting expenses. The 
     plan also identifies $9,100,000 that will be necessary for 
     software development and hardware acquisition. The Committee 
     disagrees that this level of funding is necessary for either 
     the consulting costs or the IT infrastructure development. As 
     such, the Committee directs that no additional funds shall be 
     expended for consulting costs for this initiative and directs 
     RSPA to proceed with the hiring of their IT personnel. The 
     Committee approves the request for 10 positions and 7 FTEs 
     for information technology support. It is essential that RSPA 
     hire the appropriate technical expertise to allow them to 
     develop a true Strategic Information Technology Plan in 
     house. The Committee approves the request for $3,600,000 but 
     directs RSPA to provide a Strategic Information Technology 
     Plan, of no more than 15 pages, to both the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations by August 15, 2003. The 
     Strategic Plan shall be submitted prior to any IT expenditure 
     beyond the hiring of Information Technology Specialists. 
     Within this Strategic

[[Page 989]]

     Plan RSPA should identify their infrastructure spending plan 
     and address information security.
       New Full Time Equivalent Positions Request.--Within the 
     Administration's Personnel Compensation and Benefits request, 
     17 positions and 12 FTE's are requested. Of those personnel 
     requested, one position and one FTE is for an emergency 
     transportation military liaison position. This position is 
     currently filled with a military fellow provided by the 
     Department of Defense. While the Committee believes that a 
     military liaison is beneficial to the Office of Emergency 
     Transportation, funding should continue to be provided by the 
     Department of Defense.

                            Pipeline Safety


                         (Pipeline Safety Fund)

                    (Oilspill Liability Trust Fund)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Pipeline
                                                                    safety fund     Trust fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\.........................................     $50,386,000      $7,864,000     $58,250,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\........................................      56,385,000       7,472,000      63,857,000
Committee recommendation........................................      56,385,000       7,472,000      63,857,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect rescissions of $74,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and $64,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-
  117.
\2\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals of $653,000.

       The Research and Special Programs Administration is 
     responsible for the Department's Pipeline Safety Program. 
     Funding for the Office of Pipeline Safety is made available 
     from two primary sources: the pipeline safety fund, comprised 
     of user fees assessed on interstate pipeline operators; and 
     the oil spill liability trust fund, a revolving fund 
     comprised of an environmental tax on petroleum and oil spill 
     damage recovery payments. The Pipeline Safety Program 
     promotes the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound 
     transportation of natural gas and hazardous liquids by 
     pipeline. This national program regulates the design, 
     construction, operation, maintenance, and emergency response 
     procedures pertaining to gas and hazardous liquids pipeline 
     systems and liquefied natural gas facilities. Also included 
     is research and development to support the Pipeline Safety 
     Program and grants-in-aid to State agencies that conduct a 
     qualified pipeline safety program and to others who operate 
     one-call programs.
       The Committee's recommendation for the Federal pipeline 
     safety program generally supports, and is consistent with, 
     the key provisions of the Senate-passed version of the 
     pipeline safety reauthorization bill. The Committee 
     recommends $63,857,000 for the Department's Pipeline Safety 
     Program, which is consistent with the budget estimate. The 
     bill specifies that, of the total appropriation, $56,385,000 
     shall be from the pipeline safety fund and $7,472,000 shall 
     be from the oil spill liability trust fund.
       Enforcement of Consensus Guidelines.--The Office of 
     Pipeline Safety, the pipeline industry and various Federal 
     agencies are working to finalize consensus guidelines and 
     regulatory standards on the different security measures that 
     should be taken by critical pipeline facilities. The 
     Committee maintains that it is essential that OPS has 
     sufficient legal authorities to ensure compliance with either 
     these guidelines or standards. To that end, the Department's 
     General Counsel shall submit a report to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations before August 15, 2003, 
     specifying the legal authorities that OPS will use to bring 
     either enforcement actions or issue facility orders against 
     any operator of a critical pipeline facility that fails to 
     comply with the OPS-endorsed guidelines or consensus 
     standards relevant to pipeline security at different threat 
     levels. The Counsel will also assess the need for regulatory 
     action in this area.
       National Pipeline Safety and Operations Research 
     Consortium.--Within the funds provided for research and 
     development, the Committee encourages the administrator to 
     support the creation of a National Pipeline Safety and 
     Operations Research Consortium to increase the operational 
     efficiency and system safety of pipeline transportation for 
     both liquid and gas commodities. The Center will apply 
     emerging technologies to the pipeline industry to benefit 
     both carriers and pipeline customers to increase the physical 
     safety and integrity and productivity of the nation's 
     pipeline network.
       Research and development.--The Committee recommends 
     $3,970,000 for pipeline safety research, which is consistent 
     with the amount requested. Within the funds provided, 
     $600,000 shall be used for airborne environmental laser 
     mapping technology research and engineering to support 
     improved leak detection, analysis, and response by Federal, 
     State, and industry pipeline safety officials.

                     Emergency Preparedness Grants


                     (Emergency Preparedness Fund)

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$200,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................200,000
Committee recommendation........................................200,000

       The hazardous materials transportation law (title 49 U.S.C. 
     5101 et seq.) requires RSPA to: (1) develop and implement a 
     reimbursable emergency preparedness grants program; (2) 
     monitor public sector emergency response training and 
     planning and provide technical assistance to States, 
     territories, and Indian tribes; and (3) develop and update 
     periodically a national training curriculum for emergency 
     responders. These activities are financed by receipts 
     received from the hazardous materials shipper and carrier 
     registration fees, which are placed in the emergency 
     preparedness fund. The hazardous materials transportation law 
     provides permanent authorization for the emergency 
     preparedness fund for planning and training grants, 
     monitoring and technical assistance, and for administrative 
     expenses. An appropriation of $200,000 also from the 
     emergency preparedness fund, provides for the training 
     curriculum for emergency responders.


                       LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

       Bill language is included that limits the obligation of 
     emergency preparedness training grants to $14,300,000 in 
     fiscal year 2003.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002\1\\2\..................................$50,614,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\\3\..................................57,421,000
Committee recommendation.....................................57,421,000

\1\Does not reflect reductions of $108,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 and $93,000 pursuant to section 1106 of Public Law 
107-117. Does not reflect emergency supplemental funding of $1,300,000 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\Does not include reimbursements of $3,524,000 from FHWA, $2,000,000 
from FTA, $2,000,000 from FAA; and $100,000 from NTSB.
\3\Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals of $2,532,000.

       The Inspector General Act of 1978 established the Office of 
     Inspector General [OIG] as an independent and objective 
     organization, with a mission to: (1) conduct and supervise 
     audits and investigations relating to the programs and 
     operations of the Department; (2) provide leadership and 
     recommend policies designed to promote economy, efficiency, 
     and effectiveness in the administration of programs and 
     operations; (3) prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse; 
     and (4) keep the Secretary and Congress currently informed 
     regarding problems and deficiencies.
       OIG is divided into two major functional units: the Office 
     of Assistant Inspector General for Auditing and the Office of 
     Assistant Inspector General for Investigations. The assistant 
     inspectors general for auditing and investigations are 
     supported by headquarters and regional staff.
       The Committee recommends $57,421,000.

                      SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Crediting
                                        Appropriation      offsetting
                                                           collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002\1\..............      $18,457,000         $950,000
Budget estimate, 2003\2\.............       19,459,000        1,000,000
Committee recommendation.............       19,459,000        1,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not reflect reductions of $5,000 pursuant to section 349 of
  Public Law 107-87 and $4,000 pursuant to section 1106 of Public Law
  107-117.
\2\Excludes $1,192,300 in CSRS retirement and FEHB accruals.

       The Surface Transportation Board was created on January 1, 
     1996, by Public Law 104-88, the Interstate Commerce 
     Commission Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA) . Consistent with 
     the continued trend toward less regulation of the surface 
     transportation industry, the ICCTA abolished the ICC, 
     eliminated certain functions that had previously been 
     implemented by the ICC, transferred core rail and certain 
     other functions to the Board, and transferred motor licensing 
     and certain other motor functions to DOT and are now being 
     administered by FMCSA. The Board is specifically responsible 
     for the regulation of the rail and pipeline industries and 
     certain nonlicensing regulation of motor carriers and water 
     carriers. Moreover, the Board, through its exemption 
     authority, is able to promote deregulation administratively 
     on a case-by-case basis. Rail reforms made by the Staggers 
     Rail Act of 1980 also have been continued.
       The Committee has provided $19,459,000 for activities of 
     the Board. Included in the recommended amount is an estimated 
     $1,000,000 in fees to be collected, which will offset the 
     appropriated funding. The Board is authorized to credit the 
     fees collected to the appropriated amount as offsetting 
     collections reducing the general funds appropriation on a 
     dollar-for-dollar basis as the fees are received and 
     collected.
       The Committee's recommendation will fund a total of 145 
     full-time staff equivalent (FTE) positions, if the Board 
     collects the full $1,000,000 in user fees. Between now and 
     September 30, 2003, 46 percent of the Board's employees will 
     be eligible for voluntary retirement. The Committee 
     encourages the Board to move expeditiously in filling 
     vacancies as retirements occur in order to ensure that the 
     oversight functions of the Board are not compromised.

                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

       ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002\1\......................................$5,015,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,194,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,194,000

\1\Does not include reduction of $146,000 pursuant to section 301 of 
Public Law 106-113.

       The Committee recommends $5,194,000 for the operations of 
     the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
     Board,

[[Page 990]]

     the funding level requested by the administration.
       The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
     Board (the Access Board) is the lead Federal Agency promoting 
     accessibility for all handicapped persons. The Access Board 
     was reauthorized in the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 
     1992, Public Law 102-569. Under this authorization, the 
     Access Board's functions are to ensure compliance with the 
     Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, and to develop guidelines 
     for and technical assistance to individuals and entities with 
     rights or duties under titles II and III of the Americans 
     with Disabilities Act. The Access Board establishes minimum 
     accessibility guidelines and requirements for public 
     accommodations and commercial facilities, transit facilities 
     and vehicles, State and local government facilities, 
     children's environments, and recreational facilities. The 
     Access Board also provides technical assistance to Government 
     agencies, public and private organizations, individuals, and 
     businesses on the removal of accessibility barriers.
       The Committee's recommendation provides adequate funding to 
     support 32.8 FTE, 2 FTE more than the fiscal year 2000 
     staffing level, consistent with the Board's budget request.

                  NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$68,650,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................70,480,000
Committee recommendation.....................................72,500,000

       The Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 established the 
     National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB] as an independent 
     Federal agency to promote transportation safety by conducting 
     independent accident investigations. In addition, the act 
     authorizes the Board to make safety recommendations, conduct 
     safety studies, and oversee safety activities of other 
     Government agencies involved in transportation. The Board 
     also reviews appeals of adverse actions by the Department of 
     Transportation with respect to airmen and seamen certificates 
     and licenses.
       The Board has no regulatory authority over the 
     transportation industry. Thus, its effectiveness depends on 
     its reputation for impartial and accurate accident reports, 
     realistic and feasible safety recommendations, and on public 
     confidence in its commitment to improving transportation 
     safety.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The bill includes $72,500,000 for the National 
     Transportation Safety Board. The Committee recommendation is 
     $3,850,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2002 and 
     $2,020,000 more than the budget request. The Committee notes 
     that the National Transportation Safety Board Amendments Act 
     of 2000 (Public Law 106-424) requires the Board, among other 
     things, to provide the payment of true overtime for 
     investigators and to implement the financial management 
     control initiatives that were recommended by a private sector 
     audit firm last year. The Committee's recommendation includes 
     additional funding to annualize 25 new positions; provide 
     true overtime payment costs; to provide 24 additional FTE's; 
     and, to implement financial management programs. This is 13 
     more FTE's than requested by the administration for the 
     enhancement of investigative staff.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       The Committee concurs with the general provisions that 
     apply to the Department of Transportation and related 
     agencies as proposed in the budget, with some changes, 
     deletions, and additions. These are noted below:
       Sec. 304. Modifies a requested provision to prohibit the 
     use of funds for the salaries and expenses to no more than 
     100 political and presidential appointees to the Department 
     of Transportation.
       Sec. 316. Modifies a provision regarding the funding of 
     administrative expenses for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
     Administration and the Federal Highway Administration.
       Sec. 318. Modifies a provision regarding funds made 
     available to Alaska or Hawaii for ferry boats, ferry 
     terminals and ferry passenger service.
       Sec. 320. Includes a provision exempting a general aviation 
     airport with more than 300,000 annual operations from having 
     to accept scheduled passenger service provided that airport 
     meets specific conditions.
       Sec. 322. Includes a provision permitting funds from Public 
     Law 106-69 and Public Law 106-346 for the Wilmington, 
     Delaware downtown corridor project to be available for the 
     Wilmington, Delaware commuter rail improvements.
       Sec. 324. Includes a provision transferring the operation 
     and maintenance of the localizer instrument landing system at 
     the Walnut Ridge Regional Airport, Arkansas to the Federal 
     Aviation Administration.
       Sec. 325. Includes a provision transferring the operation 
     and maintenance of the air traffic control tower at Williams 
     Gateway Airport, Arizona to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration.
       Sec. 327. Includes a provision regarding a highway in 
     Alaska.
       Sec. 329. Includes a provision which modifies section 
     1211(i) of Public Law 105-178 to define the Alameda Corridor 
     East and Southwest Passage, California high priority 
     corridor.
       Sec. 330. Provides $169,600,000, including funds provided 
     elsewhere in the bill, to the Secretary of Transportation to 
     make grants for surface transportation projects. The 
     Committee's recommendation represents a $21,600,000 increase 
     over the amount that was appropriated in fiscal year 2002. 
     Funds provided for this program for fiscal year 2003 shall be 
     available for the following activities:

        Project                                                  Amount

Aberdeen, SD to Geneseo, ND Rail Repair Project................$650,000
Adrian's Landing Urban Development Roadway Realignment Project, 
  Hartford, CT................................................5,000,000
Arkwright Connector, Spartanburg, SC..........................1,200,000
Aroostook County North-South Highways, ME.....................5,000,000
Baseline Road, Isabella, Nottawa, Deerfield, Union, MI........1,000,000
Bowling Green Riverfront Project, KY..........................4,000,000
Bremerton, Ferry Exit Tunnel, WA..............................2,000,000
Broomsfield Wadsworth Interchange, CO.........................4,000,000
Caraway Road Overpass Project, Jonesboro, AR..................3,000,000
City of Madison Railroad Relocation Project, MS.................100,000
Council Bluffs US 6 Study/Preliminary Design, IA..............2,000,000
David L. Lawrence Convention Center, Riverfront Park, Pittsbur1,400,000
Dubuque Southwest Arterial, IA................................3,000,000
East Chicago, Railroad Ave. Grade Crossing Separation, IN.....2,500,000
Elkhart Underpass, IN.........................................4,000,000
Farrington Highway, HI........................................1,000,000
General Mitchell International Airport Passenger Rail Station,5,000,000
Granite Street Bridge Project, NH.............................8,000,000
Harlingen Railroad Relocation Project.........................1,000,000
I-15 Layton Interchange Project, UT...........................3,000,000
I-44 Yale Avenue to Arkansas River, OK........................1,000,000
I-405 Corridor Tukwila to Lynnwood, WA........................2,500,000
Isleta Boulevard Project, Bernalillo, NM......................3,000,000
John Wright Drive, Huntsville, AL.............................6,600,000
Juneau Heliport, AK...........................................2,000,000
Lenexa Prairie Star Expressway, KS............................3,000,000
Matanuska-Susitna Borough road improvements, AK...............4,500,000
Main Ave. Bridge & Pedestrian/Bicycle Amenities, Fargo, ND....3,000,000
Martin Luther King, Jr. Parkway, Des Moines, IA...............5,000,000
Memphis Airport, Plough Boulevard Access Road Project, TN.....5,000,000
Missouri River Trail, ND......................................2,000,000
Montpelier Downtown Redevelopment Project, VT.................2,000,000
New Luke Road Trade Corridor Access Project, TX...............1,000,000
Northern Forum, AK..............................................500,000
Old Dominion University Maglev Project, Norfolk, VA...........2,000,000
Olympic Discovery Trail, WA...................................1,000,000
Pierre Rail Bypass, SD........................................5,000,000
Portland, Safety Enhancement, ME..............................1,000,000
Route 14 Truck Bypass Project, Huron, SD......................2,350,000
Saddle Road improvements, HI..................................4,000,000
Seward loading facility.......................................9,600,000
South & East Beltway System Construction, NE..................5,000,000
Southwestern Minnesota Regional Railroad Rehabilitation Project 
  (MVRRA), MN.................................................2,000,000
SR 67/605 in Saucier, MS......................................4,900,000
SR 104/Hood Canal Bridge East Half Replacement, WA............2,000,000
SR 99/Alaskan Way Viaduct & Seattle Seawall Replacement, WA...2,500,000
St. Louis Major Arterial Road Improvement/Renovation, MO......1,000,000
Tucson Railroad Grade Crossing Project, AZ....................1,500,000
Tuscaloosa Downtown Revitalization Project....................5,000,000
Umatilla Intermodal Facility, OR..............................3,800,000
US 14 Expansion and Improvements, MN..........................2,000,000
US 81 & Highway 30 Arterial Improvements, Columbus, NE........2,500,000

[[Page 991]]

US 93, Westside Kalispell Bypass Project, MT..................2,500,000
WSU Composite Applications for Ferries, WA....................1,000,000
WV Route 9, Jefferson and Berkeley Counties, WV..............10,000,000
Waipol Road, HI...............................................1,000,000

       Sec. 331. Includes a provision directing the Secretary of 
     Transportation to approve the use of national highway system 
     and surface transportation funds for construction of noise 
     barriers in Georgia.
       Sec. 332. Modifies a provision from the fiscal year 2000 
     appropriations act which prohibits the use of funds in this 
     Act unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House 
     and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 3 full 
     business days before any discretionary grant award is made 
     under section 1221 of Public Law 107-178 as amended, and 
     before any award totaling $500,000 or more is announced by 
     the Department or its modal administrations. The 
     administration proposed deleting this provision.
       Sec. 333. Includes a provision rescinding $77,100,000 of 
     funds provided in section 101(a)(2) of Public Law 107-42.
       Sec. 334. Includes a provision requiring a National Academy 
     of Sciences study regarding the shipment of spent nuclear 
     fuel from research nuclear reactors.
       Sec. 336. Includes a provision which would reimburse the 
     city of Escanaba, Michigan for the costs incurred for 
     repairing a municipal dock that is utilized by the United 
     States Coast Guard.
       Sec. 337. Includes a provision to consider the city of 
     Norman, Oklahoma to be part of the Oklahoma City 
     Transportation Management Area for fiscal year 2003.
       Sec. 339. Includes a provision allowing grants for the 
     construction of an air traffic control tower at Double Eagle 
     II Airport, New Mexico.
       Sec. 340. Modifies a provision from a previous 
     appropriations act permitting Section 402 funds to be used to 
     produce and place highway safety messages on paid media 
     outlets and designating certain Section 157 and Section 410 
     funds for paid media to support national law enforcement 
     mobilizations on seat belt use and impaired driving.
       Sec. 341. Modifies a provision from the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriations act regarding Coast Guard Yard in Curtis Bay, 
     Maryland and other Coast Guard specialized facilities. The 
     administration proposed deleting this provision.
       Sec. 342. Retains a provision prohibiting funds for the 
     Office of the Secretary of Transportation to be reprogrammed 
     without Congressional notification. The administration 
     proposed deleting this provision.
       Sec. 343. Includes a provision regarding Federal share for 
     certain highway funds.
       Sec. 344. Includes a provision regarding the Hoover Dam 
     Bypass Bridge.
       Sec. 346. Retains a provision allowing discretionary bridge 
     funding to be used for historic covered bridges. The 
     administration proposed deleting this provision.
       Sec. 347. Modifies a provision requiring quarterly reports 
     on major Coast Guard acquisition and mission hour emphasis. 
     The administration proposed deleting this provision.
       Sec. 348. Includes a provision amending Section 1503 and 
     Section 1101(a)(9) of Public Law 105-178.
       Sec. 349. Includes a provision which the administration had 
     requested be deleted that reduces the funds provided for the 
     Transportation Administrative Service Center.
       Sec. 350. Extends a provision from the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriations act regarding the safety of cross-border 
     trucking between the United States and Mexico. The 
     administration proposed deleting this provision.
       Sec. 351. Includes a provision granting discretionary 
     authority to the Secretary of Transportation to waive certain 
     requirements included in a conveyance for an airport.
       Sec. 352. Includes a provision which expands the exemption 
     from Federal axle weight restrictions presently applicable 
     only to public transit buses to all over-the-road buses.
       Sec. 353. Includes a provision regarding funds for the 
     construction of roads and bridges in Lake Charles, Louisiana.
       Sec. 354. Includes a provision modifying Section 342 of the 
     Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2002.
       Sec. 355. Includes a provision modifying Section 343 of the 
     Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2002.
       Sec. 356. Includes a provision providing $3,500,000 to 
     enable the Secretary to maintain operations of the Midway 
     Island airfield.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports 
     accompanying general appropriations bills identify each 
     recommended amendment which proposes an item of appropriation 
     which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
     law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
     passed by the Senate during that session.
       Federal Aviation Administration
     Office of Commercial Space Transportation
     Research, Engineering, and Development
       Federal Highway Administration
     Child Passenger Protection Education Grants
       Federal Railroad Administration
     Safety and Operations
       National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)
       National Transportation Safety Board

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or -)
              Item                      2002             Budget        House allowance      Committee    ----------------------------------------------------
                                    appropriation   estimate        deg.         recommendation         2002             Budget            House
                                                                                                            appropriation   estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
     TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF
 
     Office of the Secretary
 
Salaries and expenses...........           67,778            92,460            83,069           +15,291            -9,391
    Immediate Office of the                (1,929)  ................           (2,201)            (+272)          (+2,201)
     Secretary..................
    Immediate Office of the                  (619)  ................             (799)            (+180)            (+799)
     Deputy Secretary...........
    Immediate Office of the       ................           (4,410)  ................  ................          (-4,410)
     Secretary and Deputy
     Secretary..................
    Office of the General                 (13,355)          (15,657)          (15,507)          (+2,152)            (-150)
     Counsel....................
    Office of the Assistant                (3,058)  ................  ................          (-3,058)  ................
     Secretary for Policy.......
    Office of the Assistant                (7,421)  ................  ................          (-7,421)  ................
     Secretary for Aviation and
     International Affairs......
    Office of the Under           ................          (12,452)          (11,123)         (+11,123)          (-1,329)
     Secretary for
     Transportation Policy......
    Office of the Assistant                (7,728)           (8,375)           (8,375)            (+647)  ................
     Secretary for Budget and
     Programs...................
    Office of the Assistant                (2,282)           (2,453)           (2,282)  ................            (-171)
     Secretary for Governmental
     Affairs....................
    Office of the Assistant               (19,250)          (29,285)          (26,070)          (+6,820)          (-3,215)
     Secretary for
     Administration.............
    Office of Public Affairs....           (1,723)           (1,926)           (1,920)            (+197)              (-6)
    Executive Secretariat.......           (1,204)  ................           (1,390)            (+186)          (+1,390)
    Board of Contract Appeals...             (507)             (611)             (611)            (+104)  ................
    Office of Small and                    (1,240)           (1,304)           (1,304)             (+64)  ................
     Disadvantaged Business
     Utilization................
    Office of Intelligence and             (1,321)  ................  ................          (-1,321)  ................
     Security...................
    Office of the Chief                    (6,141)          (15,987)          (11,487)          (+5,346)          (-4,500)
     Information Officer........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..................          (67,778)          (92,460)          (83,069)         (+15,291)          (-9,391)
 
Office of Civil Rights..........            8,500             8,700             8,700              +200   ................
Transportation Security                 1,250,000   ................  ................       -1,250,000   ................
 Administration.................

[[Page 992]]

 
    Offsetting collections......       -1,250,000   ................  ................       +1,250,000   ................
Transportation planning,                   11,993            10,700            21,000            +9,007           +10,300
 research, and development......
Transportation Administrative            (125,323)  ................         (131,779)          (+6,456)        (+131,779)
 Service Center.................
    2002 Supplemental (Public              (2,800)  ................  ................          (-2,800)  ................
     Law 107-206)...............
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, TASC............         (128,123)  ................         (131,779)          (+3,656)        (+131,779)
 
Minority business resource                    900               900               900   ................  ................
 center program.................
    (Limitation on guaranteed             (18,367)          (18,367)          (18,367)  ................  ................
     loans).....................
Minority business outreach......            3,000             3,000             3,000   ................  ................
New headquarters building.......  ................           25,000   ................  ................          -25,000
Payments to air carriers                   13,000   ................           65,000           +52,000           +65,000
 (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)
    Emergency supplemental                 50,000   ................  ................          -50,000   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Office of the              1,405,171           140,760           181,669        -1,223,502           +40,909
       Secretary................
          Offsetting collections       -1,250,000   ................  ................       +1,250,000   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total...........          155,171           140,760           181,669           +26,498           +40,909
 
     Transportation Security
         Administration
 
Salaries and expenses...........  ................        5,346,000         5,346,000        +5,346,000   ................
    Facilities and equipment      ................         -124,000           -55,000           -55,000           +69,000
     (reimbursement)............
    Offsetting collections......  ................       -2,650,000        -2,650,000        -2,650,000   ................
    Emergency supplemental                 94,800   ................  ................          -94,800   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    2002 Supplemental (Public           3,370,000   ................  ................       -3,370,000   ................
     Law 107-206) (emergency)...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Transportation             3,464,800         2,572,000         2,641,000          -823,800           +69,000
       Security Administration..
 
           Coast Guard
 
Operating expenses..............        2,942,000         3,978,456         3,978,456        +1,036,456   ................
    Defense function............          440,000           340,000           340,000          -100,000   ................
    Offset for new user fees....  ................         -165,000   ................  ................         +165,000
    Emergency supplemental                209,150   ................  ................         -209,150   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    2002 Supplemental (Public             189,000   ................  ................         -189,000   ................
     Law 107-206) (emergency)...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, OE..............        3,780,150         4,153,456         4,318,456          +538,306          +165,000
 
Acquisition, construction, and            636,354           725,000           752,000          +115,646           +27,000
 improvements...................
    2002 Supplemental (Public              66,000   ................  ................          -66,000   ................
     Law 107-206) (emergency)...
    Vessels.....................         (115,740)          (13,600)          (25,600)         (-90,140)         (+12,000)
    Aircraft....................           (9,500)  ................  ................          (-9,500)  ................
    Other equipment.............         (107,022)         (117,700)         (132,700)         (+25,678)         (+15,000)
    Shore facilities and aids to          (85,271)          (28,700)          (48,700)         (-36,571)         (+20,000)
     navigation facilities......
    Personnel and related                 (64,631)          (65,000)          (65,000)            (+369)  ................
     support....................
    Integrated Deepwater Systems         (320,190)         (500,000)         (480,000)        (+159,810)         (-20,000)
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, A C and I.......         (702,354)         (725,000)         (752,000)         (+49,646)         (+27,000)
 
Environmental compliance and               16,927            17,000            17,000               +73   ................
 restoration....................
Alteration of bridges...........           15,466   ................           14,000            -1,466           +14,000
Retired pay.....................          876,346           889,000           889,000           +12,654   ................
Reserve training................           83,194            86,522            86,522            +3,328   ................
Research, development, test, and           20,222            22,000            22,000            +1,778   ................
 evaluation.....................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Coast Guard........        5,494,659         6,057,978         6,098,978          +604,319           +41,000
          Offset for new user     ................         -165,000   ................  ................         +165,000
           fees.................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total, CG.......        5,494,659         5,892,978         6,098,978          +604,319          +206,000
 
 Federal Aviation Administration
 
Operations......................        6,886,000         7,077,203         7,047,203          +161,203           -30,000
    Air traffic services........       (5,452,871)  ................       (5,662,037)        (+209,166)      (+5,662,037)
    Aviation regulation and              (768,769)  ................         (839,467)         (+70,698)        (+839,467)
     certification..............
    Civil aviation security.....         (150,154)  ................  ................        (-150,154)  ................
    Research and acquisition....         (195,799)  ................         (207,600)         (+11,801)        (+207,600)
    Commercial space                      (12,456)  ................          (12,325)            (-131)         (+12,325)
     transportation.............
    Financial services..........          (50,284)  ................          (48,782)          (-1,502)         (+48,782)
    Human resources.............          (69,516)  ................          (80,260)         (+10,744)         (+80,260)
    Regional coordination.......          (85,943)  ................          (82,192)          (-3,751)         (+82,192)
    Staff offices...............         (109,208)  ................          (84,890)         (-24,318)         (+84,890)
    Information services........  ................  ................          (29,650)         (+29,650)         (+29,650)
    Undistributed...............          (-9,000)  ................  ................          (+9,000)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operations......       (6,886,000)  ................       (7,047,203)        (+161,203)      (+7,047,203)
 
    Emergency supplemental                200,000   ................  ................         -200,000   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    2002 Supplemental (Public
     Law 107-206):
        (Transfer authority)....          (33,000)  ................  ................         (-33,000)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operations (incl        7,119,000   ................        7,047,203           -71,797        +7,047,203
       supplemental)............
 
Facilities and equipment                2,914,000         2,981,022         2,981,022           +67,022   ................
 (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)
    Rescission (Airport and               -15,000   ................  ................          +15,000   ................
     Airway Trust Fund).........
    Emergency supplemental                108,500   ................  ................         -108,500   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, F&E (incl               3,007,500         2,981,022         2,981,022           -26,478   ................
       supplemental)............
 
Research, engineering, and                195,000           124,000           124,000           -71,000   ................
 development (Airport and Airway
 Trust Fund)....................
    Emergency supplemental                 50,000   ................  ................          -50,000   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, RE&D............          245,000           124,000           124,000          -121,000   ................
 
Grants-in-aid for airports
 (Airport and Airway Trust
 Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract           (1,800,000)       (3,100,000)       (3,100,000)      (+1,300,000)  ................
     authorization).............
    (Limitation on obligations).       (3,300,000)       (3,400,000)       (3,400,000)        (+100,000)  ................
        (Small community air              (20,000)  ................          (20,000)  ................         (+20,000)
         service pilot program).
    Rescission of contract               -301,720   ................  ................         +301,720   ................
     authority..................
    Emergency supplemental                175,000   ................  ................         -175,000   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Grants-in-aid...       (3,173,280)       (3,400,000)       (3,400,000)        (+226,720)  ................
 
Aviation insurance revolving      ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 fund...........................

[[Page 993]]

 
Small community air service       ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 development....................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Federal Aviation          10,528,500        10,182,225        10,152,225          -376,275           -30,000
       Administration...........
          (Limitations on              (3,300,000)       (3,400,000)       (3,400,000)        (+100,000)  ................
           obligations).........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary           (13,828,500)      (13,582,225)      (13,552,225)        (-276,275)         (-30,000)
             resources..........
          Rescissions...........          -15,000   ................  ................          +15,000   ................
          Rescissions of                 -301,720   ................  ................         +301,720   ................
           contract authority...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total, FAA......      (13,511,780)      (13,582,225)      (13,552,225)         (+40,445)         (-30,000)
 
 Federal Highway Administration
 
Limitation on administrative             (311,000)         (317,732)         (317,732)          (+6,732)  ................
 expenses.......................
    (Border enforcement program)  ................  ................         (106,967)        (+106,967)        (+106,967)
Federal-aid highways (Highway
 Trust Fund):
    (Limitation on obligations).      (27,280,000)      (27,573,787)      (31,800,000)      (+4,520,000)      (+4,226,213)
    Revenue aligned budget             (4,543,000)      (-4,369,000)  ................      (-4,543,000)      (+4,369,000)
     authority (RABA)...........
    RABA transfer to FMCSA......         (-23,896)  ................  ................         (+23,896)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, limitation on         (31,799,104)      (23,204,787)      (31,800,000)            (+896)      (+8,595,213)
       obligations..............
    (Exempt obligations)........         (965,308)         (892,767)         (892,767)         (-72,541)  ................
    (Liquidation of contract          (30,000,000)      (29,000,000)      (32,000,000)      (+2,000,000)      (+3,000,000)
     authorization).............
    2002 Supplemental (Public            -320,000   ................  ................         +320,000   ................
     Law 107-206) (Rescission of
     contract authority)........
Appalachian development highway           200,000   ................          200,000   ................         +200,000
 system.........................
State infrastructure banks                 -5,750   ................  ................           +5,750   ................
 (rescission)...................
Value pricing project                      -9,231   ................  ................           +9,231   ................
 (rescission) (Highway Trust
 Fund) (sec. 318)...............
TIFIA (rescission) (Highway               -43,742   ................  ................          +43,742   ................
 Trust Fund) (sec. 318).........
Miscellaneous appropriations              100,000   ................  ................         -100,000   ................
 (Highway Trust Fund) (emergency
 supplemental) (Public Law 107-
 117)...........................
Emergency relief program                   75,000   ................  ................          -75,000   ................
 (emergency sup) (Public Law 107-
 117)...........................
    2002 Supplemental (Public             167,000   ................  ................         -167,000   ................
     Law 107-206) (emergency)...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Federal Highway              542,000   ................          200,000          -342,000          +200,000
       Administration...........
          (Limitations on             (31,799,104)      (23,204,787)      (31,800,000)            (+896)      (+8,595,213)
           obligations).........
          (Exempt obligations)..         (965,308)         (892,767)         (892,767)         (-72,541)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary           (33,306,412)      (24,097,554)      (32,892,767)        (-413,645)      (+8,795,213)
             resources..........
          Rescissions...........          -58,723   ................  ................          +58,723   ................
          Rescissions of                 -320,000   ................  ................         +320,000   ................
           contract authority...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total, FHWA.....      (32,927,689)      (24,097,554)      (32,892,767)         (-34,922)      (+8,795,213)
 
  Federal Motor Carrier Safety
         Administration
 
Motor carrier safety (limitation         (110,000)         (117,464)         (117,464)          (+7,464)  ................
 on administrative expenses)
 (limitation on obligations)....
    Rescission..................           -6,665   ................  ................           +6,665   ................
National motor carrier safety
 program (Highway Trust Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract             (205,896)         (190,000)         (190,000)         (-15,896)  ................
     authorization).............
    (Limitation on obligations).         (182,000)         (190,000)         (190,000)          (+8,000)  ................
    RABA transfer from FHWA:
        Border-State grants.....          (18,000)  ................  ................         (-18,000)  ................
        State commercial                   (5,896)  ................  ................          (-5,896)  ................
         driver's license.......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, RABA........          (23,896)  ................  ................         (-23,896)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, limitation           (205,896)         (190,000)         (190,000)         (-15,896)  ................
           on obligations.......
 
Border enforcement program                 25,866            59,967   ................          -25,866           -59,967
 (Highway Trust Fund)...........
    2002 Supplemental (Public              19,300   ................  ................          -19,300   ................
     Law 107-206) (emergency)...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Federal Motor                 45,166            59,967   ................          -45,166           -59,967
       Carrier Safety Admin.....
          (Limitations on                (315,896)         (307,464)         (307,464)          (-8,432)  ................
           obligations).........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary              (361,062)         (367,431)         (307,464)         (-53,598)         (-59,967)
             resources..........
 
          Rescissions...........           -6,665   ................  ................           +6,665   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total, FMCSA....         (354,397)         (367,431)         (307,464)         (-46,933)         (-59,967)
 
 National Highway Traffic Safety
         Administration
 
Operations and research.........          127,780           126,445           141,000           +13,220           +14,555
Operations and research (Highway
 trust fund):
    (Liquidation of contract              (72,000)          (72,000)          (72,000)  ................  ................
     authorization).............
    (Limitation on obligations).          (72,000)          (72,000)          (72,000)  ................  ................
    Rescission of contract                 -1,516   ................  ................           +1,516   ................
     authority..................
National Driver Register                    2,000             2,000             2,000   ................  ................
 (Highway trust fund)...........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operations and           (200,264)         (200,445)         (215,000)         (+14,736)         (+14,555)
       research.................
 
Highway traffic safety grants
 (Highway Trust Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract             (223,000)         (225,000)         (225,000)          (+2,000)  ................
     authorization).............
    (Limitation on obligations):
        Highway safety programs          (160,000)         (165,000)         (165,000)          (+5,000)  ................
         (Sec. 402).............
        Occupant protection               (15,000)          (20,000)          (20,000)          (+5,000)  ................
         incentive grants (Sec.
         405)...................
        Alcohol-impaired driving          (38,000)          (40,000)          (40,000)          (+2,000)  ................
         countermeasures grants
         (Sec. 410).............
        State highway safety              (10,000)  ................  ................         (-10,000)  ................
         data grants (Sec. 411).
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, limitation           (223,000)         (225,000)         (225,000)          (+2,000)  ................
           on obligations.......
                                 =======================================================================================================================
          Total, National                 129,780           128,445           143,000           +13,220           +14,555
           Highway Traffic
           Safety Admin.........
              (Limitations on            (295,000)         (297,000)         (297,000)          (+2,000)  ................
               obligations).....
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Total budgetary          (424,780)         (425,445)         (440,000)         (+15,220)         (+14,555)
                 resources......
 
              Rescissions of               -1,516   ................  ................           +1,516   ................
               contract
               authority........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Net total, NHTSA         (423,264)         (425,445)         (440,000)         (+16,736)         (+14,555)
 
 Federal Railroad Administration
 
Safety and operations...........          110,857           118,264           118,264            +7,407   ................
    Offset for new user fees....  ................          -45,000   ................  ................          +45,000

[[Page 994]]

 
    Emergency supplemental                  6,000   ................  ................           -6,000   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
Railroad research and                      29,000            28,325            29,325              +325            +1,000
 development....................
    Offset for new user fees....  ................          -14,000   ................  ................          +14,000
Pennsylvania Station                       20,000            20,000            20,000   ................  ................
 Redevelopment project (advance
 appropriations, Fiscal Year
 2001, Fiscal Year 2002, Fiscal
 Year 2003)\1\..................
Next generation high-speed rail.           32,300            23,200            30,000            -2,300            +6,800
Alaska Railroad rehabilitation..           20,000   ................           25,000            +5,000           +25,000
Grants to the National Railroad           521,476           521,476           826,476          +305,000          +305,000
 Passenger Corporation..........
    Emergency supplemental                100,000   ................  ................         -100,000   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    2002 Supplemental (Public             205,000   ................  ................         -205,000   ................
     Law 107-206) (emergency)...
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Amtrak..........          826,476           521,476           826,476   ................         +305,000
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Federal Railroad           1,044,633           711,265         1,049,065            +4,432          +337,800
       Administration...........
          Offset for new user     ................          -59,000   ................  ................          +59,000
           fees.................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total, FRA......        1,044,633           652,265         1,049,065            +4,432          +396,800
 
 Federal Transit Administration
 
Administrative expenses.........           13,400            14,600            14,600            +1,200   ................
Administrative expenses (Highway          (53,600)          (58,400)          (58,400)          (+4,800)  ................
 Trust Fund, Mass Transit
 Account) (limitation on
 obligations)...................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Administrative            (67,000)          (73,000)          (73,000)          (+6,000)  ................
       expenses.................
 
Formula grants..................          718,400           767,800           767,800           +49,400   ................
    Emergency supplemental                 23,500   ................  ................          -23,500   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
Formula grants (Highway Trust          (2,873,600)       (3,071,200)       (3,071,200)        (+197,600)  ................
 Fund) (limitation on
 obligations)...................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Formula grants..       (3,615,500)       (3,839,000)       (3,839,000)        (+223,500)  ................
 
University transportation                   1,200             1,200             1,200   ................  ................
 research.......................
University transportation                  (4,800)           (4,800)           (4,800)  ................  ................
 research (Highway Trust Fund,
 Mass Transit Act) (limitation
 on obligations)................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, University                 (6,000)           (6,000)           (6,000)  ................  ................
       transportation research..
 
Transit planning and research...           23,000            24,200            24,200            +1,200   ................
Transit planning and research             (93,000)          (97,800)          (97,800)          (+4,800)  ................
 (Highway Trust Fund, Mass
 Transit Account) (limitation on
 obligations)...................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Transit planning         (116,000)         (122,000)         (122,000)          (+6,000)  ................
       and research.............
 
    Rural transportation                   (5,250)           (5,250)           (5,250)  ................  ................
     assistance.................
    National Transit Institute..           (4,000)           (4,000)           (4,000)  ................  ................
    Transit cooperative research           (8,250)           (8,250)           (8,250)  ................  ................
    Metropolitan planning.......          (55,422)          (60,386)          (60,386)          (+4,964)  ................
    State planning..............          (11,578)          (12,614)          (12,614)          (+1,036)  ................
    National planning and                 (31,500)          (31,500)          (31,500)  ................  ................
     research...................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Transit planning         (116,000)         (122,000)         (122,000)          (+6,000)  ................
       and research.............
 
Trust fund share of expenses           (5,397,800)       (5,781,000)       (5,781,000)        (+383,200)  ................
 (Highway Trust Fund)
 (liquidation of contract
 authorization).................
Capital investment grants.......          568,200           607,200           607,200           +39,000   ................
Capital investment grants         ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 (General purpose)..............
    Emergency supplemental                100,000   ................  ................         -100,000   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
    2002 Supplemental (Public           1,800,000   ................  ................       -1,800,000   ................
     Law 107-206) (emergency)...
Capital investment grants              (2,272,800)       (2,428,800)       (2,428,800)        (+156,000)  ................
 (Highway Trust Fund, Mass
 Transit Account) (limitation on
 obligations)...................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital                (4,741,000)       (3,036,000)       (3,036,000)      (-1,705,000)  ................
       investment grants........
 
    Fixed guideway modernization       (1,136,400)       (1,214,400)       (1,214,400)         (+78,000)  ................
    Buses and bus-related                (568,200)         (607,200)         (607,200)         (+39,000)  ................
     facilities.................
    New starts..................       (1,136,400)       (1,214,400)       (1,214,400)         (+78,000)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..................       (2,841,000)       (3,036,000)       (3,036,000)        (+195,000)  ................
 
Job access and reverse commute             25,000            30,000            30,000            +5,000   ................
 grants.........................
    (Highway Trust Fund, Mass            (100,000)         (120,000)         (120,000)         (+20,000)  ................
     Transit Account)
     (limitation on obligations)
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Job access and           (125,000)         (150,000)         (150,000)         (+25,000)  ................
       reverse commute grants...
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Federal Transit            3,272,700         1,445,000         1,445,000        -1,827,700   ................
       Administration...........
          (Limitations on              (5,397,800)       (5,781,000)       (5,781,000)        (+383,200)  ................
           obligations).........
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary            (8,670,500)       (7,226,000)       (7,226,000)      (-1,444,500)  ................
             resources, FTA.....
 
      Saint Lawrence Seaway
     Development Corporation
 
Operations and maintenance                 13,345            14,086            13,345   ................             -741
 (Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund)
 
  Research and Special Programs
         Administration
 
Research and special programs:
    Hazardous materials safety..           21,217            23,079            23,079            +1,862   ................
    Offset for new user fees....  ................           -6,000   ................  ................           +6,000
    Emergency transportation....            1,897             2,058             2,058              +161   ................
    Research and technology.....            2,784             2,854             2,854               +70   ................
    Program and administrative             11,381            16,387            15,734            +4,353              -653
     support....................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Research and               37,279            38,378            43,725            +6,446            +5,347
       special programs.........
 
    Emergency supp (emergency               2,500   ................  ................           -2,500   ................
     trans) (Public Law 107-117)
Pipeline safety:
    Pipeline Safety Fund........           50,386            56,385            56,385            +5,999   ................
    Oil Spill Liability Trust               7,864             7,472             7,472              -392   ................
     Fund.......................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Pipeline safety            58,250            63,857            63,857            +5,607   ................
       program (incl reserve)...
 
Emergency preparedness grants:
    Emergency preparedness fund.              200               200               200   ................  ................
    Limitation on emergency               (14,300)          (14,300)          (14,300)  ................  ................
     preparedness fund..........
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, Research and                  98,229           108,435           107,782            +9,553              -653
       Special Programs Admin...
          Offset for new user     ................           -6,000   ................  ................           +6,000
           fees.................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total...........           98,229           102,435           107,782            +9,553            +5,347
 

[[Page 995]]

 
   Office of Inspector General
 
Salaries and expenses...........           50,614            57,421            57,421            +6,807   ................
    Emergency supplemental                  1,300   ................  ................           -1,300   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Inspector           51,914            57,421            57,421            +5,507   ................
       General..................
 
  Surface Transportation Board
 
Salaries and expenses...........           18,457            19,459            19,459            +1,002   ................
    Offsetting collections......             -950            -1,000            -1,000               -50   ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Surface                       17,507            18,459            18,459              +952   ................
       Transportation Board.....
 
    Bureau of Transportation
           Statistics
 
Office of airline information     ................            3,965   ................  ................           -3,965
 (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)
 
       General Provisions
 
Amtrak Reform Council (Sec. 329)              225   ................  ................             -225   ................
Aviation operations sustainment-- ................  ................            3,500            +3,500            +3,500
 Midway Island..................
Surface transpo projects (Sec.            148,300   ................           81,000           -67,300           +81,000
 1106)..........................
Excess stabilization resources    ................  ................          -77,100           -77,100           -77,100
 (rescission)...................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General provisions.          148,525   ................           17,000          -131,525           +17,000
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Net total, title I,              24,303,305        21,270,006        22,124,944        -2,178,361          +854,938
       Department of
       Transportation...........
          Appropriations........      (17,894,879)      (21,270,006)      (22,202,044)      (+4,307,165)        (+932,038)
          Emergency.............       (7,112,050)  ................  ................      (-7,112,050)  ................
          Offsets for new user        (-1,250,000)        (-230,000)  ................      (+1,250,000)        (+230,000)
           fees.................
          Rescissions...........         (-80,388)  ................         (-77,100)          (+3,288)         (-77,100)
          Rescission of contract        (-623,236)  ................  ................        (+623,236)  ................
           authority............
          (Transfer authority)..          (33,000)  ................  ................         (-33,000)  ................
          (Limitations on             (41,107,800)      (32,990,251)      (41,585,464)        (+477,664)      (+8,595,213)
           obligations).........
          (Exempt obligations)..         (965,308)         (892,767)         (892,767)         (-72,541)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total budgetary       (66,376,413)      (55,153,024)      (64,603,175)      (-1,773,238)      (+9,450,151)
             resources..........
                                 =======================================================================================================================
 
   TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES
 
Architectural and Transportation
    Barriers Compliance Board
 
Salaries and expenses...........            5,015             5,194             5,194              +179   ................
 
 National Transportation Safety
              Board
 
Salaries and expenses...........           68,000            70,480            72,500            +4,500            +2,020
    Emergency supplemental                    650   ................  ................             -650   ................
     (Public Law 107-117).......
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, National                      68,650            70,480            72,500            +3,850            +2,020
       Transportation Safety
       Board....................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Related             73,665            75,674            77,694            +4,029            +2,020
       Agencies.................
                                 =======================================================================================================================
      Grand total...............       24,376,970        21,345,680        22,202,638        -2,174,332          +856,958
          Appropriations........      (17,967,894)      (21,345,680)      (22,279,738)      (+4,311,844)        (+934,058)
          Emergency.............       (7,112,700)  ................  ................      (-7,112,700)  ................
          Offset for new user         (-1,250,000)        (-230,000)  ................      (+1,250,000)        (+230,000)
           fees.................
          Rescissions...........         (-80,388)  ................         (-77,100)          (+3,288)         (-77,100)
          Rescission of contract        (-623,236)  ................  ................        (+623,236)  ................
           authority............
          (Transfer authority)..          (33,000)  ................  ................         (-33,000)  ................
          (Limitation on              (41,107,800)      (32,990,251)      (41,585,464)        (+477,664)      (+8,595,213)
           obligations).........
          (Exempt obligations)..         (965,308)         (892,767)         (892,767)         (-72,541)  ................
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total budgetary       (66,450,078)      (55,228,698)      (64,680,869)      (-1,769,209)      (+9,452,171)
             resources..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

        TREASURY AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATION BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

   Mr. Campbell, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the United 
     States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, 
     and certain Independent Agencies for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2003, and for other purposes, reports favorably 
     thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.

Amount of bill as reported to the Senate................$34,533,464,000
Amount of estimate.......................................34,276,277,000
The bill as reported to the Senate:
  Above the appropriations provided in 2002.................716,352,000
  Above the estimates for 2003..............................257,187,000

               GENERAL STATEMENT AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

       The accompanying bill contains recommendations for new 
     budget (obligational) authority for the Treasury Department, 
     the United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the 
     President, and certain independent agencies for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2003.
       The Committee considered budget estimates for fiscal year 
     2003 in the aggregate amount of $34,276,277,000. Compared to 
     that amount, the accompanying bill recommends new budget 
     authority totaling $34,533,464,000.


                       REPROGRAMMING REQUIREMENTS

       The Committee is concerned about the number of 
     reprogramming requests submitted by agencies for 
     congressional review. Agencies are again reminded that only 
     those requests which meet the reprogramming criteria listed 
     below will be considered, that reprogramming should be 
     reserved for critical circumstances, and that reprogramming 
     proposals will not be considered, except in extraordinary 
     circumstances, if received 45 or fewer days prior to the end 
     of the fiscal year.
       The reprogramming guidelines to be used to determine 
     whether or not a reprogramming shall be submitted to the 
     Committee for prior approval are as follows:
       1. Except under extraordinary and emergency situations, the 
     Committees on Appropriations will not consider requests for a 
     reprogramming or a transfer of funds, or use of unobligated 
     balances, which are submitted after the close of the third 
     quarter of the fiscal year, June 30;

[[Page 996]]

       2. Clearly stated and detailed documentation presenting 
     justification for the reprogramming, transfer, or use of 
     unobligated balances shall accompany each request;
       3. For agencies, departments, or offices receiving 
     appropriations in excess of $20,000,000, a reprogramming 
     shall be submitted if the amount to be shifted to or from any 
     object class, budget activity, program line item, or program 
     activity involved is in excess of $500,000 or 10 percent, 
     whichever is greater, of the object class, budget activity, 
     program line item, or program activity;
       4. For agencies, departments, or offices receiving 
     appropriations less than $20,000,000, a reprogramming shall 
     be submitted if the amount to be shifted to or from any 
     object class, budget activity, program line item, or program 
     activity involved is in excess of $50,000, or 10 percent, 
     whichever is greater, of the object class, budget activity, 
     program line item, or program activity;
       5. For any action where the cumulative effect of below 
     threshold reprogramming actions, or past reprogramming and/or 
     transfer actions added to the request, would exceed the 
     dollar threshold mentioned above, a reprogramming shall be 
     submitted;
       6. For any action which would result in a major change to 
     the program or item which is different than that presented to 
     and approved by either of the Committees, or the Congress, a 
     reprogramming shall be submitted;
       7. For any action where funds earmarked by either of the 
     Committees for a specific activity are proposed to be used 
     for a different activity, a reprogramming shall be submitted; 
     and,
       8. For any action where funds earmarked by either of the 
     Committees for a specific activity are in excess of the 
     project or activity requirement, and are proposed to be used 
     for a different activity, a reprogramming shall be submitted.
       Additionally, each request shall include a declaration 
     that, as of the date of the request, none of the funds 
     included in the request have been obligated, and none will be 
     obligated, until the Committees on Appropriations have 
     approved the request.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

                  AGENCY FEES FOR FECA ADMINISTRATION

       The President's budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on Health, 
     Education, Labor, and Pensions to charge individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the administrative cost of the 
     Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA) program. Currently 
     Federal agencies are budgeted for and billed each year for 
     monetary and medical benefits that have been paid to their 
     employees under FECA, while the program's discretionary 
     administrative costs are financed in the Department of Labor 
     (DOL).
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation; therefore, the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     will continue to fund this administrative cost through the 
     Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration 
     Salaries and Expenses Account.

                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                          Departmental Offices

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$177,142,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................191,914,000
Committee recommendation....................................191,887,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $191,887,000 
     for salaries and expenses for departmental offices of the 
     Department of the Treasury.
       The Departmental Offices function in the Department of the 
     Treasury is to provide basic support to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury, who is the chief operating executive of the 
     Department. The Secretary of the Treasury maintains the 
     primary role in formulating and managing the domestic and 
     international tax and financial policies of the Federal 
     Government. The Secretary's responsibilities funded by the 
     Salaries and Expenses appropriation include: recommending and 
     implementing United States domestic and international 
     economic and tax policy; fiscal policy; governing the fiscal 
     operations of the Government; maintaining foreign assets 
     control; managing the public debt; overseeing major law 
     enforcement functions carried out by the Department of the 
     Treasury; managing development financial policy; representing 
     the United States on international monetary, trade and 
     investment issues; overseeing Department of the Treasury's 
     overseas operations; and directing the administrative 
     operations of the Department of the Treasury.
       In support of the Secretary, the Salaries and Expenses 
     appropriation provides resources for policy formulation and 
     implementation in the areas of domestic and international 
     financial, investment, tax, economic, trade and financial 
     operations and general fiscal policy. This appropriation also 
     provides resources for administrative support to the 
     Secretary and policy components, and coordination of 
     Departmental administrative policies in financial and 
     personnel management, procurement operations, and automated 
     information systems and telecommunications.
       Economic Policies and Programs.--The function of the 
     Economic Policies and Programs Activity is to advise the 
     Secretary and Deputy Secretary in economic areas such as: (1) 
     monitors macro-and micro-economic developments and assists in 
     determining appropriate economic policies; collects and 
     analyzes data pertaining to international portfolio 
     investment and foreign exchange positions; develops an 
     overall appraisal of the current state of, and outlook for 
     the economy; provides written and oral briefing materials for 
     the Secretary, other officials, and outsiders; participates 
     in interagency groups working on economic matters to develop 
     and maintain a coordinated and consistent government-wide 
     economic program; and (2) the formulation and execution of 
     U.S. international economic and financial policies regarding 
     a wide range of international development and analysis 
     functions involving: trade and investment, energy policy, 
     monetary affairs, development financing, and general economic 
     research into international financial issues. The Office of 
     International Affairs works closely with other Federal 
     agencies and international financial institutions, and 
     coordinates international financial and macro-economic policy 
     with the National Economic Council (Annual Economic Summit), 
     the National Security Council, the Council of Economic 
     Advisors, the Office of Management and Budget (foreign 
     country risk review), the United States Trade Representative 
     (financial services, investment, etc.), and all components of 
     the Executive Office of the President. Under Presidential 
     Executive Order, the Office of International Affairs 
     participates with the Department of State in the collection 
     and analysis of economic information on foreign countries. In 
     the areas of international monetary and foreign exchange 
     policy, the Office of International Affairs shares 
     responsibility with the Federal Reserve (principally, the 
     Board of Governors, but also the Federal Reserve Bank of New 
     York) in working closely with the International Monetary 
     Fund. In the area of international development, the Office of 
     International Affairs formulates resource needs, notably U.S. 
     contributions, policies and programs for various Multilateral 
     Development Banks. With the Export-Import Bank, the Office of 
     International Affairs has responsibility for export credit 
     finance. This activity includes the Office of the Assistant 
     Secretary (Economic Policy), the immediate offices of the 
     Under Secretary (International Affairs), the Assistant 
     Secretary (International Affairs) and the Office of 
     International Affairs.
       Financial Policies and Programs.--The function of the 
     Financial Policies and Programs Activity is to advise the 
     Secretary and Deputy Secretary in areas of domestic finance, 
     banking, fiscal policy and operations, and other related 
     financial matters, including development of policies and 
     guidance in the areas of financial institutions, Federal debt 
     finance, financial regulation, and capital markets. 
     Specifically, this activity ensures that the management of 
     the Federal Government's cash minimizes risk and strikes a 
     balance between cash needs and short-term investments. This 
     activity provides decision

[[Page 997]]

     makers and stakeholders with: (1) timely, concise and 
     thorough policies, guidance and analysis in the areas of: 
     financial institutions, financial regulation, the equitable 
     and efficient delivery of financial services, the 
     availability of credit, financial crimes, Federal debt 
     finance, capital markets, the privatization of government 
     assets, and any other issues related to domestic finance and 
     financial services; and (2) recommendations regarding the 
     development and implementation of tax policies and programs; 
     official estimates of all Government receipts for the 
     President's Budget, fiscal policy decisions, and cash 
     management decisions; policy criteria reflected in 
     regulations and rulings to implement the Internal Revenue 
     Code; negotiation of tax treaties for the United States; and 
     provides economic and legal policy analysis for domestic and 
     international tax policy decisions. This activity includes 
     the immediate office of the Under Secretary (Domestic 
     Finance), the Assistant Secretary (Financial Institutions), 
     the Assistant Secretary (Financial Markets), the Fiscal 
     Assistant Secretary, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
     Community Development Policy and the Assistant Secretary (Tax 
     Policy).
       Enforcement Policies and Programs.--The function of the 
     Enforcement Policies and Programs activity is to provide 
     policy development, guidance and coordination to Treasury's 
     law enforcement entities to combat money laundering and other 
     financial crime, interdict illegal drugs, reduce violent 
     crime, protect our nation's leaders, and provide quality 
     training for enforcement personnel. Responsibilities include: 
     (1) providing Departmental oversight and supervision of U.S. 
     Customs Service, U.S. Secret Service, Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Bureau 
     of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, and Executive Office of 
     Asset Forfeiture; and (2) negotiating international 
     agreements on behalf of the Secretary to engage in joint law 
     enforcement operations for the exchange of financial 
     information and records. The Office of Enforcement 
     administers economic sanctions against selective foreign 
     countries, international narcotics traffickers and 
     international terrorists in furtherance of U.S. foreign 
     policy and national security goals. This activity includes 
     the immediate offices of the Under Secretary for Enforcement 
     and the Assistant Secretary (Enforcement), including the 
     Office of Foreign Assets Control.
       Treasury-wide Management Policies and Programs.--The 
     Treasury-wide Management Policies and Programs Activity 
     provides policy advice on matters involving the internal 
     management of the Department and its bureaus; coinage and 
     currency production and security; the sale and retention of 
     savings bonds; financial management, information systems, 
     security, property management, human resources, procurement 
     and contracting, strategic planning; and customer service. 
     This activity is responsible for implementing the functions 
     of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), the Government 
     Performance Results Act (GPRA), and the Information 
     Technology Management Reform Act which includes efficient and 
     effective use of the Treasury's resources. This activity 
     includes the Office of the Assistant Secretary (Management) 
     and Chief Financial Officer and the Treasurer of the United 
     States.
       Treasury-wide Financial Statement Audit.--This activity has 
     responsibility for contracting and funding all financial 
     statement audit work that will be done by the Office of the 
     Inspector General (OIG). The OIG would streamline the 
     process, provide costs savings and accountability for getting 
     these audits done, and ensure timeliness and consistency of 
     financial statement audits in the Department. The audits 
     would include those of the Customs Service, the Financial 
     Management Service, the Bureau of Public Debt, the Federal 
     Financing Board, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and 
     Firearms, the Community Development Financial Institutions, 
     and the Departmental Offices.


                        treasury franchise fund

       The Committee recognizes the success of Treasury's efforts 
     to improve the quality and lower the cost of financial and 
     administrative services. Accordingly, the need to have 
     continuity in service delivery to current customers and to 
     continuously improve operations and achieve further 
     efficiencies in administrative support functions requires a 
     permanent footing. Therefore, the Committee has included a 
     new provision to permanently extend the Treasury Franchise 
     Fund.


                    COUNTERFEIT CURRENCY TECHNOLOGY

       The Committee notes that the war on terrorism and the war 
     on drugs have demonstrated the importance of tracking the 
     flows of currency. The Department of the Treasury has several 
     offices that track, target, and block the financial 
     transactions and assets of terrorists, narcotics traffickers, 
     foreign countries, and others that pose a threat to our 
     national security and economy, as well as offices that work 
     with domestic and foreign financial markets. The Department 
     of the Treasury, working in conjunction with the Department 
     of State, the Department of Justice, and other agencies has 
     been able to identify terrorist groups that may be funding 
     possible actions against the United States at home and 
     abroad.
       The Committee understands that funds have been authorized 
     to investigate the use of new technologies to detect and 
     track counterfeit currency which might be used against U.S. 
     interests at home and abroad. The Committee is aware of 
     various technologies under development which could aid in 
     this investigative effort. In order to best serve these 
     critical missions, the Committee directs the Department of 
     the Treasury to test the utility of using new technologies to 
     help identify the size of the universe of counterfeit 
     currency and better understand the circulation patterns of 
     currency and report back to the Committee within 120 days of 
     enactment of this Act on the results of its investigation of 
     these technologies and recommendations regarding their 
     potential use in the war on terrorism and drugs. Should the 
     results of these tests indicate that there are benefits to 
     the Government from these technologies, the Committee would 
     consider a reprogramming request which might be submitted by 
     the Department.


                CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT CLEAR PROGRAM

       The Committee is aware of an innovative program, created by 
     the Chicago Police Department, designed to partner with the 
     Department of the Treasury to implement improved information 
     sharing between criminal justice agencies at the local, 
     state, and Federal level--Citizen/Law Enforcement Analysis 
     and Reporting (CLEAR). In addition to violent crimes, the 
     CLEAR program will address financial and drug crimes, as well 
     as other law enforcement functions under the jurisdiction of 
     the Department and its related agencies. The Committee 
     directs the Department to work with the Chicago Police 
     Department to further develop and implement this important 
     program and has included $150,000, from within existing 
     funds, for this project.


                    office of foreign assets control

       The Committee provides that the Office of Foreign Assets 
     Control (OFAC) be funded at no less than $21,206,000. The 
     Committee is encouraged by the level of funding detail 
     offered by Treasury in its budget justifications for its 
     Enforcement programs, and regards this as an assurance that 
     OFAC's direct costs will be properly covered as shown, and 
     that administrative overhead resources are fairly allocated. 
     The Committee requests that similar explanatory tables be 
     provided in future justifications.
       The Committee understands that license applications 
     submitted to agencies at other departments, such as the 
     Department of Commerce, are resolved in a reasonable period 
     of time. The Committee believes that all license applications 
     pertaining to travel-related transactions submitted to OFAC 
     should be resolved expeditiously, but in no case no later 
     than 90 calendar days after receipt of the completed license 
     application.
       The Committee has included a new general provision 
     directing OFAC, whenever it decides to deny a license 
     application pertaining to travel-related transactions, to 
     notify the applicant of the denial in writing. The 
     notification shall include:
       --(1) The statutory and regulatory basis for the denial;
       --(2) To the extent consistent with the national security 
         of the United States, the specific considerations that 
         led to the decision to deny the license application;
       --(3) The name, phone number and e-mail address of the OFAC 
         representative in a position to discuss the issues with 
         the applicant.


                        DISCRIMINATORY BEER TAX

       In June of 2002, the Government of Puerto Rico enacted huge 
     increases in the excise tax on beer but exempted one local 
     beer producer. Those increases make the tax on beer imported 
     onto the Island from the mainland or abroad one of the 
     highest alcohol excise taxes in the world. This excise tax 
     has placed undue and unfair burdens on the Island's consumers 
     and on U.S. beer producers. It is costing jobs on the 
     mainland in factories and in supplier industries, including 
     U.S. agriculture.
       In order to remove this unfair barrier to trade and 
     encourage a more equitable tax structure in Puerto Rico, the 
     Committee has included a new Treasury general provision, 
     Section 128, to freeze the return to Puerto Rico of the 
     entire $300,000,000 rum rebate under section 7652 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Once the Secretary of the 
     Treasury determines that the discriminatory tax system has 
     been abolished, the rum rebate will be retroactively 
     reinstated.

        Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Program

Appropriations, 2002........................................$68,828,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................68,828,000
Committee recommendation.....................................68,828,000

       The Committee has provided a total of $68,828,000. The 1997 
     Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 
     established this account which is authorized to be used by or 
     on behalf of Treasury bureaus, at the Secretary's discretion, 
     to modernize business processes and increase efficiency 
     through technology investments, as well as other activities 
     that involve more than one Treasury bureau or Treasury's 
     interface with other governmental agencies.
       The Committee has been made aware of the inadequate funding 
     requested by the Department of the Treasury for the projects

[[Page 998]]

     under this program for the past couple of years. The 
     Committee is also aware of the importance of the timelines 
     for completion of these projects. The Committee urges the 
     Department to provide the necessary funding in fiscal year 
     2004 to avoid delays and potential cost overruns for these 
     projects.

                    Office of the Inspector General


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$35,424,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................35,428,000
Committee recommendation.....................................35,424,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $35,424,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the Office of the Inspector 
     General (OIG). The Committee supports the creation of an 
     official representational account and provides $2,500 out of 
     existing funds for that purpose.
       The OIG conducts and supervises audits, evaluations, and 
     investigations designed to: (1) promote economy, efficiency, 
     and effectiveness and prevent fraud, waste and abuse in 
     Departmental programs and operations; and (2) keep the 
     Secretary and the Congress fully and currently informed of 
     problems and deficiencies in the administration of 
     Departmental programs and operations. The audit function 
     provides program audit, contract audit and financial 
     statement audit services. Contract audits provide 
     professional advice to agency contracting officials on 
     accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, 
     award, administration, repricing, and settlement of 
     contracts. Program audits review and audit all facets of 
     agency operations. Financial statement audits assess whether 
     financial statements fairly present the agency's financial 
     condition and results of operations, the adequacy of 
     accounting controls, and compliance with laws and 
     regulations. These audits contribute significantly to 
     improved financial management by helping Treasury managers 
     identify improvements needed in their accounting and internal 
     control systems. The evaluations function reviews program 
     performance and issues critical to the mission of the 
     Department, including assessing the Department's 
     implementation of the Government Performance and Results Act 
     (GPRA). The investigative function provides for the detection 
     and investigation of improper and illegal activities 
     involving programs, personnel, and operations. This 
     appropriation also provides for the oversight of internal 
     investigations made by the Office of Internal Affairs and 
     Inspection in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 
     the Customs Service, and the Secret Service.
       The Inspectors General Auditor Training Institute provides 
     the necessary facilities, equipment, and support services for 
     conducting auditor training for the Federal Government 
     Inspector General community. The Office of the Inspector 
     General is the parent organization for this entity, although 
     program and financing data is reported under the Treasury 
     Franchise fund (effective in 1999).


           Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$125,778,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................123,962,000
Committee recommendation....................................123,962,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $123,962,000.
       The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 
     (TIGTA) conducts audits, investigations, and evaluations to 
     assess the operations and programs of the Internal Revenue 
     Service (IRS) and Related Entities, the IRS Oversight Board 
     and the Office of Chief Counsel to (1) promote the economic, 
     efficient and effective administration of the nation's tax 
     laws and to detect and deter fraud and abuse in IRS programs 
     and operations; and (2) recommend actions to resolve fraud 
     and other serious problems, abuses, and deficiencies in these 
     programs and operations, and keep the Secretary and the 
     Congress fully and currently informed of these issues and the 
     progress made in resolving them. TIGTA reviews existing and 
     proposed legislation and regulations relating to the programs 
     and operations of the IRS and Related Entities and makes 
     recommendations concerning the impact of such legislation and 
     regulations on the economy and efficiency in the 
     administration of programs and operations of the IRS and 
     Related Entities. The audit function provides program audit, 
     contract audit and financial statement audit services. 
     Program audits review and audit all facets of IRS and Related 
     Entities. Contract audits provide professional advice to IRS 
     contracting officials on accounting and financial matters 
     relative to negotiation, award, administration, repricing, 
     and settlement of contracts. The evaluations function reviews 
     program performance and issues critical to the mission of the 
     IRS. The investigative function provides for the detection 
     and investigation of improper and illegal activities 
     involving IRS programs and operations and protects the IRS 
     and Related Entities against external attempts to corrupt or 
     threaten their employees.
       The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration was 
     established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 
     (Public Law 105-206). Funding was first appropriated for this 
     account in the fiscal year 2000 Treasury and General 
     Government Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-58).


                Air Transportation Stabilization Program

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003........................................$6,041,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,041,000

       The Air Transportation Stabilization Board was authorized 
     in the Air Transportation Safety and Stabilization Act to 
     issue $10 billion of Federal Credit instruments to air 
     carriers. The purpose is ``to compensate air carriers for 
     losses incurred by the air carriers as a result of the 
     terrorist attacks on the United States that occurred on 
     September 11, 2001,'' providing among other criteria, that 
     ``such agreement is a necessary part of maintaining a safe, 
     efficient, and viable commercial aviation system in the 
     United States.''


           Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$28,932,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................32,932,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,932,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,932,000 
     for the repair and restoration of the Treasury Building and 
     Annex. This appropriation funds repairs and selected 
     improvements to maintain the Main Treasury and Annex 
     buildings. This recommendation is $2,000,000 above the fiscal 
     year 2002 level.

                 Expanded Access to Financial Services

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,000,000

       The Committee has provided $2,000,000 for Expanded Access 
     to Financial Services. The account continues funding to 
     develop and implement a program to expand access to financial 
     services to low- and moderate-income individuals who do not 
     currently utilize bank accounts or other financial service 
     opportunities. The Department of Treasury will develop and 
     assist in funding private sector provision of low-cost 
     electronic accounts and access to ATMs as a way of 
     encouraging greater efficiency and access to the financial 
     service system; conduct research on the financial services 
     needs of low- and moderate-income persons; and assist in 
     funding financial education for low- and moderate-income 
     individuals.
       The Committee recommends that funds be obligated to 
     continue the two projects initiated in fiscal year 2001. The 
     Committee also urges the Department to work with, and 
     consider an application for a project under this account 
     from, the Passaic County (New Jersey) Legal Aid Society.

                         Counterterrorism Fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$40,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................40,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................20,000,000

       The Committee has provided $20,000,000 for the 
     Counterterrorism Fund. These funds are provided for 
     responding to unforseen emergencies not budgeted for in the 
     regular process. These funds are to be made available upon 
     the advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations.
       The Counterterrorism Fund is designed to cover 
     unanticipated costs associated with: (1) providing support to 
     counter, investigate, or prosecute domestic or international 
     terrorism, including payment of rewards in connection with 
     these activities; and (2) re-establishing the operational 
     capability of an office, facility or other property damaged 
     or destroyed as a result of any domestic or international 
     terrorist incident. Treasury bureaus have important 
     counterterrorism responsibilities including: protecting the 
     President; designing and implementing security at National 
     Special Security Events; investigating arson, explosives and 
     firearms incidents; conducting financial investigations 
     relating to terrorism; preventing weapons of mass destruction 
     from entering our country; and implementing sanctions against 
     terrorist organizations. Funds would be reimbursed to 
     Treasury bureaus of departmental offices to compensate for 
     costs incurred in areas such as travel, transportation, 
     rentals and communications, print and graphics, other 
     services, supplies, equipment, and unvouchered funds.

                  Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

Appropriations, 2002........................................$47,537,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................50,517,000
Committee recommendation.....................................50,517,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $50,517,000 
     for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
       FinCEN, created in 1990 and elevated to bureau status in 
     2001, supports law enforcement investigations to prevent and 
     detect money laundering and other financial crimes. FinCEN's 
     network links law enforcement, financial, and regulatory 
     communities into a single information-sharing network. Using 
     Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) information reported by banks and 
     other financial institutions, FinCEN serves as the nation's 
     central clearinghouse for broad-based financial intelligence 
     and information sharing on money

[[Page 999]]

     laundering. This information helps illuminate the financial 
     trail for investigators to follow as they track criminals and 
     their assets.
       Investigative Analysis, Regulatory, and International 
     Activities.--Through investigative analysis efforts, FinCEN 
     provides support for the investigation and prosecution of law 
     enforcement cases at the Federal, State, local and 
     international levels, using financial data collected under 
     the BSA, as well as other commercial and law enforcement 
     information. FinCEN serves as a catalyst for research, 
     analysis, and dissemination of information on money 
     laundering methods and trends through joint case analysis 
     with law enforcement, integration of all source information 
     and the application of state-of-the-art data processing 
     techniques. In the regulatory area, FinCEN establishes 
     policies to administer the BSA effectively while balancing 
     the associated burden imposed on the regulated financial 
     institutions. Internationally, FinCEN maintains in-depth, 
     country-specific expertise concerning money laundering and 
     other financial crimes around the world to assist decision 
     makers in developing and promoting U.S. government anti-money 
     laundering policies. FinCEN also uses this expertise to 
     promote the development of Financial Intelligence Units 
     (FIUs) in other countries, and to facilitate investigative 
     exchanges with them.
       Money Services Business (MSB) Regulatory Program.--This 
     program supports new requirements to strengthen anti-money 
     laundering controls within the money services business 
     industry. The term `MSB' is used to define over 200,000 
     entities that act as money transmitters, issuers, redeemers 
     and sellers of money orders and travelers checks, check 
     cashers and currency exchanges. This largely unregulated 
     industry is required to register with the Department of the 
     Treasury by June 30, 2002. The Department of the Treasury has 
     also issued a final regulation that, for the first time, 
     extends suspicious activity reporting requirements to money 
     transmitter, travelers check, and money order segments of the 
     industry in 2002. In order to properly implement these 
     regulations, FinCEN has undertaken a major public outreach 
     project that is designed to identify and educate members of 
     the money service business industry concerning the 
     requirements of these new regulations.
       USA Patriot Act.--FinCEN is responsible for implementing 23 
     of the 44 provisions contained in Title III of the USA 
     Patriot Act, which provides new authorities and opportunities 
     to support law enforcement investigative efforts and foster 
     interagency cooperation against domestic and international 
     financial crime. FinCEN also has a key role in many of the 
     working groups established by the Department of the Treasury 
     to address the other provisions. These responsibilities 
     include developing regulatory programs to meet many of the 
     provisions, establishing a highly secure network for 
     electronic filing of Bank Secrecy Act reports, strengthening 
     cooperation between financial institutions and the law 
     enforcement communities, and enhancing strategic analysis in 
     areas such as alternate remittances systems.


                        treasury forfeiture fund

       The Treasury forfeiture fund was established on October 1, 
     1993, in Public Law 102-393. It is available to pay or 
     reimburse certain costs and expenses related to seizures and 
     forfeitures that occur pursuant to the Treasury Department's 
     law enforcement activities. It has two accounts, one which is 
     funded through permanent indefinite authority and the other 
     which is funded through a direct annual appropriation. The 
     direct appropriation represents the annual congressional 
     limitation on the use of the proceeds from seized and 
     forfeited assets. Forfeited cash and the proceeds of 
     forfeited monetary instruments are deposited into the fund. 
     Proceeds from the sale of other seized and forfeited assets 
     are also deposited into the fund.

                Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$128,680,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................122,393,000
Committee recommendation....................................126,660,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $126,660,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center (FLETC).
       FLETC provides the necessary facilities, equipment, and 
     support services for conducting recruit, advanced, 
     specialized, and refresher training for Federal law 
     enforcement personnel. FLETC personnel conduct the 
     instructional programs for the basic recruit and some of the 
     advanced training. This appropriation is for operating 
     expenses of FLETC, for research in law enforcement training 
     methods, and curriculum content. In addition, FLETC has a 
     reimbursable program to accommodate the training requirements 
     of various Federal agencies. As funds are available, law 
     enforcement training is provided to certain State, local, and 
     foreign law enforcement personnel on a space-available basis.
       The Committee has included funding to ensure that FLETC can 
     meet the demands of agencies for training their personnel as 
     they continue to hire additional personnel.
       The Committee has again included a general provision 
     (section 615) to permit FLETC to acquire the temporary use of 
     additional training facilities without seeking the advance 
     approval otherwise required by that section.


                          Off-Campus Training

       The Committee continues to support the FLETC mission to 
     provide basic technical assistance to State and local law 
     enforcement agencies. Therefore, the Committee provides 
     funding for the travel expenses of non-Federal personnel to 
     attend course development meetings and training. In addition, 
     the Committee continues to authorize FLETC to obtain 
     temporary use of additional facilities by lease, contract, or 
     other agreement for training which cannot be accommodated in 
     existing Center facilities. In making these decisions, the 
     Committee believes every consideration should be given to 
     providing training in the most cost effective manner.


                    rural law enforcement education

       The Committee recognizes the successful collaboration 
     between the National Center for State and Local Training at 
     FLETC and the Minot State University (MSU) Rural Crime and 
     Justice Center to expand the Small Town and Rural Law 
     Enforcement training series in the Northern Plains States and 
     for related rural law enforcement research. The validated 
     success of this collaboration at a regional level leads the 
     Committee to conclude that the project should be expanded and 
     conducted on a nationwide basis. Empirical research findings 
     from the Northern Plains project have indicated that 
     evaluation of rural law enforcement training results in 
     higher quality and more relevant training practices, 
     significantly changing how rural law enforcement officers 
     perform their official duties. The Committee recognizes that 
     it is not unusual to have only one law enforcement officer in 
     a rural area, which underscores the significance of the 
     training and evaluation, and the need to expand the program 
     nationwide. In addition to funding included in the base, the 
     Committee has provided $1,500,000 to the national center and 
     $1,500,000 for MSU to expand on the current program and 
     conduct the research and evaluative component of this 
     national initiative.


                Law Enforcement Vehicle Pursuit Training

       The Committee recognizes the importance of evaluating the 
     effectiveness of the vehicle pursuit training program that 
     FLETC has conducted nationwide with law enforcement 
     executives. To conduct this assessment, the Committee has 
     included an additional $500,000 to FLETC for the Minot State 
     University Rural Crime and Justice Center to provide a 
     comprehensive evaluation/assessment of the effectiveness of 
     the training and to provide recommendations for curriculum 
     revision, training delivery methods, and program policy 
     modifications.


                      FEDERAL AIR MARSHAL TRAINING

       The Committee commends the men and women of the Federal Law 
     Enforcement Training Center for their outstanding service to 
     the nation, the law enforcement community and the traveling 
     public. Immediately following the tragic terrorist attacks of 
     September 11, 2001, FLETC and the Federal Aviation 
     Administration (FAA) collaborated to meet the challenge of 
     training large numbers of Federal Air Marshals to protect the 
     United States aviation industry on an expedited basis.
       Only weeks after the attacks, FLETC in Artesia, New Mexico, 
     and Glynco, Georgia, began training large numbers of newly 
     hired law enforcement officers for deployment as air 
     marshals. FLETC augmented its excellent facilities in Artesia 
     for this new training, which included operational commercial 
     aircraft fuselages to provide realistic training 
     environments. Through FLETC, the United States rapidly 
     marshaled critical resources from across government to meet 
     the urgent need for airline security. The Committee applauds 
     this exceptional effort by FLETC and the Federal Air 
     Marshals.


                                 ALERRT

       The Committee recognizes the successful work done by the 
     Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center 
     (ALERRT) at Southwest Texas State University to expand small 
     town and rural law enforcement training in the Southern 
     Plains States and for related rural law enforcement research. 
     The validated success of the collaboration with local 
     agencies for law enforcement training has provided results in 
     higher quality and more relevant training practices, 
     significantly changing how rural law enforcement officers 
     perform their official duties. The Committee recognizes that 
     it is not unusual to have only one law enforcement officer in 
     a rural area, which underscores the significance of the 
     training and evaluation. The Committee encourages the Federal 
     Law Enforcement Training Center to work with Southwest Texas 
     State University (SWT) and provides $750,000 for this 
     relationship to be developed and to expand the SWT ALERRT 
     program.


                       TARLETON STATE UNIVERSITY

       The Committee recognizes the successful work done by 
     Tarleton State University for Small Town and Rural Law 
     Enforcement

[[Page 1000]]

     training in the Southern Plains. The validated success of 
     this program's collaboration with local agencies for law 
     enforcement training have provided results in higher quality 
     and more relevant training practices, significantly changing 
     how rural law enforcement officers perform their official 
     duties. The Committee provides $100,000 for FLETC to work 
     with Tarleton State University to continue to expand and 
     develop these initiatives.


     acquisition, construction, improvements, and related expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$41,934,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................23,329,000
Committee recommendation.....................................32,029,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $32,029,000 
     for acquisition, construction, improvements, equipment, 
     furnishings and related costs for expansion and maintenance 
     of facilities of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 
     (FLETC).
       The Committee was disappointed that the fiscal year 2003 
     budget request did not include additional funding for needed 
     construction at the FLETC facilities in Glynco, Georgia and 
     Artesia, New Mexico. While the Committee understands that the 
     Master Plan is undergoing review, Federal law enforcement 
     training needs have significantly increased since September 
     11, 2001. With new requirements placed upon FLETC to train 
     Federal air marshals and additional law enforcement personnel 
     necessary for homeland security, the budget falls well short 
     of meeting immediate needs to support these efforts. The 
     Committee therefore believes that it is incumbent upon the 
     Department of the Treasury and the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center to move expeditiously to determine the long-
     range needs of both campus locations and to take all 
     necessary steps to find the funding to begin addressing these 
     needs. To that end, the Committee has provided $4,200,000 for 
     a new classroom and $4,500,000 for an indoor firearms 
     training range at the Artesia, New Mexico campus.


                      Interagency Law Enforcement

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$107,576,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................107,576,000
Committee recommendation....................................107,576,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $107,576,000 
     for interagency law enforcement.
       In a 1982 counterdrug effort, the Department of Justice 
     (DOJ) developed the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement 
     Task Force (ICDE) program to bring together and integrate the 
     efforts of all levels of law enforcement in the fight against 
     drugs. The ICDE program designated nine domestic regions that 
     deploy the investigative expertise from 10 Federal agencies, 
     and State and local law enforcement agencies to dismantle and 
     disrupt major drug trafficking and money laundering 
     organizations and place offenders in jail. Treasury agencies 
     provide specific value-added investigative expertise to these 
     major cases. The U.S. Customs Service provides specific 
     expertise in international smuggling and interdiction; the 
     Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) provides 
     expertise on firearms and explosives violence; and the 
     Internal Revenue Service (Criminal Investigative Division) 
     provides expertise on money laundering and tax evasion. Since 
     1998, the Treasury portion of the ICDE program has been 
     administered by Treasury's Departmental Offices. Treasury's 
     participating bureaus, ATF, Customs, and IRS, are reimbursed 
     from this appropriation. Treasury has assigned two special 
     agents to oversee ICDE policy and budget for the three 
     Treasury bureaus. Funding for Treasury components is 
     primarily utilized for full-time equivalent employees; 
     however, a portion of funding is used for operating expenses 
     incurred during the investigative phase of the case.

                      Financial Management Service


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$212,850,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................220,712,000
Committee recommendation....................................220,664,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $220,664,000 
     for salaries and expenses for the Financial Management 
     Service (FMS) in fiscal year 2003.
       Payments.--FMS implements payment policy and procedures for 
     the Federal Government, issues and distributes payments, 
     promotes the use of electronics in the payment process, and 
     assists agencies in converting payments from paper checks to 
     electronic funds transfer (EFT). The control and financial 
     integrity of the Federal payments and collections process 
     includes reconciliation, accounting, and claims activities. 
     The claims activity settles claims against the United States 
     resulting from Government checks which have been forged, 
     lost, stolen, or destroyed, and collects monies from those 
     parties liable for fraudulent or otherwise improper 
     negotiation of Government checks.
       Collections.--FMS implements collections policy, 
     regulations, standards, and procedures for the Federal 
     Government, facilitates collections, promotes the use of 
     electronics in the collections process, and assists agencies 
     in converting collections from paper to electronic media.
       Debt Collection.--FMS provides debt collection operational 
     services to client agencies which includes collection of 
     delinquent accounts, offset of Federal payments against debts 
     owed the Government, post-judgment enforcement, consolidation 
     of information reported to credit bureaus, reporting for 
     discharged debts or vendor payments, and disposition of 
     foreclosed property.
       Government-wide Accounting and Reporting.--FMS also 
     provides financial accounting, reporting, and financing 
     services to the Federal Government and the Government's 
     agents who participate in the payments and collections 
     process by generating a series of daily, monthly, quarterly 
     and annual Government-wide reports. FMS also works directly 
     with agencies to help reconcile reporting differences.

                Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$854,747,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................883,775,000
Committee recommendation...................................$888,430,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $888,430,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 
     and Firearms (ATF), an increase of $4,655,000 above the 
     President's request, which includes $5,000,000 for an 
     explosives enforcement initiative.
       The ATF has three major strategic goals: (1) effectively 
     contribute to a safer America by reducing the future number 
     and cost of violent crimes; (2) maintain a sound revenue 
     management and regulatory system that continues reducing 
     payer burden, improving service, collecting revenue due, and 
     preventing illegal diversion; and (3) protect the public and 
     prevent consumer deception in ATF's regulated commodities. To 
     achieve these goals, ATF enforces the Federal laws and 
     regulations relating to alcohol, tobacco, firearms, 
     explosives, and arson by working directly and in cooperation 
     with others.


                   Federal alcohol administration act

       The Committee recognizes alcoholic beverages as among the 
     most socially sensitive commodities marketed in the United 
     States. In this connection, marketing, labeling, and 
     advertising of alcoholic beverages must be accomplished in an 
     environment which fosters fair and healthy competition while 
     protecting the interests of the American consumer. The 
     Committee expects that there be no diminution of regulatory 
     and oversight functions in fiscal year 2003.


               armed career criminal apprehension program

       The Armed Career Criminal Act, signed into law in 1984 and 
     expanded by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, provides 
     mandatory sentences for certain violent repeat offenders who 
     carry firearms. The Bureau, given its jurisdiction over 
     firearms laws, has a unique opportunity to effect the 
     apprehension of violent offenders. The success to date of the 
     Bureau's Repeat Offender Program has surpassed initial 
     expectations regarding apprehension, prosecution, and 
     conviction of career criminals. The Committee notes that 74 
     percent of the defendants apprehended under this program have 
     had direct involvement in illegal narcotics trafficking.


           STAFFING LEVELS IN SMALLER STATES AND RURAL STATES

       Over the past several years the number of ATF agents in the 
     smaller States and rural areas have steadily declined, in 
     favor of placing agent resources in larger States with large 
     metropolitan centers. These staffing trends have not always 
     reflected the needs of these areas. The Committee credits the 
     Department for recognizing the need for placing special 
     agents in under-represented rural areas and small and medium-
     sized States. The Committee urges that ATF follow through on 
     pledges to maintain and increase staffing in under-
     represented rural, small, and medium-sized States.


                             GREAT Program

       The Committee provides $13,000,000 for grants to local law 
     enforcement organizations for the Gang Resistance Education 
     and Training (GREAT) Program. The GREAT program continues to 
     be enthusiastically endorsed by communities in Colorado, 
     North Dakota, and Alaska. The Committee directs ATF to 
     consider providing GREAT funding to the qualified law 
     enforcement and prevention organizations in these areas.


                     Safety and Security Standards

       The Committee is concerned about the apparent lack of 
     safety and security standards for federally licensed firearms 
     dealers. Guns stolen from licensed gun dealers pose an 
     increasingly significant public safety threat. It is clear 
     that the industry and ATF need to work together to address 
     these problems. Therefore, the Committee directs ATF to make 
     identifying and addressing security recommendations for 
     Federal firearms licensees a priority at the next firearms 
     industry discussion group that convenes.


                    Activity on Indian Reservations

       The Committee appreciates ATF's efforts to address the 
     growing problem of gang-related activities on and near Indian 
     reservations. In conjunction with programs and activities 
     provided by the Boys and Girls Clubs

[[Page 1001]]

     of America, ATF has made in-roads in Native communities to 
     reduce gang-related activities by training, seminars, and 
     after-school activities aimed at reducing the number of 
     Native children that are likely participants in gang 
     behavior. The Committee recommends that ATF continue to 
     coordinate the efforts of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), 
     the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, and private 
     organizations such as the National Native American Law 
     Enforcement Association to expand these activities and 
     develop an inter-agency and inter-disciplinary approach to 
     gang-related activities.


                Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative

       The Committee commends ATF's efforts to reduce firearms 
     violence by investigating illegal trafficking to the youth of 
     this country. The Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative 
     (YCGII) began as a pilot program in 17 cities in 1996 and is 
     currently operating in 50 sites.
       The partnership between ATF and local law enforcement 
     agencies in these communities is invaluable to the mutual 
     effort to reduce gun-related crime. The tracing information 
     provided by ATF not only allows local jurisdictions to target 
     scarce resources to investigations likely to achieve results 
     but also gives ATF the raw data to be able to investigate and 
     prosecute the illegal source of these crime guns. The 
     Committee continues to believe that there are significant 
     disruptions in these illegal firearms markets directly due to 
     investigative leads arising from this regional initiative.


                     EXPLOSIVES ENFORCEMENT GROUPS

       The Committee is concerned about the illegal use of 
     explosives and its relation to our homeland security. The 
     Committee is dedicated to protecting and supporting our first 
     responders, the American public, and American institutions 
     from the threat of terrorist violence and the illegal and 
     criminal use of explosives. There are approximately 6 billion 
     pounds of explosives produced in the United States every 
     year. Because of the extremely high and unacceptable risk to 
     public safety from criminal or terrorist theft and misuse of 
     these explosives, the Committee believes that more 
     comprehensive enforcement and regulatory efforts are 
     essential to public safety. Therefore, the Committee has 
     included an additional $5,000,000 for an explosives 
     enforcement initiative. This funding shall be used to 
     increase the number of agents and inspectors dedicated to 
     enforcing existing Federal explosives laws and regulations. 
     The additional personnel would comprise explosives groups to 
     be located strategically nationwide. These groups shall 
     conduct undercover and surveillance operations into the 
     misuse and trafficking in explosive materials; investigating 
     all bombings of Federal interest throughout the United 
     States; and thoroughly investigating all explosives-related 
     thefts and losses. The Committee directs ATF to provide a 
     detailed spending plan to the Committee on Appropriations 
     prior to the obligation of any funds. The Committee 
     encourages ATF to work with industry in developing this 
     initiative.


                      EXPLOSIVE DETECTION TRAINING

       The Committee appreciates efforts by ATF to make explosive 
     detection training available on request to school districts 
     nationwide. The Committee understands that ATF, in 
     conjunction with the U.S. Department of Education, is 
     developing a CD-ROM training program which will provide a 
     standardized bomb threat management and response template for 
     use by school administrators to develop a customized response 
     program for individual schools. The Committee is pleased by 
     this expanded assistance and encourages continued assistance 
     to schools by ATF field office personnel as they establish 
     and implement these necessary management and response plans.


               MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENTS

       The Committee expects that $2,500,000 will be used to 
     continue management and technological enhancement at the AFT 
     National Licensing Center, the Imports Branch, and the 
     National Firearms Act Branch (NFA). The Committee notes that 
     ATF has taken some major steps in the right direction:
       --substantial progress on information management 
         improvements for data retrieval and reporting for 
         customers of the Firearms, Explosives and Arson Services 
         (FEA) Division;
       --increased meeting and other outreach efforts with 
         industry to coordinate policy and operational concerns;
       --a firearms importers conference and seminar to be held in 
         the summer of 2002; and
       --additional contract assistance retained and directed at 
         FEA's service improvements efforts.
       However, the Committee believes that there are critical 
     areas of the plan which have not yet demonstrated improvement 
     over the last 2 years.
       The lack of well trained personnel still continues at 
     certain branches. Some additional assistance is particularly 
     needed with regard to specialized staff at the Division level 
     to troubleshoot problems, and manage these significant 
     improvement efforts. Operations personnel cannot be expected 
     to perform these roles and still achieve service 
     improvements, particularly where the operations workload has 
     increased significantly in the last fiscal year due to the 
     processing of import applications for nonimmigrant aliens 
     (NIA).
       Performance standards and critical elements for services 
     positions to meet enhanced service goals in the FEA Division 
     have not been finalized, but are still under review. The 
     Committee has received no information that the Division as a 
     whole has established milestones for service improvements, 
     such as specific targets for reductions in current the 
     processing times. The Committee notes that such milestones 
     will have to take into account the addition of the NIA 
     applicant workload.
       Communications improvements must continue to be emphasized. 
     In recent years, and more dramatically since new homeland 
     security programs have been initiated, importers and NFA 
     registrants often face inconsistent and confusing policy, 
     law, and technical guidance that frequently changes regarding 
     the importation of firearms, parts, and ammunition. 
     Developments in these areas must be communicated clearly, 
     consistently, and often to the importing and NFA communities. 
     The Committee believes that in addition to use of the FFL 
     newsletters and the ATF web site, a comprehensive and 
     frequently updated guidance handbook designed for both the 
     importing and NFA communities should be published and 
     distributed to these communities as the Committee has 
     recommended for the last 2 years.
       ATF efforts cannot be fully achieved without serious 
     coordination efforts, both in technology and policy, with the 
     import and export processes at the Department of State and 
     the U.S. Customs Service. The Committee recommends that ATF 
     seek a working group with these agencies to consult with 
     importers and others on solutions that will enhance the 
     fairness and efficiency of administering or enforcing 
     firearms-related laws by these agencies.

                          U.S. Customs Service

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,471,960,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,391,952,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,501,488,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,501,488,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the U.S. Customs Service.
       The Committee has included an additional $4,000,000 for 
     forced child labor, an additional $4,000,000 for expanded 
     intellectual property rights initiatives, $500,000 for the 
     Vermont World Trade Center, $2,300,000 for canine curriculum 
     on chemical and biological threats, $4,000,000 for port 
     technology research and development, $10,000,000 for the 
     Container Security Initiative, $2,000,000 for a bulk currency 
     initiative, and $750,000 for the Center for Agricultural 
     Policy and Trade Studies.
       The United States Customs Service, in partnership with 
     other Federal agencies, is one of the Nation's primary means 
     of border enforcement. Its mission is to ensure that all 
     goods and persons entering and exiting the United States do 
     so in compliance with all United States laws and regulations.
       Commercial.--Commercial activities are all process/business 
     area activities (Trade Compliance, Outbound, and Passenger 
     Processing) which occur prior to a violation being confirmed 
     or acceptance of a referral for investigation. This includes 
     intelligence gathering, targeting, analysis, and examination 
     activities.
       Drug and Other Enforcement.--Drug and Other Enforcement 
     activities are process activities which occur after 
     confirmation of a violation or acceptance of a referral for 
     investigation. Also included are enforcement strategies to 
     address enforcement issues which impact more than one 
     process, intelligence activities and investigations of drug 
     and money laundering violations, intelligence activities and 
     investigations related to alleged/suspected violations which 
     are independent of process activities, the air and marine 
     interdiction programs, and radio communications management.


                            NORTHERN BORDER

       The Committee commends the actions of the United States 
     Customs Service insofar as the Customs Service has worked to 
     strengthen America's border with Canada. The Committee also 
     recognizes that the process of strengthening the Northern 
     Border is not complete and that further adjustments in 
     personnel assignments and resource allocations will be 
     necessary. Customs stands at the front line in securing ``the 
     longest open border in the world'' from potential acts of 
     terrorism and other illegal activity. The Committee is also 
     aware of the vital role Customs performs in supporting 
     America's strong trade relationship with Canada, facilitating 
     over $350,000,000,000 in trade annually.
       The Committee supports full implementation of the 30-point 
     ``Smart Border Accord,'' signed by the United States and 
     Canada in December 2001. The Committee urges Customs to fully 
     implement ongoing initiatives in furtherance of securing the 
     flow of people and goods, hardening our infrastructure, and 
     in sharing mutual enforcement objectives with Canada. 
     Implementation of programs such as pre-clearance of U.S.-
     bound traffic, ``reverse inspections,'' hardening of remote 
     ports, and expanded information sharing promises increased 
     security and important trade benefits on the Northern Border.

[[Page 1002]]

       The Committee commends Customs for stationing U.S. Customs 
     officers in Canadian ports to work side by side with Canadian 
     counterparts to target high-risk containers bound for the 
     United States. Additionally, the Committee encourages Customs 
     to expand use of ``smart'' processing and inspection 
     technologies such as the NEXUS program. This joint United 
     States-Canadian pilot is a dedicated commuter lane system 
     which allows Customs and the Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service to rapidly identify and clear pre-registered frequent 
     travelers. The Committee urges Customs to implement an 
     expansion of the program expeditiously as an integral part of 
     a layered security framework which both secures our mutual 
     border and facilitates this unique trade relationship.


                       SOUTHWEST BORDER SECURITY

       The Committee commends the actions of the United States 
     Customs Service in its efforts to combat threats entering 
     America. The Committee also recognizes that the process of 
     strengthening the Southwest Border is crucial to America's 
     safety and that further adjustments in personnel assignments 
     and resource allocations will be necessary. Customs stands at 
     the front line in securing the United States-Mexican border 
     from potential acts of terrorism and other illegal activity. 
     The Committee is also aware of the vital role Customs 
     performs in supporting America's strong trade relationship 
     with Mexico, facilitating over $232,000,000,000 in trade 
     annually.
       The Committee urges Customs to fully implement the United 
     States-Mexico Border Partnership, which is a 22-point program 
     with greater cooperation and technological enhancements at 
     the border. Implementation of programs such as pre-clearance 
     of U.S.-bound traffic, ``reverse inspections,'' hardening of 
     remote ports, and expanded information sharing promises 
     increased security and important trade benefits to both the 
     United States and Mexico.
       The Committee commends Customs for its efforts to prescreen 
     in-bound trade traffic through early cargo manifests but is 
     concerned that more inspectors, check points, and the use of 
     sophisticated technologies are needed to lower the risk of 
     potential terrorism. Additionally, the Committee encourages 
     Customs to expand use of ``smart'' processing and 
     authorization and access technologies such as smart cards, 
     currently used in the Department of Defense and the 
     Department of the Treasury. Smart cards are identification 
     cards embedded with a computer chip containing biometric data 
     used to rapidly identify and clear preregistered and frequent 
     travelers. The Committee urges Customs to expeditiously 
     implement an expansion of a Southwest Border-wide security 
     program as an integral part of a layered security framework 
     which both secures our mutual border and facilitates this 
     unique trade relationship with Mexico.


                     Container Security Initiative

       The Customs Service announced the creation of the Container 
     Security Initiative (CSI) on January 17, 2002. The CSI is a 
     critical effort to address the need to protect U.S. seaports. 
     This initiative would allow the targeting and screening of 
     potentially dangerous cargo prior to its arrival at U.S. 
     ports. The Committee notes that three major Canadian ports as 
     well as the ports of Rotterdam, Singapore, Antwerp, and Le 
     Havre have all become participants in this initiative. The 
     Committee provides $10,000,000 to continue this effort. The 
     Committee also urges the Customs Service to continue to 
     evaluate best practices when investigating options for 
     container security as stated in Senate Report 107-156.


                    Remote Administration Technology

       The Committee supports ongoing efforts to enhance services 
     at low-volume ports of entry through the use of remote 
     administration technology. The Committee believes the 
     additional security presence and the after-hours travel 
     capabilities will benefit those who live near the affected 
     border crossings. However, to ensure that commercial traffic 
     through these ports is not negatively affected, these 
     enhancements must not result in loss of personnel or 
     reduction of staffed hours at these ports.


         Staffing and Service Levels at Customs Ports of Entry

       The Committee continues to believe that the services 
     provided through the Charleston, WV, Customs office are very 
     important to the State of West Virginia and the Nation as a 
     whole. For this reason, the Committee expects the Service to 
     maintain the level of services provided in fiscal year 1996 
     through fiscal year 2003 at this office.
       The Committee continues to believe that the policy of 
     providing part-time and temporary inspectors at the Honolulu 
     International Airport is an effective way to handle the large 
     and increasing volume of passengers arriving and departing 
     this very busy airport in Hawaii. The Committee has again 
     included $750,000 for part-time and temporary positions in 
     the Honolulu Customs District. This action is intended to 
     enhance and not supplant current staffing levels. Amounts 
     included in this account are sufficient to maintain staffing 
     levels at this airport through fiscal year 2003 at the fiscal 
     year 1997 level.
       The Charleston, South Carolina Port (Port) is the fourth 
     largest cargo port in the United States, and the second 
     largest on the East Coast. However, the Port continues to be 
     severely understaffed by Customs and lacks the necessary 
     resources to address the volume of cargo entering the Port 
     yearly. As the volume of cargo traffic at the Port continues 
     to increase, Customs resources and staffing at the Port have 
     fallen behind. The Committee is aware that Customs dedicated 
     to the Port, on a temporary basis, an additional canine team 
     which resulted in commensurate increases in seizures of 
     contraband. This is concrete evidence that increased staffing 
     at the Port will enhance the mission of the Customs Service 
     at this location, supporting enforcement as well as 
     facilitating the entry of legitimate trade. The Committee 
     recommends that Customs make every effort to provide 
     additional staffing and equipment for use at the Port. The 
     Committee directs that in no case shall the level of Special 
     Agents, Inspectors, Canine Enforcement Officers or other 
     support personnel fall below the 1999 staffing levels at the 
     Port.
       The Committee is aware that the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service has assigned badly needed personnel to 
     New Mexico's major ports of entry at Santa Teresa and 
     Columbus. Similar increases in Customs Service personnel are 
     needed, especially in Santa Teresa which lacks the staff to 
     operate two processing booths throughout the day. The 
     Committee therefore strongly urges the Customs Service to 
     review the staffing situation in Santa Teresa and to approve 
     the addition of four Customs Service personnel to that 
     location. Further, the Committee expects to be kept informed 
     on the status of this review.
       Legitimate, as well as illicit, trade and traffic continue 
     to grow in the State of Florida. Customs should give a high 
     priority to funding sufficient inspection personnel at ports 
     of entry in Florida for fiscal year 2003.
       Over the years Customs personnel in smaller States as well 
     as rural areas have declined considerably. Problems facing 
     these areas have not necessarily declined, and the Committee 
     urges Customs to continually review its staffing requirements 
     and to consider the allocation to smaller States and rural 
     areas.
       The Committee recognizes the importance of full-time 
     staffing at the Pittsburg, New Hampshire port of entry for 
     New Hampshire and the entire New England region. As the only 
     port of entry in New Hampshire, the Committee directs Customs 
     to give a high priority to funding sufficient staffing at the 
     Pittsburg station for fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee appreciates the work of the Customs Service 
     to address issues related to the national and economic 
     security of our Nation. As such, the Committee recognizes the 
     significant role that the Customs Service plays in providing 
     essential inspection services to major airports such as 
     Louisville, Kentucky, a major shipment hub which faces acute 
     economic pressure due to tremendous growth year after year. 
     The Committee directs the Customs Service to identify and 
     request resources necessary to address staffing shortfalls at 
     the Louisville Airport, and to work closely with the Regional 
     Airport Authority and the many businesses that rely on this 
     location as a channel for national and international trade.
       The U.S. Customs Service is the first line of homeland 
     defense for cargo and ships that enter the Port of Virginia, 
     which consists of the Norfolk International Terminals, the 
     Portsmouth Marine Terminal, and the Newport News Marine 
     Terminal. The Port of Virginia handled 1.3 million 20-foot 
     containers and 1.6 million vessels in 2001. Located near the 
     port are the Norfolk Naval Base, the Norfolk Naval Air 
     Station, the Oceana Naval Air Station, Langley Air Force 
     Base, the U.S. Army Transportation Center at Fort Eustis and 
     Fort Story, and several other critical Department of Defense 
     facilities. Because of the unique combination of defense 
     facilities and large volume of international trade, the Port 
     of Virginia is a likely target for terrorism. The Committee 
     directs the Customs Service to conduct an in-depth review the 
     homeland security needs of the Port of Virginia, and report 
     back within 60 days after the date of enactment on the 
     resources necessary and steps they are taking to address 
     those needs.
       The Committee recognizes the importance of full-time 
     staffing for the Providence, Rhode Island port of entry. 
     While the volume of cargo entering Rhode Island has increased 
     annually, staffing at the Office of Field Operations in Rhode 
     Island has been operating below full strength. The Committee 
     directs the Customs Service to give high priority to funding 
     sufficient staffing in Rhode Island for fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee also recognizes the increased demand for 
     criminal investigative work by the Customs Service in Rhode 
     Island, particularly in the areas of drug smuggling and money 
     laundering investigations. The Committee directs the Customs 
     Service to explore the feasibility of establishing an Office 
     of Investigations in Providence, Rhode Island, including an 
     adequate number of special agents and support staff.


                   PEACE BRIDGE JOINT BORDER FACILITY

       The Committee directs the Commissioner of the U.S. Customs 
     Service, in consultation

[[Page 1003]]

     with the Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization 
     Service and the Office of Homeland Security, to submit to the 
     Committee on Appropriations a report, within 180 days of 
     enactment, that details how a joint United States/Canadian 
     border inspection facility could be established on the 
     Canadian side of the Peace Bridge in Fort Erie, Ontario. In 
     formulating this report, the Commission shall consult with 
     the Canadian Government, the Buffalo and Fort Erie Public 
     Bridge Authority, and the City of Buffalo, New York. The 
     report shall consider how such a joint facility could 
     maximize the security and efficiency of the Peace Bridge 
     Expansion project, which is currently being developed by the 
     Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority. The report 
     shall also include preliminary recommendations for such a 
     joint or shared United States/Canadian facility and identify 
     any United States or Canadian statutes or regulations that 
     would need to be altered in order to establish such a 
     facility.


                  TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

       The Committee has provided $4,000,000 to the U.S. Customs 
     Service for the establishment of a pilot program to evaluate 
     and prototype next-generation technology to screen and detect 
     contraband, explosives, chemical and biological weapons, and 
     radioactive materials at the Nation's larger ports including, 
     but not limited to, the Port of Charleston, South Carolina. 
     The Committee is aware of proven technology and security 
     standards currently being employed by the Department of 
     Defense Total Asset Visibility Network and encourages Customs 
     to evaluate such best practices when investigating options 
     for this project. In particular, Customs shall: (a) evaluate 
     screening technology including, but not limited to, machinery 
     that does not require human evaluation and analysis; and (b) 
     work with agencies like the Departments of Energy and Defense 
     to evaluate technology to facilitate the placement of 
     radiation detection to maximize the ability to effectively 
     detect Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) threats. 
     Customs shall report to the Committee on Appropriations no 
     later than 120 days after the enactment of this legislation 
     on its progress in implementing this program.


                  Vehicle and Cargo Inspection System

       The Committee has been responsive to the needs of the 
     Customs Service for new technology and equipment to improve 
     the inspection of traffic across both the Northern and 
     Southwest Borders. One example is the use of the Vehicle and 
     Cargo Inspection System (VACIS) technology which is a non-
     intrusive inspection technology used to scan vehicles, 
     primarily trucks, and cargo containers. A new VACIS system 
     has been developed to scan rail cars and has been installed 
     along the Southwest Border for deployment.
       An additional technology of interest to law enforcement 
     agencies is the Weigh-In-Motion or WIM system, which can 
     weigh commercial traffic as it passes through ports of entry. 
     New Mexico State University's Physical Science Lab has WIM 
     under development and has established the Santa Teresa Border 
     Technology Deployment Center to test such technologies. The 
     Committee strongly believes that the Customs Service should 
     work jointly with the New Mexico State University Physical 
     Science Lab to test the effectiveness of this technology at 
     an operating port of entry.


                       VERMONT WORLD TRADE OFFICE

       Vermont continues to develop a large market in 
     international trade. Forty percent of Vermont companies, 
     which employ approximately 70,000 individuals, are engaged in 
     exports. In 1995, the State of Vermont created the Vermont 
     World Trade Office to provide technical assistance to 
     businesses and information on foreign trade opportunities. 
     The Office has received overwhelming numbers of requests from 
     companies interested in exploring international trade 
     opportunities. To meet this demand, the Vermont World Trade 
     Office hopes to open satellite offices and expand service for 
     its clients. The Committee includes $500,000 to continue the 
     partnership with the Vermont World Trade Office in 
     furtherance of promoting foreign trade.


               Customs Integrity Awareness Program (CIAP)

       The Committee continues its strong support for the Customs 
     integrity awareness program. This program, begun in fiscal 
     year 2000, is to improve hiring methodologies to ensure that 
     applicants are of the highest quality and integrity, and to 
     improve the recruitment process. The funding provided allows 
     Customs to conduct polygraph examinations for candidates 
     applying for positions which are most susceptible to 
     corruption. The Committee encourages the Commissioner to 
     continue efforts to improve the integrity measures of the 
     Customs Service.

                           child pornography

       The Committee directs the Customs Service to continue 
     providing $100,000 of available funds to promote public 
     awareness for the child pornography tipline, including 
     ongoing efforts to make children aware of the tipline, in 
     fiscal year 2003. The Committee recommends that the Customs 
     Service continue to coordinate this promotional effort with 
     the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and 
     the U.S. Postal Service to ensure that the publicity is 
     diversified and effective. The Committee fully supports 
     Customs' work in battling child pornography and is impressed 
     with the successes Customs has had given the limited 
     resources.


                   Forced and Indentured Child Labor

       The Committee is pleased with the continued work of Customs 
     regarding enforcement of section 307 of the Tariff Act of 
     1930 as it relates to forced and indentured child labor. The 
     Committee believes that continued focus on enforcement of the 
     ban on importation of goods made by forced child labor is 
     critical, and that Customs needs to continue this effort 
     through aggressive investigation and enforcement of the 
     applicable laws. The Committee has provided an additional 
     $4,000,000 and expects to receive an expenditure plan prior 
     to the obligation of funds.


                Intellectual Property Rights Initiative

       The Committee commends Customs for continuing to focus on 
     Intellectual Property Rights violations even while it serves 
     as America's frontline and performs critical homeland 
     security duties. Intellectual Property Rights violation cost 
     American businesses millions in lost revenue annually. Since 
     its establishment in early calendar year 2002, the National 
     Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center, led by 
     Customs in collaboration with the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation, has provided critical leadership for both 
     domestic and international efforts. Through outreach, 
     training, symposia, and aggressive investigations, the Center 
     is protecting citizens from economic and other adverse 
     impacts of counterfeit merchandise. The Committee directs 
     Customs to aggressively continue these efforts and provides 
     an additional $4,000,000 for domestic and international 
     programs, staffing, as well as continued operation of the 
     Coordination Center.


            CENTER FOR AGRICULTURAL POLICY AND TRADE STUDIES

       The volume of trade along the Northern border has increased 
     dramatically in the last decade as a result of a number of 
     free trade agreements. Implementation of World Trade 
     Organization (WTO) policies will also have a significant 
     impact on the Northern Border, particularly in the Northern 
     Plains region. The Committee recognized the importance of 
     this growth in trade and provided funds in fiscal years 2000, 
     2001, and 2002 to conduct research on the bilateral trade of 
     agricultural commodities and products under the Canada-United 
     States Trade Agreement. This research is being conducted at 
     the Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies located 
     at North Dakota State University.
       The primary purpose of this research program is to analyze 
     a wide range of agricultural and trade policy issues for 
     agricultural products, agribusiness firms, and the rural 
     economies in the Northern Plains States. Specific objectives 
     for this research are (1) to evaluate the potential impacts 
     of multilateral and regional free trade agreements (e.g. the 
     WTO and Free Trade Area of the Americas negotiations) on 
     Northern Plains agricultural competitiveness in global 
     markets, (2) to analyze net farm income and agricultural 
     policies for the Northern Plains region, (3) to evaluate the 
     impacts of macro policy variables, such as exchange rates and 
     the new farm bill, on agricultural exports, (4) to develop 
     strategies to improve export opportunities for agricultural 
     goods from this region, and (5) to analyze the impacts of the 
     North American Free Trade Agreement on trilateral flows of 
     agricultural goods and net farm income in the region. The 
     Committee has included $750,000 to continue this project.


                             Project ALERT

       The Committee instructs the Customs Service to provide no 
     less than $200,000 to the National Center for Missing and 
     Exploited Children for the training of retired law 
     enforcement officers to assist in the investigation of 
     unsolved missing children cases nationwide. The Committee 
     anticipates that these funds will be in addition to other 
     funds available to the Center for these purposes.


                        INTERDICTION OPERATIONS

       Through the years, Customs has had to react to constantly 
     changing drug smuggling methods. Consequently, interdiction 
     methods have been adapted to challenge the nature of the 
     ever-changing threat. This effort has proven effective, with 
     record narcotics seizures posted annually. After the 
     terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the concept of 
     applying the lessons learned in air and marine narcotics 
     enforcement to the precepts of counterterrorism have become 
     particularly critical. This is especially true given the 
     published vulnerabilities of our sovereign coastal waters, 
     seaports, and airspace. The Committee notes that a reactive 
     posture, oftentimes successful in counter drug activities, 
     becomes an unacceptably passive alternative to combating the 
     specter of terrorism proactively. The Committee believes that 
     the threat of terrorism and the fluid patterns of drug 
     smuggling demand forward thinking vigilance by Customs. The 
     Committee notes that the consequences for failure in the 
     fight against terrorism are unacceptable. The Committee 
     therefore strongly urges Customs to apply the lessons learned 
     from enhanced air and marine enforcement efforts in 
     countering fluid smuggling efforts to the battle against 
     terrorism by ensuring sufficient resources are dedicated to 
     the interdiction mission.

[[Page 1004]]




            Canine Detection Training Curriculum Development

       The Committee is encouraged with the initiatives 
     demonstrated by the Customs Service as regards development 
     and utilization of canine detection to combat and respond to 
     possible future terrorist activities involving hazardous 
     materials. The Committee is pleased that the Customs Service 
     has continually recognized the unique and special abilities 
     that the appropriately trained canine and handler immediately 
     offer in this regard. The Committee has provided $2,300,000 
     for further canine training activities and curriculum 
     development to enhance canine detection technology for the 
     detection of additional chemical and biological agents. In 
     order to comply with this section, the Committee directs the 
     Customs Service to contract with an appropriate entity, like 
     Auburn University, and to provide any and all technical and 
     physical support necessary to enhance canine detection 
     technology and operational resources for protecting the 
     Nation against terrorism.


                 Advanced Passenger Information System

       The Committee commends the U.S. Customs Service for the 
     creation and expansion of the Advanced Passenger Information 
     System. The Committee strongly believes that the information 
     supplied through this program will be critical in our 
     homeland security efforts. The Committee recommends that the 
     Customs Service recognize the unique aspects of Part 135 on-
     demand air taxi operators as they apply manifest requirements 
     according to Public Law 107-71, the Aviation Transportation 
     Security Act of 2001. Customs is encouraged to consider all 
     transmission options for any operators or locations that do 
     not have internet access.


  CHARACTERIZATION AND RECOGNITION OF DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL BULK 
                                CURRENCY

       Both United States and international bulk currency are used 
     to finance trafficking of illicit substances and in 
     supporting terrorist activities. Funding in the amount of 
     $2,000,000 is provided to the Customs Service for a contract 
     with the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental 
     Laboratory to expand the lab's support to the Department of 
     the Treasury and the Customs Service program to characterize 
     domestic currency and build a detector to identify illicit 
     movement of bulk currency. The program will expand the 
     existing effort into the characterization and recognition of 
     international currency.


    STRENGTHENED ENFORCEMENT OF U.S. TRADE LAWS PERTAINING TO STEEL

       The Committee supports Customs in its enforcement of U.S. 
     trade laws, including the Presidents' steel 201 proclamation 
     of March 5, 2002, and all antidumping and countervailing duty 
     orders related to steel. The Committee also understands that 
     Customs is responsible for enforcing and monitoring imports 
     of wire rods and certain line pipe products that were 
     previously covered by a 201 remedy decision. The Committee is 
     aware that Customs personnel assigned to enforce antidumping 
     and countervailing duty orders, including import specialists, 
     inspectors, and agents, have been increasingly burdened and 
     many have been reassigned to meet homeland security 
     priorities. The steel industry states that Customs would have 
     to dedicate as many as 30 additional positions to fully 
     enforce this set of trade laws, and the Committee understands 
     that there are serious deficiencies in the level of training 
     and specialized knowledge of Customs inspectors and import 
     specialists who deal with steel tariff matters. The Committee 
     supports assisting Customs officials, working with the steel 
     manufacturing and trading community, to identify and apply 
     the resources and training required to carry out these 
     responsibilities. Such efforts may include utilizing steel 
     industry experts through a series of national trading 
     seminars, which could be made available to members of the 
     trade and brokerage community who play a key role in 
     classifying imported goods for Customs processing. Other 
     efforts could involve assigning more import specialists, 
     inspectors, or agents to steel trade enforcement. The 
     Committee recommends that new steel import specialists be 
     assigned to ports with the greatest volume of steel imports. 
     In addition, the Committee directs Customs to report not 
     later than 60 days after the date of enactment describing the 
     steps it has taken to improve overall training for steel 
     tariff implementation, enforcement efforts and manpower, 
     including data on the types and value of illegal imports 
     seized and the penalties awarded.


                   TEXTILE TRANSSHIPMENT ENFORCEMENT

       Public Law 107-210 authorizes additional appropriations for 
     textile transshipment enforcement operations by the United 
     States Customs Service. In addition, the General Accounting 
     Office was directed to audit efforts by the Customs Service 
     to monitor transshipment efforts.
       The Committee notes that textile transshipment enforcement 
     is essential to help the textile industry in this country 
     become more competitive in the international marketplace. The 
     additional positions authorized by Public Law 107-210 would 
     drastically increase the number of Customs import 
     specialists, inspectors, and investigators which would help 
     crack down on illegal transshipments into the United States. 
     The provisions would also increase the number of auditors and 
     attorneys to help pursue suspected illegal importers as well 
     as emphasize agent training.
       The Committee looks forward to reviewing the GAO audit, 
     which is expected in May 2003. The Committee also expects 
     that the administration's fiscal year 2004 budget request 
     will include necessary funding to help ensure that the 
     textile trade laws are strictly enforced.


                            DRAWBACK OFFICES

       The Committee is concerned about the decision to close the 
     Boston drawback office, even though some reports indicate 
     that that particular office has a 3-year backlog of drawback 
     claims. The Committee feels that closing this office without 
     providing a clear and workable alternative for exporters who 
     rely on the Boston drawback office may have significant 
     adverse effects on the ability of many U.S. companies to 
     engage in international trade. Accordingly, the Committee 
     requests that Customs forgo any closure of the Boston 
     drawback office in this fiscal year. Further, the Committee 
     directs Customs to provide, within 15 days after enactment of 
     this Act, a detailed proposal as to how to handle both the 
     Boston drawback office backlog and future claims in a more 
     efficient and timely manner.


                             TRADE STUDIES

       The volume of trade along the Southern Border has increased 
     dramatically in the last decade as a result of a number of 
     free trade agreements, most specifically the North American 
     Free Trade Agreement. The Committee recognizes the importance 
     of this growth in trade and provides $550,000 to work with 
     the Center for North American Studies to continue research on 
     a wide range of agricultural and trade policy issues for 
     agricultural products, agribusiness firms, and the rural 
     economies in the Southern Plains States. The most specific 
     objective for this research is to analyze the impacts of the 
     North American Free Trade Agreement on trilateral flows of 
     agricultural goods and net farm income in the region. Of the 
     funds provided for this project, $300,000 to work with the 
     University of Texas Magic Program to continue to produce 
     satellite imaging crucial to analyzing the effects of the 
     North American Free Trade Agreement.


                          BORDERLAND SECURITY

       The University of Texas El Paso proposes to design and 
     implement, in coordination with other government elements, a 
     crisis management program for dealing with regional security 
     issues and terrorist attacks along the Southern Border. The 
     Committee recognizes that El Paso is uniquely situated to 
     address this problem due to its position along the United 
     States-Mexico border, its status as an economic crossroads, 
     and that El Paso, along with Ciudad Juarez, comprises the 
     largest international metroplex in the world. Also, nearby 
     are two strategic targets: White Sands Missile Range and Ft. 
     Bliss. The Committee provides $300,000 for Customs to work 
     with the University of Texas to develop a crisis management 
     program to protect the United States-Mexico Border.


                       AGRICULTURAL BIOTERRORISM

       The Committee recognizes the work of the Institute for 
     Countermeasures against Agricultural Bioterrorism (ICAB) at 
     Texas A&M University to develop methods for rapid detection 
     and diagnosis of bio-agents as well as prevention and 
     mitigation of bioterrorist attacks. The Secretary of 
     Treasury, as well as the Secretary of the new Department of 
     Homeland Security once the Customs Service is transferred, 
     are encouraged by the Committee to work closely with the 
     Institute to help develop and implement new technologies to 
     protect our borders from bioterrorism.


                           EL PASO RAIL YARD

       The Committee is concerned about continued acts of violence 
     against Customs, Immigration, FBI, and other Federal law 
     enforcement personnel at the downtown El Paso, Texas rail 
     yard and Customs inspection facility. The Committee also 
     notes the heightened susceptibility of rail cars carrying 
     hazardous materials to possible terrorist or other attack at 
     the present downtown rail yard. Customs is strongly urged to 
     continue to work closely with the City of El Paso and other 
     relevant Federal, State, and local stakeholders to develop a 
     plan to establish new freight rail yard and inspection 
     facilities away from the downtown area.


                             DRUG DETECTION

       The Committee is impressed with the U.S. Customs Service on 
     the Southwest Border as shown by the 76 percent increase of 
     seized cocaine due to the use of canine drug detection and 
     advanced training. The Committee encourages Customs to expand 
     this effort and report back both its successes and failures 
     with this effort in 2004.


                             SMART BORDERS

       The Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) is a leader in 
     dealing with transportation issues across the nations and the 
     Committee is impressed with TTI's research on security risks 
     at border stations. TTI's Smart Border's initiative adapts 
     and develops emerging technologies and practices to enhance 
     the

[[Page 1005]]

     ability of inspection agents to facilitate the flow of 
     traffic across the United States borders. The Committee 
     provides $125,000 for Customs to work with TTI in applying 
     this research to its current practices.


                           TAMU INTERNATIONAL

       Texas A&M International is in an exceptional position to 
     assist customs in protecting our Nations. With the numerous 
     agencies that deal with border affairs and the newly 
     established Department of Homeland Security communication is 
     essential to protecting America from Terrorism. The Committee 
     provides $100,000 for Customs to work with Texas A&M 
     International University and other Federal Agencies to create 
     a demonstration project in Laredo, Texas focusing on 
     enhancing collaborative efforts on the border through 
     training, research and education.


                            PROGRESSO BRIDGE

       The Committee is concerned about the extraneous lines at 
     the Progresso Bridge in Progresso, Texas for pedestrians 
     crossing the U.S.--Mexico border. Customs and INS are urged 
     to work together to find an equitable solution to expedite 
     this on-foot traffic. The Committee provides $75,000 for 
     equipment-related costs to assist in this situation.


                          DAIRY PROTEIN BLENDS

       The Committee is very concerned with the impact of imported 
     milk protein concentrates on domestic milk use, resulting in 
     historically low milk prices paid to dairy producers. The 
     U.S. Customs Service of the Department of the Treasury is 
     encouraged to expeditiously make their final decision on the 
     reclassification of dairy protein blends within 60 days of 
     the enactment of this Act and to report the results to the 
     Committee.


                   Harbor Maintenance Fee Collection

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,000,000

       The Committee provides $3,000,000 to be transferred from 
     the harbor maintenance trust fund to the Customs Service 
     ``salaries and expenses'' appropriation.
       The harbor maintenance fee was established to provide 
     resources to the Army Corps of Engineers for the improvement 
     of American channels and harbors. The fee is assessed on the 
     value of commercial imports and exports delivered to and from 
     certain specified ports. The fee is collected by the Customs 
     Service. The transferred funds will offset the costs incurred 
     by Customs in collecting these fees.

  operation, maintenance and procurement, air and marine interdiction 
                                programs

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$184,560,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................170,829,000
Committee recommendation....................................177,829,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $177,829,000 
     for operation and maintenance activities of the Customs air 
     and marine interdiction programs. This amount is $6,731,000 
     below fiscal year 2002 levels and $7,000,000 above the 
     President's request. This includes an additional $7,000,000 
     for the Customs National Aviation Center.
       The Customs Air and Marine Interdiction Program combats the 
     illegal entry of narcotics and other goods into the United 
     States. This appropriation provides capital procurement and 
     total operations and maintenance for the Customs air and 
     marine program. This program also provides support for the 
     interdiction of narcotics by other Federal, State and local 
     agencies.
       The Customs Service will continue implementation of the 
     Western Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act (WHDEA). At the 
     Administration's request $35,764,000 in new funding is 
     included to intensify WHDEA activities, including the 
     purchase of new equipment as well as other enhancements, to 
     improve interdiction efforts against drug operations in the 
     source and transit zones.


                     CUSTOMS COUNTERDRUG RESOURCES

       The Committee, supportive of the use of technology and 
     assets as a means to enhance the Customs mission, necessarily 
     places the priority on meeting these annualized costs over 
     the acquisition of additional assets and the concomitant 
     support personnel and maintenance costs. The Committee 
     remains concerned about the Customs Service failure to 
     consider the full budgetary impact and secure funding for 
     items and personnel funded in addition to their congressional 
     budget submission. The Committee encourages Customs to 
     continue to evaluate, consider and acquire such assets in an 
     effort to maximize its personnel and resources. However, the 
     Committee expects that the Customs Service will responsibly 
     address and meet all out-year costs for any new acquisitions 
     and personnel without sacrificing existing programs in the 
     process.


                    CUSTOMS NATIONAL AVIATION CENTER

       The Committee has provided $7,000,000 to continue a Customs 
     Service program to facilitate uniformity in aviation 
     training. This standardization program will be headquartered 
     on site at the Customs National Aviation Center (CNAC) at 
     Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. CNAC will also be the home station 
     for such assets as are required to implement this program, 
     including facilities necessary for further standardization of 
     operational training activities of the Customs Service's Air 
     and Marine Interdiction Division.


                         TOTAL SYSTEMS SUPPORT

       The Committee has supported and continues to support the 
     Customs air and marine interdiction programs, and is 
     concerned about the aging fleet of P-3 aircraft. While it 
     would be preferable to replace these aging aircraft with new 
     models, the Committee is mindful of funding constraints. The 
     Committee believes that the Customs Service should take all 
     necessary steps to protect the investment in these aircraft, 
     while considering aircrew safety. In this regard, the 
     Committee is aware of an unsolicited proposal to work with 
     Customs to study the feasibility of utilizing private sector 
     expertise to manage a wide range of engineering and 
     maintenance requirements. The Committee urges Customs to 
     carefully review this proposal, and provide a report within 
     60 days after the date of enactment to the Committee on their 
     plans with regard to a total systems support concept.


                        AUTOMATION MODERNIZATION

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$427,832,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................435,332,000
Committee recommendation....................................435,332,000

       The Committee has provided $122,432,000 for the Automated 
     Commercial Systems (ACS), and $312,900,000 to continue work 
     on the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE).
       The Customs Service continues to modernize its trade data 
     processing system. The current system, ACS, will be replaced 
     with the new ACE. ACE will provide an upgrade to the system 
     which will enable Customs to meet the demands of an 
     increasing volume of trade and convert to a paperless process 
     and an account-based system. These funds will support the ACS 
     legacy system while the conversion to ACE is under way.


                    AUTOMATED COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENT

       Automation modernization of the aging Customs commercial 
     systems and processes is critical to the Nation's commerce. 
     In light of the events of September 11, 2001, it is even more 
     imperative that all trade entering this country be as 
     accurately tracked as possible. The Committee continues to be 
     encouraged by the efforts and progress made by the Customs 
     Service in its modernization effort. The Committee believes 
     that Customs appears to be on the right track in establishing 
     a well-considered framework necessary to proceed with the 
     initial ACE development.
       The Committee directs Customs, in concert with General 
     Accounting Office (GAO) and the Department of the Treasury, 
     to report periodically on the status of the project 
     pertaining to the need for technology insertion, to include 
     the reasons, whether through technological advancement or 
     delay in project completion.
       The Committee strongly believes that continued oversight of 
     the program by GAO and Treasury is critical to successful 
     adherence to the ACE expenditure plan. Periodic review of 
     investment increments allows for oversight of the capital 
     planning and architecture development and is consistent with 
     best practices. The Committee directs that regular quarterly 
     reports continue to be provided until ACE becomes functional. 
     Additionally, the Committee directs Customs to submit 
     requests for release of funds, including a cost-benefit 
     analysis, in a timely manner, but in no case less than 30 
     days from the anticipated need for the funds.

                               U.S. Mint

       The U.S. Mint manufactures coins, sells numismatic and 
     investment products, and provides for security and asset 
     protection. Public Law 104-52 established the U.S. Mint 
     Public Enterprise Fund (the Fund). The Fund encompasses the 
     previous Salaries and Expenses, Coinage Profit Fund, Coinage 
     Metal Fund, and the Numismatic Public Enterprise Fund. The 
     Mint submits annual audited business-type financial 
     statements to the Secretary of the Treasury and to Congress 
     in support of the operations of the revolving fund.
       The operations of the Mint are divided into three major 
     activities: Circulating Coinage; Numismatic and Investment 
     Products; and Protection. The Mint is credited with receipts 
     from its circulating coinage operations, equal to the full 
     cost of producing and distributing coins that are put into 
     circulation, including depreciation of the Mint's plant and 
     equipment on the basis of current replacement value. From 
     those receipts, the Mint pays its cost of operations, which 
     includes the costs of production and distribution. The 
     difference between the face value of the coins and these 
     costs are profit, which is deposited as seigniorage to the 
     general fund. In 2001, the Mint transferred $1,383,000,000 to 
     the General Fund. Any seigniorage used to finance the Mint's 
     capital acquisitions is recorded as budget authority in the 
     year that funds are obligated for this purpose, and as 
     receipts over the life of the asset.


                           GOLDEN DOLLAR COIN

       The Committee strongly supported the creation and 
     circulation of the Golden Dollar (Sacagawea) coin. However, 
     the Committee notes with disappointment that nearly 2

[[Page 1006]]

     years has passed since the coin's introduction with an 
     exhuberant marketing campaign, and the coin has yet to enter 
     into regular circulation in all areas. The Committee is 
     pleased with the U.S. Mint's action plan for additional 
     research on the future of the Golden Dollar Coin, in 
     accordance with the findings of the recent General Accounting 
     Office (GAO) report, ``New Dollar Coin Marketing Campaign 
     Raised Public Awareness but Not Widespread Use'' (GAO-02-
     896). The Committee hopes that the results of the research 
     received in December 2002 will provide the necessary 
     direction for the U.S. Mint and the Federal Reserve to 
     improve the circulation of the Golden Dollar Coin. The 
     Committee directs the U.S Mint, in consultation with the 
     Federal Reserve and the GAO, to submit a new marketing plan 
     to the Committee on Appropriations no later than 15 days 
     after the enactment of this appropriations Act.

                    Bureau of Engraving and Printing

       The Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) designs, 
     manufactures, and supplies Federal Reserve notes, various 
     public debt instruments, as well as most evidences of a 
     financial character issued by the United States, such as 
     postage and internal revenue stamps. The Bureau executes 
     certain printings for various territories administered by the 
     United States, particularly postage and revenue stamps.
       The anticipated work volume is based on estimates of 
     requirements submitted by agencies served. The program 
     comprises the following activities:
       Currency.--Total deliveries of currency for 2002 and 2003 
     are estimated to be 7 billion notes each year. During 2001, 
     the Bureau delivered 7 billion Federal Reserve notes.
       Stamps.--This category of work is comprised of postal and 
     internal revenue stamps. The projected requirements for 2002 
     and 2003 are estimated to be 12 billion and 9 billion stamps, 
     respectively. In 2001, the Bureau delivered 15.9 billion 
     stamps.
       Securities.--This program encompasses the production of a 
     wide variety of bonds, notes, and debentures for the Bureau 
     of Public Debt and certain other agencies of the Government.
       Commissions, certificates, etc.--This program is comprised 
     primarily of Presidential and Department of Defense 
     commissions and certificates, White House invitations, and 
     identification cards for various Government agencies. It 
     represents a small portion of the Bureau's total workload.
       Space utilized by other agencies.--Other agencies are 
     charged for services provided in the space occupied in the 
     Bureau's buildings.
       Other miscellaneous services.--A wide variety of 
     miscellaneous services are performed by Bureau personnel for 
     other agencies, which are charged on an actual cost basis.
       Purchase of operating equipment.--This category consists of 
     new purchases and replacement of printing equipment and other 
     related printing items.
       Plant alterations and experimental equipment.--This 
     category encompasses alterations made on the Bureau's 
     buildings and purchases of experimental equipment. The 
     operations of the Bureau are currently financed by means of a 
     revolving fund established in accordance with the provisions 
     of Public Law 656, August 4, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 181), which 
     requires the Bureau to be reimbursed by customer agencies for 
     all costs of manufacturing products and services performed. 
     The Bureau is also authorized to assess amounts to acquire 
     capital equipment and provide for working capital needs. 
     Bureau operations during 2001 resulted in an increase to 
     retained earnings of $45,000,000.
       The Committee is concerned about the links between 
     terrorism and counterfeiting. The Committee is also aware 
     that a substantial degree of counterfeiting of U.S. currency 
     takes place overseas. The Committee encourages the Department 
     of the Treasury to consider for future currency designs, the 
     best available, most cost effective anti-counterfeiting 
     technology and security devices for U.S. currency, including 
     but not limited to alternative substrates; distinctive 
     fibers; optically variable devices; high-technology inks; 
     and, security measures produced by modern offset printing 
     techniques.
       No direct appropriation is required to cover the activities 
     of the Bureau.

                       Bureau of the Public Debt


                     administering the public debt

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$186,953,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................191,119,000
Committee recommendation....................................191,073,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $191,073,000 
     for the Bureau of the Public Debt in fiscal year 2003. This 
     amount includes $2,500 within existing funds for official 
     reception and representation expenses.
       This appropriation provides funds for the conduct of all 
     public debt operations and the promotion of the sale of U.S. 
     savings-type securities.
       Savings securities.--This activity involves the issuance, 
     servicing, and retirement of savings bonds and notes and 
     retirement-type securities, including: (1) the maintenance 
     and servicing of individual accounts of owners of series H 
     and HH bonds and the authorization of interest payments; and 
     (2) the maintenance of accounting control over financial 
     transactions, securities transactions and accountability, and 
     interest cost. These functions are performed directly by the 
     Bureau of the Public Debt, by the Federal Reserve Banks as 
     fiscal agents of the United States, and by the qualified 
     agents which issue and redeem savings bonds and notes. This 
     activity also consists of sales promotion efforts, using 
     press, radio, other advertising media, and organized groups, 
     augmented by concentrated sales campaign emphasizing payroll 
     savings plans.
       Marketable and special securities.--This activity involves 
     all securities of the United States, other than savings and 
     retirement securities, including securities of Government 
     corporations for which the Bureau of the Public Debt provides 
     services. Functions performed relate to the issuance, 
     servicing, and retirement of these securities, both directly 
     by the Bureau and through the Federal Reserve Banks, as 
     fiscal agents, including: (1) the maintenance and servicing 
     of individual accounts of owners of registered securities and 
     book-entry Treasury bills; (2) the authorization of interest 
     and principal payments; and (3) the maintenance of accounting 
     control over financial transactions, securities transactions 
     and accountability, and interest cost.

                        Internal Revenue Service

                                summary

       The Committee has recommended a total of $9,899,293,000 for 
     the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in fiscal year 2003. This 
     amount is $424,689,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level and a decrease of $16,560,000 from the President's 
     request.


                 processing, assistance, and management

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,810,880,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,958,337,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,955,777,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,955,777,000 
     for processing, taxpayer assistance, and management.
       This appropriation provides for: processing tax returns and 
     related documents; assisting taxpayers in the filing of their 
     returns, paying taxes that are due, and complying with tax 
     laws; issuing technical rulings; revenue accounting, 
     conducting background investigations; managing financial 
     resources, rent and utilities.
       Pre-Filing Taxpayer Assistance and Education.--This 
     activity includes resources to support services provided 
     before a return is filed to assist the taxpayer in filing a 
     tax return correctly. Included in this activity are staffing, 
     training and direct support for (1) pre-filing services 
     operational management; (2) tax law interpretation and 
     published guidance; (3) taxpayer communication and education 
     to research customer needs, prepare tax forms and 
     publications, develop and manage education programs, 
     establish partnerships with stakeholder groups, and 
     disseminate tax information to taxpayers and the general 
     public; (4) rulings and agreements to apply the tax law to 
     specific taxpayers in the form of pre-filing agreements, 
     determination letters, advance pricing agreements and other 
     pre-filing determinations and advice; (5) marketing of 
     electronic tax administration products and services; and (6) 
     ensuring that taxpayers have an advocate to prevent future 
     problems by identifying the underlying causes of taxpayers' 
     problems and to participate in the development of systemic 
     and/or procedural remedies.
       Filing and Account Services.--This activity provides 
     resources to support services provided to a taxpayer in the 
     process of filing returns and paying taxes in addition to 
     issuance of refunds and maintenance of taxpayers accounts. 
     Included in this activity are staffing, training and direct 
     support for (1) filing and account services operational 
     management; (2) submission processing of paper and 
     electronically submitted tax returns and supplemental 
     documents which account for tax revenues, and issue refunds 
     and tax notices; (3) electronic/correspondence assistance to 
     taxpayers to resolve account and notice inquires, either 
     electronically or by telephone; (4) face-to-face assistance 
     to taxpayers, including return preparation, answering tax 
     questions, resolving account and notice inquiries, and 
     supplying forms and publications to taxpayers; and (5) 
     processing of information documents which enables the Service 
     to match this information with that provided by taxpayers on 
     their returns.
       Shared Services Support.--This activity provides staffing, 
     training and direct support for (1) services and supplies to 
     manage IRS facilities; (2) human resources programs including 
     recruitment, labor and employee relations, workforce planning 
     and evaluation, performance management, employee benefits, 
     personnel security and transactional processing; (3) 
     procurement; (4) the Servicewide EEO and Diversity program; 
     (5) the Servicewide Career Management and Learning Center; 
     (6) financial services including relocation, travel, imprest 
     fund, purchase cards, corporate express and employee 
     clearance; and (7) Treasury complaint centers. This activity 
     also provides resources for (1) building rent; (2) IRS 
     building services, maintenance space alterations, guard 
     services, custodial overtime, utility services, and non-
     information technology equipment; (3) shared support such as 
     copiers, postage meters, shredders, courier services, P.O. 
     boxes,

[[Page 1007]]

     etc.; and (4) cleaning, maintenance, utilities, security and 
     repair costs of delegated buildings.
       General Management and Administration.--This activity 
     provides staffing, training and direct support for (1) 
     business unit headquarters management activities of strategic 
     planning, communications and liaison, finance, human 
     resources, EEO and diversity, and business systems planning; 
     (2) national headquarters management and administration of 
     policy making and goal setting, leadership and direction for 
     the IRS, building partner relationships with key stakeholders 
     (e.g., Congress, OMB, etc.); (3) strategic direction 
     Servicewide for communications, Government liaison and 
     disclosure, legislative affairs and public liaison; (4) 
     general legal advice to the IRS on non-tax legal issues 
     including procurement, personnel, labor relations, equal 
     employment opportunity, fiscal law, tort claims and damages, 
     ethics, and conflict of interest; and (5) payments for 
     workmen's compensation benefits and unemployment compensation 
     payments.


                           IRS Staffing Plans

       The Committee continues to support adequate staffing levels 
     for effective tax administration and supports the staffing 
     plans for the Internal Revenue Service facilities in the 
     communities of Martinsburg and Beckley, WV. Therefore, the 
     Committee urges the IRS, within the constraints of the fiscal 
     year 2003 funding levels, to make no staffing reductions at 
     the Martinsburg National Computing Center and the programmed 
     level at the Administrative Services Center in Beckley, WV.


                           Taxpayer Services-

       The Committee is pleased that the IRS is providing more 
     service and assistance to taxpayers, especially in rural and 
     less populated areas. The Committee notes the benefits 
     provided by, and increased usage of, mobile tax preparation 
     services in North Dakota. The Committee commends the IRS for 
     providing this mobile taxpayer service and urges the IRS to 
     use existing resources to expand this mobile service to New 
     Mexico, with a special emphasis on providing these services 
     to Native American reservations and pueblos. To increase use 
     of these mobile services, the Committee urges the IRS to make 
     a greater effort to provide early notice to local media of 
     the dates and times the mobile services will be in specific 
     locations.
       The Committee also directs the IRS to provide a report to 
     the Committee at the conclusion of the filing season on its 
     efforts to publicize the availability of these mobile 
     taxpayer services as well as the number of taxpayers served 
     and the types of assistance provided.


                     tax counseling for the elderly

       The Committee once again believes that the Tax Counseling 
     Program for the Elderly has proven to be most successful. To 
     meet the goals of this program, $3,950,000 is included within 
     the aggregate amount recommended by the Committee for 
     processing tax returns and assistance in fiscal year 2003. To 
     ensure that the full effect of the program is accomplished, 
     the IRS is directed to cover administrative expenses within 
     existing funds.


                 Taxpayer Services in Alaska and Hawaii

       Given the remote distance of Alaska and Hawaii from the 
     U.S. mainland and the difficulty experienced by Alaska and 
     Hawaii taxpayers in receiving needed tax assistance by the 
     national toll-free line, it is imperative that the Taxpayer 
     Advocate Service office in each of these States is fully 
     staffed and capable of resolving taxpayer problems of the 
     most complex nature. The Committee directs the Internal 
     Revenue Service to staff each Taxpayer Advocate Service 
     office in each of these States with a Collection Technical 
     Advisor and an Examination Technical Advisor in addition to 
     the current complement of office staff. Staffing shall be 
     increased if, as the result of the IRS Restructuring and 
     Reform Act of 1998, subsequent legislation, or other factors, 
     the number of cases or their complexity increases.


                       LOW-INCOME TAXPAYER CLINIC

       The Committee once again commends the IRS for the Low-
     Income Taxpayer Clinic (LITC) program. With the growing 
     complexity of tax laws, this program has provided invaluable 
     help for taxpayers who are seeking to resolve disputes with 
     the IRS. To ensure that the goals of the LITC program are 
     maintained, the Committee has provided a total of $7,000,000 
     to assist low-income taxpayer clinics across the Nation.
       The Committee is concerned about recent proposed Treasury 
     regulations that state that the Treasury Department and the 
     Internal Revenue Service do not believe that qualified LITC's 
     are authorized to provide tax preparation services unless it 
     is in conjunction with a controversy or with an English as a 
     Second Language program. Need-based tax preparation 
     assistance through LITC and other programs such as VITA is 
     imperative for many of our Nation's taxpayers who cannot 
     afford commercial preparers. Without this assistance, many 
     individuals may either not file a return or will make errors 
     and prepare their returns improperly, ultimately leading to a 
     controversy with the IRS. Helping taxpayers with problems 
     with the IRS begins with the preparation and filing of the 
     return. Without this assistance, the limited resources 
     available to the LITC program will be insufficient to meet 
     the demand of taxpayers with controversies with the IRS.


                RHODE ISLAND LOW INCOME TAXPAYER CLINIC

       The Committee acknowledges the valuable work and service to 
     the community that the Rhode Island Low Income Taxpayer 
     Clinic (RILITC) has provided over the past 4 years of its 
     existence. The Committee therefore encourages the Internal 
     Revenue Service to fund the RILITC's grant request for 2003, 
     so that it may continue to operate and deliver its unique 
     services to the citizens of the City of Providence.


                    VOLUNTEER INCOME TAX ASSISTANCE

       The Committee notes that the existing Volunteer Income Tax 
     Assistance (VITA) program provides an invaluable service by 
     helping low income taxpayers prepare and file their Federal 
     income tax returns. It is the Committee's understanding that 
     IRS used Congress' fiscal year 2002 appropriation of an 
     additional $1,000,000 for the VITA program to provide VITA 
     sites with additional computers and computer modules to 
     assist taxpayers to file electronically. The Committee, 
     therefore, urges the IRS to provide such additional sums as 
     may become available to the VITA program outside of its in-
     kind contribution program. These additional funds are 
     intended to assist the IRS in expanding the VITA program to 
     hard to serve areas, such as Indian Reservations. 
     Additionally, these funds are intended to increase the 
     capacity of VITA sites to file returns electronically and to 
     cover some operational expenses. The Committee expects that 
     IRS will continue its current level of in-kind contributions 
     to VITA programs and directs the IRS to report to the 
     Committee within 90 days of enactment of this Act on the 
     steps it has taken in this regard.


          Providence, Rhode Island Taxpayer Assistance Office

       The Committee notes and commends the work that is being 
     done at the Providence Field Office of the IRS to establish a 
     Taxpayer Assistance Office, as well as to redesign the space 
     used by the Taxpayer Advocate's Office. The Committee urges 
     the IRS to ensure that these projects remain a priority and 
     that funding for them remains intact.


                      WAGE AND INVESTMENT DIVISION

       The Committee recognizes that there are ebbs and flows in 
     employment at the Internal Revenue Service's field offices 
     around the country, particularly in correlation to the tax 
     filing season. However, the Committee is concerned that some 
     of these departures may have unintended consequences, 
     especially by stretching available resources to satisfy the 
     needs of a particular community. Therefore, the Committee 
     requests that the IRS report to the Committee, within 60 days 
     after the date of enactment, with an analysis of staffing 
     plans at IRS field offices and the impact of such plans on 
     the communities they serve. The report also should include an 
     analysis of staffing plans at the Providence, Rhode Island 
     field office.


                           Office of Appeals

       The Committee recognizes the importance of the work 
     provided by the IRS Office of Appeals, and strongly urges the 
     IRS to consider establishing an Office of Appeals within the 
     current IRS Field Office in Providence, Rhode Island.


         IRS Consortium for Learning and Workforce Development

       The Committee is aware of the IRS Consortium for Learning 
     and Workforce Development that incorporates technology such 
     as e-learning to deliver training in a more cost-effective 
     manner. The Committee is concerned that the delays in 
     awarding the course conversion task order may jeopardize the 
     Consortium initiative and directs the IRS to complete its 
     negotiations expeditiously. Further, the Committee requests 
     that the IRS provide quarterly briefings to the Committee on 
     the work of the Consortium.


                         NO-COST EZ TAX FILING

       The Committee understands that the IRS does not intend to 
     enter into the tax preparation software business with respect 
     to no-or low-cost digital filing of tax returns over the 
     Internet. The Committee recognizes that the IRS intends to 
     work in partnership with industry to expand the electronic 
     filing of tax returns. The necessity of a partnership was 
     emphasized in a statement released by the Department of the 
     Treasury on January 30, 2002. The IRS has echoed this 
     commitment to work with industry and notes that IRS plans do 
     not include tax preparation services. The Committee notes 
     that the IRS budget request sought no resources for this 
     purpose. The Committee strongly believes in the industry-IRS 
     partnership concept and urges the IRS to continue 
     strengthening its ties with the private sector and computer 
     software industry as it moves forward in this endeavor.


                          tax law enforcement

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,542,891,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,729,072,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,729,072,000


[[Page 1008]]

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,729,072,000 
     for tax law enforcement activities in fiscal year 2003.
       This appropriation funds IRS's ability to provide equitable 
     application and enforcement of the tax laws, identify 
     possible nonfilers for investigations, investigate violations 
     of criminal statutes, and supports the Statistics of Income 
     program.
       Compliance Services.--This activity funds services to 
     taxpayers after a return is filed, identifying and attempting 
     to correct possible errors or underpayment. It provides for 
     the examination of tax returns, both domestic and 
     international, and the administration and judicial settlement 
     of taxpayer appeals of examination findings. It also provides 
     for monitoring employee pension plans, determining 
     qualifications of organizations seeking exempt status, 
     examining the tax returns of exempt organizations, enforcing 
     statutes relating to detection and investigation of criminal 
     violations of the internal revenue laws and other financial 
     crimes, collecting unpaid accounts, securing unfiled tax 
     returns and payments, analyzing and determining the reasons 
     for delinquent accounts, preventing accounts from becoming 
     delinquent, and preventing nonfiling. This activity also 
     provides for legal counsel regarding legal interpretation of 
     the law and representation in litigation.
       Research and Statistics of Income.--This activity funds 
     research and statistical analysis support for the Service. It 
     provides annual income, financial, and tax data from tax 
     returns filed by individuals, corporations, and tax-exempt 
     organizations. Likewise it provides resources for market-
     based research to identify compliance issues, for conducting 
     tests of treatments to address non-compliance, and for the 
     implementation of successful treatments of taxpayer non-
     compliant behavior.


                          Abusive Tax Shelters

       The Committee has become extremely concerned about the 
     growth of abusive tax shelters and their impact on investor 
     confidence as well as on the national economy. For instance, 
     during Committee hearings this spring with the Internal 
     Revenue Service the Committee explored with the Commissioner 
     examples of these corporations, such as the Enron Corporation 
     which apparently ran nearly 600 subsidiaries out of a single 
     post office box in the Cayman Islands. The Committee strongly 
     believes that these abuses are out of control and that the 
     IRS must do more to target these abuses.
       To ensure that the IRS more effectively and aggressively 
     investigates and combats abusive tax shelters, the Committee 
     directs the IRS to designate no less than $60,000,000 of the 
     ``Tax Law Enforcement'' account for the purpose of targeting 
     these abusive schemes, abusive scheme promoters, and offshore 
     schemes. The Committee further directs the IRS to report back 
     to the Committee within 120 days after enactment of this Act 
     on the resources that have been directed to assist in this 
     effort.


                        earned income tax credit

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$146,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................146,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................146,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $146,000,000.
       The ``Earned income tax credit'' (EITC) appropriation 
     provides for expanded customer service and public outreach 
     programs, strengthened enforcement activities, and enhanced 
     research efforts to reduce overclaims and erroneous filing 
     associated with the earned income tax credit.
       Expanded customer service includes dedicated, toll-free 
     telephone assistance, increased community-based tax 
     preparation sites, and a coordinated marketing and 
     educational effort (including paid advertising and direct 
     mailings) to assist low-income taxpayers in determining their 
     eligibility for EITC. Improved compliance includes increased 
     staff and systemic improvements in submissions processing, 
     examination, and criminal investigation programs. In returns 
     processing, new procedures include expanded use of math error 
     authority and the identification of EITC-based refund claims 
     involving invalid or duplicate primary, secondary, and 
     dependent tax identification numbers (TIN's). Increased 
     examination coverage, prior to issuance of refunds, reduces 
     overpayment and encourages compliance in subsequent filing 
     periods. In addition, post-refund correspondence audits by 
     service center staff aids in the recovery of erroneous 
     refunds. Criminal investigation activities target individuals 
     and practitioners involved in fraudulent refund schemes and 
     generate referrals of suspicious returns for followup 
     examination. Examination staff, assigned to district offices, 
     audit return preparers and may apply penalties for 
     noncompliance with due diligence requirements.
       Enhanced research activities and projects focus on EITC 
     claimant characteristics and patterns of noncompliance and 
     are designed to improve education and outreach products, 
     strengthen IRS abuse detection capabilities, and measure the 
     effects of Servicewide programs on compliance levels for the 
     EITC-eligible taxpayer population. This appropriation also 
     funds the development of specialized research data bases and 
     masterfile updates, reimbursement to the Social Security 
     Administration (SSA) for enhancements to the SSA numbering 
     systems, and cooperative efforts with State vital statistics 
     offices.


                          information systems

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,579,240,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,632,444,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,632,444,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,632,444,000 
     for information systems activities in fiscal year 2003.
       This appropriation provides for Servicewide information 
     systems operations and maintenance, and investments to 
     enhance or develop business applications for the IRS Business 
     Units. The appropriation includes staffing, 
     telecommunications, hardware and software (including 
     commercial-off-the-shelf), and contractual services.
       Information services.--This activity provides the salaries, 
     benefits, and related costs to manage, maintain, and operate 
     the information systems that support tax administration. The 
     Service's business activities rely on these information 
     systems to process tax and information returns, account for 
     tax revenues collected, send bills for taxes owed, issue 
     refunds, assist in the selection of tax returns for audit, 
     and provide telecommunications services for all business 
     activities including the public's toll free access to tax 
     information. These systems are located in a variety of sites 
     including the Martinsburg, West Virginia, Memphis, Tennessee, 
     and Detroit, Michigan Computing Centers; Service Centers; and 
     in other field office operations. Staffing in this activity 
     develops and maintains the millions of lines of programming 
     code supporting all aspects of tax processing; as well as 
     operating and administering the Service's hardware 
     infrastructure of mainframes, minicomputers, personal 
     computers, networks, and a variety of management information 
     systems.
       Information systems improvement programs.--This activity 
     funds improvements or enhancements to business applications 
     that support requirements unique to one of the new IRS 
     Business Units. These projects meet the following criteria: 
     each project is small or medium in size and can be fully 
     developed and implemented in 1 to 2 years; it supports 
     specialized functions of a single Business Unit; and it 
     conforms to the modernized IRS architecture. These projects 
     differ in scope from those funded by the Business Systems 
     Modernization Program, which addresses major common tax 
     administration systems that cross Business Unit lines.
       The Committee believes that funds provided under the 
     Information Systems account, particularly for development 
     related activities, should be managed with the same diligence 
     and financial controls as those activities funded through the 
     Business Systems Modernization account. In addition, the 
     Committee expects that as the Business Systems Modernization 
     moves an increasing number of major projects into deployment, 
     the Service will realign development activities funded under 
     the Information Systems account so that they are managed and 
     integrated formally into Business Systems Modernization 
     activity. For this reason, the Committee directs the 
     Commissioner to submit, concurrent with the fiscal year 2004 
     budget submission, a detailed budget justification for funds 
     provided in the Information Systems account that outlines the 
     specific use of all monies allocated in this appropriation, 
     apportioning responsibility between operations and 
     development functions, and specifying how program governance 
     for these funds will meet the appropriate and rigorous 
     requirements set for comparable activities in Business 
     Systems Modernization.


                     Business Systems Modernization

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$391,593,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................450,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................436,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $436,000,000. 
     This amount, in addition to $14,000,000 provided in the 
     fiscal year 2002 Supplemental, is equal to the President's 
     fiscal year 2003 budget request. This account provides for 
     revamping business practices and acquiring new technology. 
     The agency is using a formal methodology to prioritize, 
     approve, fund, and evaluate its portfolio of business systems 
     modernization investments. This methodology enforces a 
     documented, repeatable, and measurable process for managing 
     investments throughout their life cycle. Investment decisions 
     are approved by the IRS Core Business System Executive 
     Steering Committee, chaired by the Commissioner.


                 BUSINESS SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION EFFORT

       The Committee is pleased with the program's progress to 
     date. In order to ensure more timely release of funds 
     appropriated under this account in fiscal year 2003, the 
     Committee directs the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in 
     consultation with the Department of the Treasury and the 
     Office of Management and Budget, to submit a single business 
     systems modernization spending plan to the Committee on 
     Appropriations for the full use of this appropriation 15 days 
     after the enactment of this appropriations Act. In addition, 
     the IRS should articulate in its fiscal years 2003 and 2004 
     expenditure

[[Page 1009]]

     plans and the fiscal year 2004 budget submission how IRS 
     intends to guarantee that products and projects delivered 
     under the business systems modernization program are fully 
     integrated into the new business units. As in previous years, 
     the Committee fully expects that the IRS will continue to 
     brief and provide documents and all pertinent information to 
     the General Accounting Office in a timely manner for review 
     of the expenditure plan.


                     IRS--administrative provisions

       The Committee has recommended approval of the following 
     administrative provisions for the Internal Revenue Service:
       Section 101 continues a provision which authorizes the IRS 
     to transfer up to 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available to the agency in fiscal year 2003, to any other IRS 
     account. The IRS is directed to follow the Committee's 
     reprogramming procedures outlined earlier in this report.
       Section 102 continues a provision which maintains a 
     training program in taxpayer's rights and cross-cultural 
     relations.
       Section 103 continues a provision which requires the IRS to 
     institute and enforce policies and procedures which will 
     safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information.
       Section 104 continues a provision which directs that funds 
     shall be available for improved facilities and increased 
     manpower to provide sufficient and effective 1-800 telephone 
     assistance and that the Commissioner shall continue to make 
     this a priority.

                          U.S. Secret Service


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,025,384,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,010,435,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,010,817,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,010,817,000 
     for the U.S. Secret Service in fiscal year 2003. The increase 
     above the President's request reflects an additional $740,000 
     for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
       The Secret Service is responsible for the security of the 
     President, the Vice President and other dignitaries and 
     designated individuals; for enforcement of laws relating to 
     obligations and securities of the United States and financial 
     crimes such as financial institution fraud and other fraud; 
     and for protection of the White House and other buildings 
     within Washington, D.C.
       Investigations, protection, and uniformed activities.--The 
     Service must provide for the protection of the President of 
     the United States, members of his immediate family, the 
     President-elect, the Vice President, or other officer next in 
     the order of succession to the Office of the President, and 
     the Vice President-elect, and the members of their immediate 
     families unless the members decline such protection; 
     protection of the person of a visiting head and accompanying 
     spouse of a foreign state or foreign government and, at the 
     direction of the President, other distinguished foreign 
     visitors to the United States and official representatives of 
     the United States performing special missions abroad; the 
     protection of the person of former Presidents, their spouses 
     and minor children unless such protection is declined. The 
     Service is also responsible for the detection and arrest of 
     persons engaged in counterfeiting, forging, or altering of 
     any of the obligations or other securities of the United 
     States and foreign governments; the investigation of thefts 
     and frauds relating to Treasury electronic fund transfers; 
     fraudulent use of debit and credit cards; fraud and related 
     activity in connection with Government identification 
     documents; computer fraud; food coupon fraud; and the 
     investigation of personnel, tort claims, and other criminal 
     and noncriminal cases.
       The Secret Service Uniformed Division protects the 
     Executive Residence and grounds in the District of Columbia; 
     any building in which White House offices are located; the 
     President and members of his immediate family; the official 
     residence and grounds of the Vice President in the District 
     of Columbia; the Vice President and members of his immediate 
     family; foreign diplomatic missions located in the Washington 
     metropolitan area; and the Treasury Building, its annex and 
     grounds, and such other areas as the President may direct on 
     a case-by-case basis.
       Presidential candidate protective activities.--The Secret 
     Service is authorized to protect major Presidential and Vice 
     Presidential candidates, as determined by the Secretary of 
     the Treasury after consultation with an advisory committee. 
     In addition, the Service is authorized to protect the spouses 
     of major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates; 
     however, such protection may not commence more than 120 days 
     prior to the general Presidential election.


                     Missing and Exploited Children

       The Committee has included $1,633,000 for the Service's 
     operation costs of the exploited child unit, associated with 
     its continued efforts with the National Center for Missing 
     and Exploited Children. The Committee has also included 
     $3,749,000 as a grant for investigations of exploited 
     children.


                        STAFFING IN RHODE ISLAND

       The Committee is concerned about the declining number of 
     Secret Service special agents in Rhode Island, particularly 
     in light of the increased demand for criminal investigative 
     work in the areas of identity theft, bank fraud and 
     counterfeit currency investigations. The Committee 
     understands that the number of special agents, excluding the 
     supervisor, has declined from seven in fiscal year 1998 to 
     three in fiscal year 2002. The Committee urges the Secret 
     Service to give the highest priority to funding additional 
     staffing in Rhode Island for fiscal year 2003.


      acquisition, construction, improvement and related expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,457,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,519,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,519,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,519,000 for 
     the ``Acquisition, construction, improvement and related 
     expenses'' account in fiscal year 2003, which is equal to the 
     budget estimate.
       This appropriation provides funding for security upgrades 
     of existing facilities and the James J. Rowley Training 
     Center to continue development of the current Master Plan and 
     to maintain and renovate existing facilities to ensure 
     efficient and full utilization of the Center.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                           General Provisions

       The Committee recommends that certain general provisions be 
     included in the Senate bill. The provisions do the following:
       Section 110 continues a provision which pertains to 
     reprogramming instructions for unobligated funds.
       Section 111 continues a provision which authorizes certain 
     basic services within the Treasury Department in fiscal year 
     2003, including purchase of uniforms; maintenance, repairs, 
     and cleaning; purchase of insurance for official motor 
     vehicles operated in foreign countries; and contracts with 
     the Department of State for health and medical services to 
     employees and their dependents serving in foreign countries.
       Section 112 continues a provision which requires that funds 
     provided to ATF for fiscal year 2003 will be expended in such 
     a manner so as not to diminish enforcement efforts with 
     respect to section 105 of the Federal Alcohol Administration 
     Act.
       Section 113 continues a provision which authorizes 
     transfers, up to 2 percent, between law enforcement 
     appropriations under certain circumstances.
       Section 114 continues a provision which authorizes 
     transfers, up to 2 percent, between Departmental Offices, 
     Office of Inspector General, Treasury Inspector General for 
     Tax Administration, Financial Management Service, and the 
     Bureau of the Public Debt appropriations under certain 
     circumstances.
       Section 115 continues a provision which authorizes 
     transfer, up to 2 percent, between the Internal Revenue 
     Service and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
     Administration under certain circumstances.
       Section 116 continues a provision to require that the 
     purchase of law enforcement vehicles is consistent with 
     Departmental vehicle management principles.
       Section 117 continues a provision that prohibits the 
     Department of the Treasury and the Bureau of Engraving and 
     Printing from redesigning the $1 Federal Reserve Note.
       Section 118 continues a provision that authorizes the 
     Secretary of the Treasury to transfer funds from Salaries and 
     Expenses, Financial Management Service, to the Debt Services 
     Account as necessary to cover the costs of debt collection. 
     Such amounts shall be reimbursed to the Salaries and Expenses 
     account from debt collections received in the Debt Services 
     Account.
       Section 119 continues a provision that extends the pilot 
     project for designated critical occupations for 1 additional 
     year.
       Section 120 modifies and continues a provision that 
     requires prior notification for the construction and 
     operation of a museum by the United States Mint.
       Section 121 continues a provision limiting the use of funds 
     for the production of Customs declarations that do not 
     inquire whether the passenger had been in the proximity of 
     livestock.
       Section 122 is a new provision directing the Federal Law 
     Enforcement Training Center to establish an accrediting body 
     to set standards for measuring and assessing the quality and 
     effective of Federal law enforcement training.
       Section 123 is a new provision providing for a permanent 
     extension of the Treasury Franchise Fund.
       Section 124 is a new provision providing for licensing 
     procedures for the Office of Foreign Assets Control.
       Section 125 is a new provision authorizing a pilot project 
     concerning reverse inspections for the Customs Service.
       Section 126 is a new provision to allow the John C. Stennis 
     Center for Public Service Development Trust Fund to invest in 
     par value special securities issued by the Department of the 
     Treasury.
       Section 127 is a new provision to allow the James Madison 
     Memorial Fellowship Trust Fund to invest in par value special 
     securities issued by the Department of the Treasury.
       Section 128 is a new provision regarding the rum rebate to 
     Puerto Rico.

                     TITLE II--U.S. POSTAL SERVICE

                   Payment to the Postal Service Fund

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$596,093,000

[[Page 1010]]

Budget estimate, 2003........................................76,619,000
Committee recommendation.....................................76,619,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $76,619,000 in 
     fiscal year 2003 for payments to the Postal Service Fund. 
     This includes $47,619,000 in advance appropriations made 
     available on October 1, 2003, and $29,000,000 as partial 
     reimbursement for losses incurred in previous years for 
     reduced- rate mail, as required by the Revenue Forgone Act of 
     1993. The Committee also recommends an advance appropriation 
     of $31,014,000 for fiscal year 2004 as requested by the 
     President. This amount consists of $48,999,000 for providing 
     free mail to the blind and overseas voters from which 
     $17,985,000 has been deducted to reconcile previous fiscal 
     year estimated mail volume with actual volume.
       Revenue forgone on free and reduced-rate mail enables 
     postage rates to be set at levels below the unsubsidized 
     rates for certain categories of mail as authorized by 
     subsections (c) and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United 
     States Code. Free mail for the blind and overseas voters will 
     continue to be provided at the funding level recommended by 
     the Committee.
       The Committee includes provisions in the bill that would 
     assure that mail for overseas voting and mail for the blind 
     shall continue to be free; that 6-day delivery and rural 
     delivery of mail shall continue at the 1983 level; and that 
     none of the funds provided be used to consolidate or close 
     small rural and other small post offices in fiscal year 2003. 
     These are services that must be maintained in fiscal year 
     2003 and beyond.
       The Committee believes that 6-day mail delivery is one of 
     the most important services provided by the Federal 
     Government to its citizens. Especially in rural and small 
     town America, this critical postal service is the linchpin 
     that serves to bind the Nation together. The Committee 
     recognizes that the Postal Service faces fiscal woes, but it 
     believes that there are other means available to resolve this 
     problem than reducing mail delivery to Americans.


               Response to the anthrax threat to the mail

       The Committee was extremely concerned about the safety and 
     security of postal employees and the American people as well 
     as the mail as a result of last year's anthrax attacks. 
     Following the attacks, the Committee held a hearing in 
     November 2001 to learn more about how to protect the Nation's 
     mail system from biohazards. Also in November 2001, the 
     President provided $175,000,000 in funds under his control 
     from the funds provided by Congress in response to the 
     September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In December 2001, this 
     Committee took the lead in appropriating an additional 
     $500,000,000 to the Postal Service to further assist its 
     response for additional funds to protect the mail. The 
     President requested and received an additional $87,000,000 in 
     supplemental fiscal year 2002 funding to continue its efforts 
     to improve mail safety and security.
       The Committee understands that the Postal Service formally 
     requested of the administration an additional $799,800,000 
     for fiscal year 2003. The Committee understands the threat to 
     mail safety continues. However, the Office of Management and 
     Budget has yet to transmit a request for these funds to the 
     Congress and the Committee's allocation is not sufficient to 
     meet this additional requirement.


                           Pest Introductions

       The Committee is concerned that recent introductions of 
     plant and animal pests and diseases into Hawaii may have 
     occurred through the U.S. postal system. Such introductions 
     have severe consequences for U.S. agriculture, biodiversity, 
     and public health and safety. The U.S. Postal Service is 
     directed to work with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and 
     the Hawaii Department of Agriculture to devise and implement 
     a program to combat pest introductions.


                        ELY, NEVADA POST OFFICE

       The Committee requests the United States Postal Service to 
     conduct an analysis of the recent decision to close the 
     contract Post Office located in downtown Ely, Nevada. Within 
     90 days of the enactment of this Act, the Postal Service 
     shall submit to the Committee a report on why the Ely Post 
     Office was closed and what effect it believes the closure 
     will have on Ely.

TITLE III--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO 
                             THE PRESIDENT


            Executive Office of the President Consolidation

       For the second year in a row, the administration has 
     proposed a consolidation of the various accounts which 
     comprise the Executive Office of the President. Last year, 
     the Committee gave this request considerable deliberation and 
     concluded that the existing structure well served the 
     Committee's and the public's need for sunshine in the funding 
     and operation of these important functions. The existing 
     structure also provides the executive branch with the 
     flexibility it needs to reprogram funds within accounts to 
     address unforeseen budget needs upon the notification and 
     approval of the Committee. As noted in discussions with 
     administration officials last year, as well as in hearings 
     before this Committee this year, at no time has this 
     Committee rejected an administration's request to reprogram 
     existing funds within accounts in this Title.

        Compensation of the President and the White House Office


                     Compensation of the President

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$450,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................450,000
Committee recommendation........................................450,000

       The fiscal year 2003 budget request for compensation of the 
     President is $450,000. This amount includes $400,000 for the 
     direct salary of the President as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 102, 
     and a $50,000 expense account for official expenses, with any 
     unused portions reverting to the Treasury. This expense 
     account is not considered as taxable to the President.
       The Committee recommends the full budget request of 
     $450,000 for compensation of the President.


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$54,651,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................84,595,000
Committee recommendation.....................................59,735,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $59,735,000 
     for the White House Office. This is a decrease of $24,860,000 
     below the budget estimate because a portion of the funds 
     requested for this account are provided in a new ``Office of 
     Homeland Security'' account.
       These funds provide the President with staff assistance and 
     provide administrative services for the direct support of the 
     President. Public Law 95-570 authorizes appropriations for 
     the White House Office and codifies the activities of the 
     White House Office.


                      Office of Homeland Security

Appropriations, 2002........................................$27,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................24,844,000
Committee recommendation.....................................24,844,000

       The Office of Homeland Security was created by Executive 
     Order 13288 which was signed by the President on October 8, 
     2001. The purpose of the Office, as stated in the Executive 
     Order, is ``to develop and coordinate the implementation of a 
     comprehensive national strategy to secure the United States 
     terrorist threats or attacks.''

                 Executive Residence at the White House


                           operating expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$11,695,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................12,228,000
Committee recommendation.....................................12,228,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,228,000 
     for the Executive Residence at the White House.
       These funds provide for the care, maintenance, 
     refurnishing, improvement, heating, and lighting, including 
     electrical power and fixtures, of the Executive Residence.
       The Executive Residence staff provides for the operation of 
     the Executive Residence. A staff of 40 domestic employees 
     accomplish general housekeeping, prepare and serve meals, 
     greet visitors, and provide services as required in support 
     of official and ceremonial functions. A staff of 33 
     tradespersons, including plumbers, carpenters, painters, on a 
     single shift; electricians on a double shift; and operating 
     engineers on a 24-hour basis, maintains and makes repairs, 
     minor modifications, and improvements to the 132 rooms and 
     the mechanical systems, and provides support for official and 
     ceremonial functions.
       A staff of 12 specialized employees provide services 
     necessary to the operation of the White House and official 
     and ceremonial functions. This staff includes four florists, 
     four curators, and four calligraphers.
       An administrative staff consists of the chief usher, four 
     assistant ushers, one executive grounds superintendent, one 
     operating accountant, one accounting technician, one computer 
     network engineer, and one administrative officer. This staff 
     is charged with management and administrative functions of 
     the Executive Residence. This requires coordination with the 
     Executive Office of the President, the National Park Service, 
     the military, the U.S. Secret Service, the General Services 
     Administration, and other agencies.
       During larger events, the Executive Residence staff is 
     assisted by contract personnel under personal services 
     contract agreements (services by agreement) to provide 
     additional help as required for official and ceremonial 
     functions.


                   White House Repair and Restoration

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$8,625,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,200,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,200,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,200,000 for 
     White House Repair and Restoration. The Committee 
     recommendation is equal to the budget estimate.
       To provide for the repair, alteration, and improvement of 
     the Executive Residence at the White House, a separate 
     account was established in fiscal year 1996 to program and 
     track expenditures for the capital improvement projects at 
     the Executive Residence at the White House.

[[Page 1011]]



                  Special Assistance to the President


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,925,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,066,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,066,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,066,000 for 
     special assistance to the President.
       The ``Special assistance to the President'' account was 
     established on September 26, 1970, to enable the Vice 
     President to provide assistance to the President. This 
     assistance takes the form of directed and special 
     Presidentially assigned functions.
       The objective of the Office of the Vice President is to 
     efficiently and effectively advise, assist, and support the 
     President in the areas of domestic policy, national security 
     affairs, counsel, administration, press, scheduling, advance, 
     special projects, and assignments. Assistance is also 
     provided for the wife of the Vice President.
       The Vice President also has a staff funded by the Senate to 
     assist him in the performance of his duties in the 
     legislative branch.
       The level of funding recommended by the Committee will 
     allow for 24 full-time permanent positions in fiscal year 
     2003.

                Official Residence of the Vice President


                           operating expenses

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$318,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................324,000
Committee recommendation........................................324,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $324,000 for 
     the official residence of the Vice President.
       The ``Official Residence of the Vice President 
     (residence)'' account was established by Public Law 93-346 on 
     July 12, 1974. The residence is located on the grounds of the 
     Naval Observatory in the District of Columbia and serves as a 
     facility for official and ceremonial functions and as a home 
     for the Vice President and his family.
       The objective of the ``Residence'' account is to provide 
     for the care of, operation, maintenance, refurnishing, 
     improvement, and heating and lighting of the residence and to 
     provide such appropriate equipment, furnishings, dining 
     facilities, services, and provisions as may be required to 
     enable the Vice President to perform and discharge the 
     duties, functions, and obligations associated with his high 
     office.
       Funds to renovate the residence are provided to the 
     residence through the Department of the Navy budget. The 
     Committee has had a longstanding interest in the condition of 
     the residence and expects to be kept fully apprised by the 
     Vice President's office of any and all renovations and 
     alterations made to the residence by the Navy.

                      Council of Economic Advisers


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,211,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,405,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,405,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,405,000 for 
     salaries and expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers.
       The Council of Economic Advisors analyzes the national 
     economy and its various segments, advises the President on 
     economic developments, recommends policies for economic 
     growth and stability, appraises economic programs and 
     policies of the Federal Government, and assists in the 
     preparation of the annual Economic Report of the President to 
     Congress.

                      Office of Policy Development


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,142,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,221,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,221,000

       The Committee recommends $4,221,000 for the Office of 
     Policy Development.
       The Office of Policy Development supports the National 
     Economic Council and the Domestic Policy Council, in carrying 
     out their responsibilities to advise and assist the President 
     in the formulation, coordination, and implementation of 
     economic and domestic policy. The Office of Policy 
     Development also provides support for other domestic policy 
     development and implementation activities as directed by the 
     President.

                       National Security Council


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,494,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................9,525,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,525,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,525,000 for 
     the salaries and expenses of the National Security Council 
     (NSC).
       The primary purpose of the Council is to advise the 
     President with respect to the integration of domestic, 
     foreign, and military policies relating to the national 
     security.
       The funding level provided by the Committee will support 60 
     full-time equivalent positions, or the same since the fiscal 
     year 1996 level for the normal activities of the NSC.

                        Office of Administration


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$96,995,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................70,128,000
Committee recommendation.....................................70,128,000

       The Committee has provided $70,128,000 to the Office of 
     Administration for fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Administration's mission is to provide high-
     quality, cost-effective administrative services to the 
     Executive Office of the President. These services, defined by 
     Executive Order 12028 of 1977, include financial, personnel, 
     library and records services, information management systems 
     support, and general office services.
       The Office of Administration receives reimbursements for 
     information management support and general office services.

                    Office of Management and Budget

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$70,752,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................70,752,000
Committee recommendation.....................................70,752,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $70,752,000.
       The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) assists the 
     President in the discharge of his budgetary, management, and 
     other executive responsibilities.
       OMB-wide offices.--Executive direction and coordination for 
     all Office of Management and Budget activities is provided. 
     This includes the Director's immediate office as well as 
     staff support in the areas of budget review, administration, 
     public affairs, office of communications, legislative 
     reference, legislative affairs, economic policy, and general 
     counsel. Budget instructions and procedures are developed, 
     review of agency estimates is coordinated, budget data 
     systems are maintained, agency financial management plans are 
     reviewed, the budget document is prepared, and scorekeeping 
     is accomplished.
       National security and international affairs; general 
     government and finance; natural resources, energy, and 
     science; education, income maintenance, and labor; and 
     health/personnel.--Agency programs, budget requests, and 
     management activities are examined, appropriations are 
     apportioned, proposed changes in agency functions are 
     studied, and special studies aimed at establishing goals and 
     objectives that would result in long- and short-range 
     improvements in the agencies' financial, administrative, and 
     operational management are conducted.
       Financial management.--In conjunction with the Chief 
     Financial Officers Council, prepares the Government-wide 
     financial management status report and 5-year plan, monitors 
     execution of the plan, provides policy guidance on 
     preparation and audit of financial statements, financial 
     systems requirements, management controls, and cost 
     accounting and audit requirements for the non-Federal grantee 
     community.
       Information and regulatory affairs.--Agency proposals to 
     implement or revise Federal regulations and information 
     collection requirements are reviewed and coordinated. 
     Information resources management and statistical policies and 
     practices are analyzed and developed.
       Procurement policy.--The Office of Federal Procurement 
     Policy is responsible for promoting economy, efficiency, and 
     effectiveness in the procurement of property and services by 
     and for the executive branch.


                  Harry S Truman Memorial Scholarships

       The Committee strongly supports the Truman Scholarship 
     program and its original intentions. The Committee is 
     concerned, however, that the regulations regarding awarding a 
     scholarship to at least one qualified applicant from each 
     State has been violated numerous times in recent years. The 
     Committee directs the Board of the Truman Scholarship program 
     to strictly adhere to its statutory mandate to ``assure that 
     at least one Truman scholar shall be selected each year from 
     each State in which there is at least one resident applicant 
     who meets the minimum criteria established by the 
     Foundation.''

                 Office of National Drug Control Policy

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,263,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................25,458,000
Committee recommendation.....................................26,456,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,456,000. 
     The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the National Alliance 
     for Model State Drug Laws but does not recommend an increase 
     to the official reception and representation fund.
       The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), 
     established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, and 
     reauthorized by Public Law 105-277, is charged with 
     developing policies, objectives and priorities for the 
     National Drug Control Program. In addition, ONDCP administers 
     the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center (CTAC), the High 
     Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) program and the 
     Special Forfeiture Fund. The account provides funding for 
     personnel compensation, travel, and other basic operations of 
     the Office, and for general policy research to support the 
     formulation of the National Drug Control Strategy. Funds are 
     also provided for the National Alliance for Model State Drug 
     Laws, which encourages

[[Page 1012]]

     States to adopt and implement laws, policies, and regulations 
     to reduce drug trafficking, drug use, and their related 
     consequences.


                Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center

Appropriations, 2002........................................$42,300,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................40,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................40,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $40,000,000 
     for the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center (CTAC). This 
     funding includes $22,000,000 for the continuation of the 
     technology transfer program by CTAC to State and local law 
     enforcement in their efforts to combat drugs. Pursuant to the 
     Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 
     1998 (Title VII of Division C of Public Law 105-277), CTAC 
     serves as the central counterdrug research and development 
     organization for the U.S. Government.
       The Committee expects multiagency research and development 
     programs to be coordinated by CTAC in order to prevent 
     duplication of effort and to assure that whenever possible, 
     those efforts provide capabilities that transcend the need of 
     any single Federal agency. Prior to the obligation of these 
     funds, the Committee expects to be notified by the chief 
     scientist on how these funds will be spent; it also expects 
     to receive periodic reports from the chief scientist on the 
     priority counterdrug enforcement research and development 
     requirements identified by the Center and on the status of 
     projects funded by CTAC.
       The Committee continues to believe CTAC should work closely 
     and cooperatively with the individual law enforcement 
     agencies in the definition of a national research and 
     development program which addresses agency requirements with 
     respect to timeliness, operational utility, and consistency 
     with agency budget plans.
       Last year the Committee provided additional funds for CTAC 
     to focus on conducting substance abuse research and training 
     Native American physicians in the field of substance abuse 
     research. The Committee requests that the chief scientist 
     provide periodic updates on this process.


                Counterdrug Technology Transfer Program

       The Committee fully supports the continuation of this 
     program and, therefore, has provided $22,000,000 for its 
     operation in fiscal year 2003. The Committee believes that 
     this program demonstrates the best that the Federal 
     Government has to offer to State and local law enforcement in 
     their efforts to combat drug related crimes. The Committee is 
     encouraged by the positive reception this program has 
     received by State and local law enforcement agencies as 
     current requests for technology continue to outpace resources 
     by over four to one. The Committee expects that CTAC will 
     conduct further outreach to State and local agencies to 
     educate them about the program. Finally, the Committee would 
     encourage CTAC to work with private industry to make their 
     developed technology available to State and local law 
     enforcement through this program. The Committee requests that 
     ONDCP report within 60 days after the date of enactment of 
     the fiscal year 2003 appropriations bill on the number of 
     requests received, promotion efforts to State and local law 
     enforcement, and the effectiveness and interest in this 
     program by these law enforcement communities.

                  Funds Appropriated to the President


                     Federal drug control programs

                 high-intensity drug trafficking areas

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$226,350,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................206,350,000
Committee recommendation....................................226,350,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $226,350,000, 
     which is $20,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
     directs that funding shall be provided for the existing High 
     Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) at no less than the 
     fiscal year 2003 budget request level.
       The Committee has included a new provision to prohibit the 
     use of funds to consolidate management of the California, 
     Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas partnerships in the El Paso 
     office. Such a centralization of the Southwest Border HIDTA 
     could undermine operational flexibility and law-enforcement 
     support for the HIDTA program, ultimately degrading its 
     effectiveness.
       The Committee is deeply disturbed over ONDCP actions and 
     communications with the Committee concerning the HIDTA 
     program over the past year. The Committee provided additional 
     funds in fiscal year 2002 for the HIDTA program to increase 
     funding for or expand existing HIDTAs, or to fund newly 
     designated HIDTAs. The Committee was not consulted when ONDCP 
     decided how to obligate these funds, in some cases for 
     different purposes. In addition, the Committee is concerned 
     that those decisions were not completely thought out, and 
     that necessary programmatic personnel were not consulted.
       The Committee is aware of the continued interest in the 
     creation of new, and expansion of existing, HIDTAs. The 
     Committee is also profoundly aware of proposals submitted to 
     ONDCP for the additional $20,000,000 provided by the Congress 
     in fiscal year 2002 that went unfunded in ONDCP's spending 
     plan. Prior to any notification or any obligation of funds, 
     the Committee directs ONDCP to submit for approval to the 
     Committee on Appropriations a spending plan for the 
     additional $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
     directs ONDCP to review the Senate report for suggestions on 
     how to allocate portions of the additional funds and requires 
     ONDCP to provide a detailed explanation to the Committee on 
     Appropriations on the reasons why any of the Senate 
     recommendations receive an amount lower than that requested. 
     The Committee also directs ONDCP to provide a detailed 
     timeline and explanation to the Committee 30 days after the 
     date of enactment on how the additional $20,000,000 provided 
     in fiscal year 2002 was obligated.
       The HIDTA program was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse 
     Act of 1988, as amended, and the Office of National Drug 
     Control Policy's reauthorization, Public Law 105-277, to 
     provide assistance to Federal, State and local law 
     enforcement entities operating in those areas most adversely 
     affected by drug trafficking. In allocating the HIDTA funds, 
     the Committee expects the Director of ONDCP to ensure that 
     the activities receiving these limited additional resources 
     are used strictly for implementing the strategy for each 
     HIDTA, taking into consideration local conditions and 
     resource requirements. These funds should not be used to 
     supplant existing support for ongoing Federal, State, or 
     local drug control operations normally funded out of the 
     operating budgets of each agency. The remaining funds may be 
     transferred to Federal agencies and departments to support 
     Federal antidrug activities.
       The Committee believes that the Director should take steps 
     to ensure that the HIDTA funds are transferred to the 
     appropriate drug control agencies expeditiously. To ensure 
     that the funding allocations meet the priorities outlined in 
     the strategies, the Committee instructs the Director to 
     submit the strategies, along with the identification of how 
     the funds will be spent, to the Committee for approval prior 
     to the obligation of the funds. The Committee also expects to 
     be notified if any changes are made in the spending plans 
     presented to it during the course of the fiscal year. The 
     Committee further instructs the Director to submit the 
     updated 2003 strategies for each of the HIDTA's to the 
     Committee for review and to obligate the HIDTA funds within 
     120 days of enactment of this Act. This provision may be 
     waived if a request is made to the Committee and has been 
     approved in advance according to the normal reprogramming 
     procedures. The Committee expects the Director to take 
     actions necessary to ensure that all HIDTA funds are being 
     used to support only those activities which are directly 
     linked to the individual HIDTA strategies recommended by the 
     HIDTA coordinators and which support the goals and objectives 
     outlined in each of these strategies.


                          ROCKY MOUNTAIN HIDTA

       The Committee understands that the Office of National Drug 
     Control Policy is reviewing a proposal from the Rocky 
     Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area to expand its 
     operation into five counties in Montana. The Committee 
     encourages ONDCP to closely and expeditiously review the 
     merit of this request. However, the Committee directs that 
     any expansion of the Rocky Mountain HIDTA be accomplished in 
     such a way so as not to diminish the funding currently 
     available to the existing HIDTA entities.


                      ECSTASY REDUCTION INITIATIVE

       The Committee is extremely concerned about the use of 
     Ecstasy among teenagers and young adults. The use of this 
     dangerous drug has reached alarming proportions among junior 
     high and high school students, and the numerous fatalities 
     associated with Ecstasy do not appear to have had any impact 
     on the drug's popularity. The Committee encourages the Rocky 
     Mountain HIDTA to continue the Ecstasy reduction initiative 
     to help deal with this steadily increasing problem, with 
     emphasis on designated counties in Colorado.


                    COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN HIDTAS

       The Committee recognizes the positive impact and successes 
     of the cooperative law enforcement arrangements of the HIDTA. 
     As HIDTAs have matured, they have demonstrated an ability to 
     address their HIDTA-specific problems with unique and 
     effective solutions. Many HIDTAs have begun to reach outside 
     of the law enforcement community to other organizations which 
     affect the effort to combat drugs in our communities. The 
     Committee has seen success in the HIDTAs as they begin to 
     incorporate the important work of those in the community 
     itself, such as in the areas of treatment and counseling. The 
     Committee is encouraged by this rounding out of the HIDTAs' 
     efforts and encourages the HIDTAs to continue to further 
     develop these relationships.


                             MIDWEST HIDTA

       The Committee is concerned about the growing production, 
     trafficking, and use of methamphetamine throughout the 
     Midwest HIDTA. The Committee is distressed that ONDCP did not 
     provide more funds out of the

[[Page 1013]]

     additional $20,000,000 fiscal year 2002 to address this 
     situation.
       The Committee notes that the State of Missouri, which is 
     part of the Midwest HIDTA, had the highest number of 
     methamphetamine lab seizures in the country. The fight 
     against methamphetamine places a tremendous burden on State 
     and local law enforcement. Additional funding would allow 
     Missouri to continue to target methamphetamine labs, and 
     would enable ONDCP to designate additional counties, 
     including counties in the Southern District of Illinois, as 
     part of the Midwest HIDTA where appropriate. The Committee 
     directs ONDCP to work with the affected counties to determine 
     whether they meet the statutory criteria required for 
     designation as a HIDTA.


              balanced focus between urban and rural areas

       The Committee is also concerned about the direction ONDCP 
     seems to be taking the HIDTA program with the new National 
     Priority Targeting Project. According to ONDCP, this Project 
     will enhance existing HIDTA-affiliated law enforcement 
     efforts to curtail the availability of illegal drugs through 
     the disruption and dismantlement of specific major drug 
     trafficking organizations that coincide with Department of 
     Justice National Priority Targets (``NPTs''). The Committee 
     is concerned that this ``king-pin'' strategy could 
     significantly impact the level of support provided to cases 
     that have been regional impact targets in the past.


                            GULF COAST HIDTA

       The Committee recognizes that the Gulf Coast HIDTA covers 
     the full spectrum of drug trafficking and abuse, trafficking 
     modalities and types of criminal organizations. In its 
     continued effort to combat these threats, the Gulf Coast 
     HIDTA is seeking to expand into new areas of Louisiana, 
     Mississippi, and Alabama. ONDCP is encouraged to work with 
     Louisiana and other interested States to further their 
     initiatives.


                           NEW ENGLAND HIDTA

       The Committee recognizes that the growing availability and 
     abuse of inexpensive, high-purity heroin has had a harmful 
     impact on the New England region, resulting in an increase in 
     the number of drug-related arrests, overdose deaths and 
     injuries, and individuals seeking treatment for addiction. 
     The Committee is also aware of the extraordinary challenges 
     posed by increasing drug importation into the region across 
     the northern U.S. border and via marine transportation. 
     Therefore, the Committee directs ONDCP to focus additional 
     resources on these emerging drug threats and to work with the 
     New England HIDTA to address unmet needs in the areas of task 
     force expansion, training, intelligence, space and equipment, 
     with a particular focus on Rhode Island.


                           Southwest Indiana

       The Committee is aware of a proposal to create a HIDTA in 
     Southwest Indiana to combat the drastic increase in the 
     production, use and distribution of methamphetamine. The 
     Indiana State Police, in conjunction with local and Federal 
     officials, would target the following counties in Southwest 
     Indiana: Benton, Clay, Crawford, Daviess, Dubois, Fountain, 
     Gibson, Greene, Jackson, Jasper, Knox, Lawrence, Martin, 
     Monroe, Morgan, Montgomery, Newton, Orange, Owen, Parke, 
     Perry, Pike, Posey, Putnam, Spencer, Sullivan, Vanderburgh, 
     Vigo and Warrick. The State of Indiana has experienced an 
     exponential increase in the number of methamphetamine labs 
     that have been seized--43 in 1998, 129 in 1999, 314 in 2000, 
     and 546 in 2001. State Police estimate that they will seize 
     over 800 labs in 2002. ONDCP is encouraged to work with the 
     Indiana State Police to develop and implement this innovative 
     approach to combating the spread and distribution of 
     methamphetamine. Recognizing current resource limitations, 
     the Committee has provided additional discretionary funding 
     and directs ONDCP to work with the affected counties to 
     determine whether they meet the statutory criteria required 
     for designation as a HIDTA.


                            Milwaukee HIDTA

       The Committee understands that the ONDCP is reviewing a 
     proposal to expand the Milwaukee HIDTA to the metropolitan 
     areas surrounding Milwaukee along the I-94 corridor 
     connecting Milwaukee to Chicago. This extension of the 
     program to Racine, Kenosha and Waukesha counties would assist 
     Milwaukee's efforts and attack the scourge of drugs in the 
     surrounding communities. The Committee has provided 
     additional discretionary funding and encourages ONDCP to work 
     with these States and communities to determine whether they 
     meet the statutory criteria required for designation as a 
     HIDTA and direct the necessary resources towards this 
     proposal.


                         Southwest Border HIDTA

       The Committee recognizes the strides that have been made by 
     the New Mexico partnership of the Southwest Border HIDTA in 
     disrupting heroin trafficking in New Mexico. Despite these 
     gains, however, the availability of heroin continues to be 
     prevalent in Rio Arriba County and other counties in New 
     Mexico. The Committee directs the Director of ONDCP to 
     evaluate the situation and work with State and local law 
     enforcement to provide adequate resources to target this 
     continuing threat.


                       PHILADELPHIA/CAMDEN HIDTA

       The Committee is aware of the current coordination of the 
     State of Delaware with the Philadelphia/Camden HIDTA. As a 
     result of this strong relationship, the Committee directs the 
     Director of ONDCP to evaluate the current situation to 
     determine whether or not Delaware meets the statutory 
     requirements to qualify for inclusion into the Philadelphia/
     Camden HIDTA.


                            APPALACHIA HIDTA

       The Committee is concerned that the three Appalachia HIDTA 
     States, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee, along with 
     California and Hawaii, account for over 77 percent of the 
     domestic production of marijuana. The three Appalachia HIDTA 
     States are also producing some of the most potent marijuana 
     available. For fiscal year 2000, the West Virginia National 
     Guard, which has mounted a vigorous counterdrug program in 
     cooperation with the Appalachia HIDTA, estimates that the 
     eradicated marijuana crop in West Virginia yielded plants 
     valued at $57,000,000. Therefore, the Committee directs ONDCP 
     to work with State and local law enforcement officials to 
     provide additional resources to combat this threat.


                          South Carolina HIDTA

       The Committee is aware of a proposal to create a HIDTA in 
     Charleston County, South Carolina. Charleston, South Carolina 
     is the fourth largest port in the United States, with 177,000 
     containers annually entering the United States. The Committee 
     understands the proposal would target, disrupt, and dismantle 
     narcotics smuggling operations at the Ports of Charleston, 
     Georgetown, and Port Royal, South Carolina. The Committee 
     directs ONDCP to work with the Federal, State, and local law 
     enforcement agencies in South Carolina to determine whether 
     these areas meet the statutory criteria required for 
     designation as a HIDTA.


                            NORTHWEST HIDTA

       The Committee recognizes that Washington State has recently 
     experienced tremendous growth in the production and use of 
     methamphetamine. In fact, Washington is now second in the 
     country in methamphetamine production, after California. 
     Combating methamphetamine and other illegal drugs takes a 
     multi-faceted approach, including the use of narcotics 
     canines and support from various Federal agencies. Washington 
     State has recently lost a number of critical drug detecting 
     canines. Therefore, the Committee directs ONDCP to focus 
     additional resources on these emerging drug threats, and in 
     particular funding for additional narcotic canines to work 
     with the Northwest HIDTA to address unmet needs in detection 
     and enforcement.


         HIDTA EFFORTS TO COMBAT METHAMPHETAMINE IN RURAL AREAS

       The Committee is concerned about the increasing threat 
     posed by methamphetamine production, trafficking, and use, 
     especially in rural, underpopulated areas. Recognizing that 
     the Director of ONDCP designated the Midwest HIDTA in 1996 to 
     specifically address this threat, the Committee encourages 
     ONDCP to continue to focus available resources on combating 
     this emerging drug threat not only in the Midwest HIDTA, but 
     in all HIDTAs operating in traditionally underserved areas.


                 WEB SERVICES TECHNOLOGY AND NETWORKING

       The Committee provides $1,150,000 to the Rocky Mountain 
     HIDTA for a demonstration project in Colorado that uses web-
     based technology to securely integrate disparate data bases 
     in real time for the purpose of enhancing the ability of law 
     enforcement agencies to share and exchange information within 
     and between agencies in order to improve public safety.


                        Special Forfeiture Fund

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$239,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................251,300,000
Committee recommendation....................................172,700,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $172,700,000. 
     The Committee provides $100,000,000 for the continuation of 
     the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. The Committee 
     included a total of $5,900,000 for the United States Anti-
     Doping Agency.
       The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, as amended, and the Office 
     of National Drug Control Policy's reauthorization, Public Law 
     105-277, established the Special Forfeiture Fund to be 
     administered by the Director of ONDCP. The monies deposited 
     in the Fund support high-priority drug control programs and 
     may be transferred to drug control agencies or may be 
     directly obligated by the Director of ONDCP.


                        National Media Campaign

       The Committee has been supportive of the national media 
     campaign and has provided consistent funding for this 
     program. When this program was initially funded by the 
     Congress in fiscal year 1998, it was with the understanding 
     that within 3 years there would be demonstrable behavior 
     changes in America's youth with relation to drug use. To 
     date, the Congress has provided over $928,872,000 for this 
     program and has done so

[[Page 1014]]

     at the expense of many other important law enforcement needs. 
     The Committee is concerned that drug use is clearly 
     increasing in spite of the national media campaign, leading 
     some observers to conclude it has not had a noticeable impact 
     on drug use among America's youth.
       The May and November 2002 evaluations by Westat and the 
     Annenberg School for Communication of the University of 
     Pennsylvania confirmed numerous concerns over the 
     effectiveness of the media campaign. It concluded that while 
     there appears to be a favorable effect on parents, youth--the 
     target audience for the program--do not seem to obtain 
     similar benefits. It was the intent of both the authorizers 
     and the appropriators to affect the behavior of drug use 
     among youth over the course of a 5-year program. 
     Unfortunately, we find ourselves back at square one after 
     spending close to $1,000,000,000 of taxpayer money.
       The Committee held a hearing on this subject on June 19, 
     2002, shortly after the release of the Westat evaluation. The 
     issues raised during the hearing highlighted the numerous 
     controversies associated with the campaign and speculation 
     regarding the cause. ONDCP is staking the future of the media 
     campaign on an advertising effort it developed outside the 
     parameters and participants specified in the authorization. 
     ONDCP also stated that to move forward with the campaign, 
     additional testing needed to be performed prior to any airing 
     of advertising. The Committee agrees with the Director on 
     fully testing the advertising.
       The Committee has cautioned ONDCP for a number of years 
     about the growing number of controversies and maintaining the 
     true essence of the program as authorized by Congress. Recent 
     events have resulted in a loss of the Committee's confidence 
     in the management of the campaign, and the reason the 
     Committee has decreased the allocation for the campaign.


                       Drug-Free Communities Act

       The accelerating rate of drug use by young Americans is a 
     major concern that must be addressed. The Committee, 
     therefore, provides $60,000,000 in support of the Drug-Free 
     Communities Act. These funds will be used to support the 
     establishment of local counterdrug efforts that are 
     characterized by strong conditions for local initiatives, 
     support, and accountability. In addition, the requirement for 
     participating communities to match funding will help ensure 
     the degree of commitment necessary to succeed.
       The Drug Free Communities Support Program Reauthorization 
     (Public Law 107-82) authorized ONDCP to make a grant to 
     establish a National Community Anti-Drug Coalition Institute. 
     ONDCP instead solicited applications for a cooperative 
     agreement. The sponsors of the provision did not intend for 
     the National Community Anti-Drug Coalition Institute to be 
     hampered by layers of bureaucracy which duplicate current 
     efforts.
       Congress created an advisory commission to oversee and 
     guide the program when it authorized the Drug Free 
     Communities Support Program in 1997. Creating a second 
     advisory committee to oversee the National Community Anti-
     Drug Coalition Institute is a needless duplication and 
     expense. In addition, avoiding programmatic duplications of 
     effort should be the responsibility of ONDCP, and should not 
     be shifted to the grant recipient.
       The requirements for a grant recipient were clearly written 
     in the authorizing legislation, and the sponsors of the 
     reauthorization legislation are unaware of any organization 
     besides the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America who 
     meet these qualifications. As a result, the Committee has 
     included language directing ONDCP to provide a $2,000,000 
     grant directly to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of 
     America to establish and maintain the National Community 
     Anti-Drug Coalition Institute.


                      NATIONAL DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE

       The Committee recognizes the work of the National Drug-Free 
     Workplace Alliance to promote and assist the establishment of 
     drug-free workplace programs and provide comprehensive drug-
     free workplace services to businesses. In addition, the 
     Committee understands that the Alliance provides technical 
     assistance and up-to-date workplace substance abuse 
     information to communities, drug-free workplace 
     organizations, and other similar groups through a national 
     network of experts and professionals with drug-free workplace 
     interests. The Committee urges ONDCP to work with the 
     National Drug-Free Workplace Alliance as it coincides with 
     ONDCP's mission and encourages cooperative efforts relating 
     to the National Clearinghouse.


                    UNITED STATES ANTI-DOPING AGENCY

       The Committee provides $5,900,000 for efforts of the United 
     States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) under the Special 
     Forfeiture Fund. The Committee directs ONDCP to provide the 
     entire amount directly to USADA within 30 days after 
     enactment.
       USADA was created to oversee testing, education, research, 
     and adjudication on behalf of America's athletes 
     participating in the Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic 
     Games. The Committee has provided additional funds to 
     increase the number of ``No-Advanced-Notice'' tests, to 
     increase research funding at university and research 
     laboratories, and to expand their efforts to educate the 
     youth of America on health issues and the ethics of competing 
     fairly in sport. The Committee continues to be impressed with 
     the operations of this new agency and wishes to congratulate 
     them on the international recognition of their efforts.


                          Drug Court Institute

       The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the National Drug 
     Court Institute. The Committee is aware of the extraordinary 
     growth in drug courts across the country and the important 
     training of new drug courts that the Institute provides. Drug 
     courts provide an effective means to fight drug-related crime 
     through the cooperative efforts of State and local law 
     enforcement, the judicial system, and the public health 
     treatment network.

                     TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

 Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,629,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................4,629,000
Committee recommendation......................................4,629,000

       The Committee recommends $4,629,000 for the Committee for 
     Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled 
     (CPPBSD).
       The CPPBSD administers the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (JWOD) 
     of 1971, as amended. Its primary objective is to use the 
     purchasing power of the Federal Government to provide people 
     who are blind or have other severe disabilities with 
     employment and training that will develop and improve job 
     skills as well as prepare them for employment options outside 
     the JWOD program. In fiscal year 2003, the Committee's goal 
     is to employ approximately 50,000 people who are blind or 
     have other severe disabilities in 650 producing nonprofit 
     agencies. The Committee's duties include promoting the 
     program; determining which products and services are suitable 
     for Government procurement from qualified nonprofit agencies 
     serving people who are blind or have other severe 
     disabilities; maintaining a procurement list of such products 
     and services; determining the fair market price for products 
     and services on the procurement list; and making rules and 
     regulations necessary to carry out the purposes of the Act. 
     In fiscal year 2003, the Committee's goal is to have sales of 
     $1.6 billion.
       The Committee staff's responsibilities include promoting 
     and assessing the overall program; supervising the selection 
     and assignment of new products and services; assisting in 
     establishing prices; reviewing and adjusting these prices; 
     verifying the qualifications of nonprofit agencies; and 
     monitoring their performance.

                      Federal Election Commission


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$43,689,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................45,244,000
Committee recommendation.....................................45,244,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $45,244,000 
     for the Federal Election Commission.
       The Federal Election Commission administers the disclosure 
     of campaign finance information, enforces limitations on 
     contributions and expenditures, supervises the public funding 
     of Presidential elections, and performs other tasks related 
     to Federal elections.

                   Federal Labor Relations Authority


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$26,524,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................28,684,000
Committee recommendation.....................................28,677,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $28,677,000 
     for the Federal Labor Relations Authority.
       The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) serves as a 
     neutral party in the settlement of disputes that arise 
     between unions, employees, and agencies on matters outlined 
     in the Federal Service Labor Management Relations statute, 
     decides major policy issues, prescribes regulations, and 
     disseminates information appropriate to the needs of 
     agencies, labor organizations, and the public. Establishment 
     of the FLRA gives full recognition to the role of the Federal 
     Government as an employer.
       In addition, the FLRA is engaged in case-related 
     interventions and training and facilitation of labor-
     management partnerships and in resolving disputes. FLRA 
     promotes labor-management cooperation by providing training 
     and assistance to labor organizations and agencies on 
     resolving disputes, facilitates the creation of partnerships, 
     and trains the parties on rights and responsibilities under 
     the Federal Relations Labor Relations Management statute.

                    General Services Administration


     Federal buildings fund--limitations on availability of revenue

                     (Including Transfer of Funds)

       The Federal Buildings Fund program consists of the 
     following activities financed from rent charges:
       Construction and acquisition of facilities.--Space is 
     acquired through the construction

[[Page 1015]]

     or purchase of facilities and prospectus-level extensions to 
     existing buildings. All costs directly attributable to site 
     acquisition, construction, and the full range of design and 
     construction services, and management and inspection of 
     construction projects are funded under this activity.
       Repairs and alterations.--Repairs and alterations of public 
     buildings as well as associated design and construction 
     services are funded under this activity. Protection of the 
     Government's investment, health and safety of building 
     occupants, transfer of agencies from leased space, and cost 
     effectiveness are the principal criteria used in establishing 
     priorities. Primary consideration is given to repairs to 
     prevent deterioration and damage to buildings, their support 
     systems, and operating equipment. This activity also provides 
     for conversion of existing facilities and non-prospectus 
     extensions.
       Installment acquisition payments.--Payments are made for 
     liabilities incurred under purchase contract authority and 
     lease purchase arrangements. The periodic payments cover 
     principal, interest, and other requirements.
       Rental of space.--Space is acquired through the leasing of 
     buildings including space occupied by Federal agencies in 
     U.S. Postal Service facilities, 153 million rentable square 
     feet in fiscal year 2002, and 157 million rentable square 
     feet in fiscal year 2003.
       Building operations.--Services are provided for Government-
     owned and leased facilities, including cleaning, utilities 
     and fuel, protection, maintenance, miscellaneous services 
     (such as moving, evaluation of new materials and equipment, 
     and field supervision), and general management and 
     administration of all real property related programs 
     including salaries and benefits paid from the Federal 
     Buildings Fund.
       Other programs.--When requested by Federal agencies, the 
     Public Buildings Service provides building services such as 
     tenant alterations, cleaning and other operations, and 
     protection services which are in excess of those services 
     provided under the commercial rental charge. For presentation 
     purposes, the balances of the Unconditional Gifts of Real, 
     Personal, or Other Property trust fund have been combined 
     with the Federal Buildings Fund.


                      construction and acquisition

Limitation on availability, 2002...........................$662,680,000
Limitation on availability, 2003............................556,574,000
Committee recommendation....................................631,663,000

       The Committee recommends $631,663,000 for the construction 
     and acquisition account. The Committee recommendation is 
     $75,089,000 above the President's request.


                        COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION

       The Committee encourages the General Services 
     Administration (GSA), the administration, and the judiciary 
     to continue to work cooperatively to develop a single 
     comprehensive plan upon which courthouse construction will be 
     based. The Committee continues to believe that a model should 
     incorporate utilization rates, courtroom sharing, and safety 
     considerations. The use of cost savings measures and careful 
     planning will result in a program that can be consistently 
     supported. The Committee notes, however, that it has been 
     extremely supportive of addressing the courthouse 
     construction backlog. The Committee would remind the 
     Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOC) and other 
     organizations that the Committee has adhered to the jointly 
     agreed to priority list and that the Congress is constrained 
     by overall budget resolutions and spending caps from 
     accommodating every request.


                           COURTROOM SHARING

       The Committee is aware of conflicting information regarding 
     the issue of courtroom sharing. The Committee is concerned 
     that in spite of the strict budgetary pressures facing the 
     Federal Government, AOC fails to pursue a policy of fiscal 
     restraint and approaches the Congress for increases in 
     courthouse construction funding above the Administration's 
     request. The Congress and the Administration have worked 
     diligently to reign in court construction costs and the 
     Committee will continue to pursue all avenues with respect to 
     cost containment with or without the support of the Courts.
       The Committee notes that the General Accounting Office 
     (GAO), in a December 2000 report to the Congress on this 
     issue, analyzed the data used in a courtroom sharing study 
     commissioned by the Courts. That study criticized a 1997 GAO 
     report on the same issue. GAO noted that the Courts did not 
     agree with its recommendations, yet also commented that the 
     AOC ``did not provide any data, analysis, or rationale that 
     would give us [GAO] an adequate basis for changing or 
     dropping'' the recommendations. The Committee concurs with 
     GAO's concerns and urges the AOC to provide the Committee 
     with persuasive courtroom use data and analysis, along with 
     its views, to justify the number of courtrooms being 
     requested in future courtroom construction requests.


                      PORT OF ENTRY INFRASTRUCTURE

       The Committee notes that it has been over 2 years since the 
     Port of Entry Infrastructure Assessment Study was delivered 
     to the Congress. That study was required as part of the 
     fiscal year 2000 Treasury and General Government 
     Appropriations Act and included detailed input from the U.S. 
     Customs Service, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 
     and GSA. The study identified an enormous backlog of 822 
     individual infrastructure requirements at our Nation's border 
     crossings at an estimated gross cost of $784,000,000.
       The events of September 11, 2001 refocused the Nation's 
     attention on the need to reinforce our borders. While this 
     Committee has fully funded the administration's past requests 
     for border facility construction and repair, those projects 
     merely scratch the surface of what is required to robustly 
     address the infrastructure backlog. The creation of a new 
     Department of Homeland Security, which combines the various 
     existing border agencies, offers the opportunity to address 
     this facilities backlog in a cohesive manner.
       The Committee therefore directs GSA, in consultation with 
     the Office of Management and Budget, the U.S. Customs 
     Service, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and 
     Directorate of Border and Transportation Security within the 
     Department of Homeland Security, to update the study and 
     submit it to the Congress no later than 90 days after 
     enactment of this Act.
       The Committee also directs that the study identify port of 
     entry infrastructure and technology improvements which 
     enhance border security and facilitate the flow of legitimate 
     commerce. The Committee urges that the study, to the greatest 
     extent possible, prioritize projects based on the ability of 
     the project to fulfill immediate security requirements and 
     facilitate trade across the borders. The Committee recommends 
     that the annual courthouse construction projects 
     prioritization list submitted by the Administrative Office of 
     the U.S. Courts be used as a model for this effort.


                        Champlain Port of Entry

       The Committee acknowledges the untenable conditions at the 
     Champlain, New York port of entry and is aware that the 
     General Services Administration is currently designing a new 
     border facility to improve the safety and efficiency of this 
     critical United States and Canada trade corridor. The 
     Committee urges the Administration to make the completion of 
     the Champlain port of entry a high priority and to include 
     construction funding for the facility in the fiscal year 2004 
     budget request.


                       Burlington, VT Courthouse

       The Committee is pleased that Burlington, VT is included in 
     the list of recommended future construction projects provided 
     by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The 
     Committee expects GSA to move forward with this project in an 
     expeditious manner and give priority to central business 
     districts when selecting a location for the new building.


                       ROSENN FEDERAL COURTHOUSE

       The Committee is aware of the shortage of parking in and 
     around the Rosenn Federal Courthouse in Wilkes-Barre, 
     Pennsylvania, which has caused a number of inconveniences for 
     both employees and visitors to the facility. The Committee 
     encourages GSA to work with the community to address this 
     parking issue, utilizing up to $1,000,000 from funds provided 
     for the construction non-prospectus account.


                        repairs and alterations

Limitation on availability, 2002...........................$869,376,000
Limitation on availability, 2003............................986,029,000
Committee recommendation....................................997,839,000

       The Committee recommends new obligational authority of 
     $997,839,000 for repairs and alterations in fiscal year 2003.
       Under this activity, the General Services Administration 
     (GSA) executes its responsibility for repairs and alterations 
     (R&A) of both Government-owned and leased facilities under 
     the control of GSA. The major goal of this activity is to 
     provide commercially equivalent space to tenant agencies. 
     Safety, quality, and operating efficiency of facilities are 
     given primary consideration in carrying out this 
     responsibility. A major portion of the fiscal year 2003 
     program is devoted to nondiscretionary work necessary to meet 
     this goal and keep the buildings in an occupiable condition.
       R&A workload requirements originate with scheduled onsite 
     inspections of buildings by qualified regional engineers and 
     building managers. The work identified through these 
     inspections is programmed in order of priority into the 
     repairs and alterations construction automated tracking 
     system (RACATS) and incorporated into a 5-year plan for 
     accomplishment, based upon funding availability, urgency, and 
     the volume of R&A work that GSA has the capability to execute 
     annually. Beginning in fiscal year 1995, design and 
     construction services activities associated with the repair 
     and alteration projects are funded in this account.
       The R&A program, for purposes of funds control, is divided 
     into two types of projects--line item and nonline item. The 
     following is a definition of each category of projects:

[[Page 1016]]

       Line item projects.--Line item projects are those larger 
     projects for which a prospectus is required under the 
     provisions of the Public Buildings Act of 1959. Generally, 
     line item projects are similar to construction projects in 
     the scope of work involved and the multiyear timeframe for 
     project completion. Line item projects are listed 
     individually in GSA's appropriations acts and the 
     obligational authority for each project is limited to the 
     amount shown therein.
       Nonline item projects.--Projects included in this category 
     are generally short term in nature and funds can normally be 
     obligated within a 1-year period. This category also includes 
     projects which are recurring in nature, such as cyclic 
     painting and the minor repair of defective building systems; 
     for example, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, fire safety, 
     and elevator system components.


                  rogers courthouse renovation project

       The Committee provided funding for the design of the Rogers 
     Courthouse renovation project in Denver, Colorado, in fiscal 
     year 2002 with the expectation that the construction funding, 
     estimated to be $40,000,000, would be requested in fiscal 
     year 2003. However, due to funding constraints, that level of 
     funding is not available within the Federal Buildings Fund. 
     The timing of the project had been planned to coordinate with 
     the completion of the new Denver courthouse in late 2002 
     which will house the judicial offices currently occupying the 
     Rogers Courthouse while renovations are underway. Therefore, 
     in an effort to keep this project moving forward, the 
     Committee has included an additional $9,000,000 for 
     demolition and asbestos removal. The Committee fully expects 
     that the remaining construction funds will be requested as 
     part of the fiscal year 2004 budget submission.


               PITTSBURGH U.S. POST OFFICE AND COURTHOUSE

       The Pittsburgh U.S. Post Office and Courthouse was 
     completed in 1934 and must be expanded to accommodate the 
     U.S. Courts. Needed alterations include an upgrade of the 
     building's exterior, plaza and parking ramp improvements, 
     installation of a fire safety system, and expansion of the 
     severely undersized main lobby. The Committee provided much 
     needed funding for this project in fiscal year 2002. However, 
     in order to complete the project, the Committee has provided 
     an additional $2,810,000 in fiscal year 2003 for facade and 
     window repairs, sprinkler system testing drains, millwork 
     repairs, refurbishment of the lobbying revolving doors, 
     sanitary/storm pipe repairs, corridor restoration, and 
     replacement of basement garage doors.


                    installment acquisition payments

Limitation on availability, 2002...........................$186,427,000
Limitation on availability, 2003............................178,960,000
Committee recommendation....................................178,960,000

       The Committee recommends a limitation of $178,960,000 for 
     installment acquisition payments. The Committee 
     recommendation equals the budget estimate.
       The Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 enables GSA to 
     enter into contractual arrangements for the construction of a 
     backlog of approved but unfunded projects. The purchase 
     contracts require the Government to make periodic payments on 
     these facilities over varying periods until title is 
     transferred to the Government. This activity provides for the 
     payment of principal, interest, taxes, and other required 
     obligations related to facilities acquired pursuant to the 
     Public Buildings Amendments of 1972 (40 U.S.C. 602a).


                            Rental of Space

Limitation on availability, 2002.........................$2,952,050,000
Limitation on availability, 2003..........................3,153,211,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,153,211,000

       The Committee recommends a limitation of $3,153,211,000 for 
     rental of space. The Committee recommendation is equal to the 
     budget estimate.
       GSA is responsible for leasing general purpose space and 
     land incident thereto for Federal agencies, except cases 
     where GSA has delegated its leasing authority (for example, 
     the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as the 
     Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Defense). GSA's 
     policy is to lease privately owned buildings and land only 
     when: (1) Federal space needs cannot be otherwise 
     accommodated satisfactorily in existing Government-owned or 
     leased space; (2) leasing proves to be more efficient than 
     the construction or alteration of a Federal building; (3) 
     construction or alteration is not warranted because 
     requirements in the community are insufficient or are 
     indefinite in scope or duration; or (4) completion of a new 
     Federal building within a reasonable time cannot be assured.


                          Building Operations

Limitation on availability, 2002.........................$1,748,949,000
Limitation on availability, 2003..........................1,965,160,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,965,160,000

       The Committee recommends a limitation of $1,965,160,000 for 
     building operations.
       This activity provides for the operation of all Government-
     owned facilities under the jurisdiction of GSA and building 
     services in GSA-leased space where the terms of the lease do 
     not require the lessor to furnish such services. Services 
     included in building operations are cleaning, protection, 
     maintenance, payments for utilities and fuel, grounds 
     maintenance, and elevator operations. Other related 
     supporting services include various real property management 
     and staff support activities such as space acquisition and 
     assignment; the moving of Federal agencies as a result of 
     space alterations in order to provide better space 
     utilization in existing buildings; onsite inspection of 
     building services and operations accomplished by private 
     contractors; and various highly specialized contract 
     administration support functions.
       The space, operations, and services referred to above are 
     furnished by GSA to its tenant agencies in return for payment 
     of rent. Due to considerations unique to their operation, GSA 
     also provides varying levels of above-standard services in 
     agency headquarter facilities, including those occupied by 
     the Executive Office of the President, such as the east and 
     west wings of the White House.


                      policy and citizen services

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$65,995,000
Committee recommendation.....................................65,995,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $65,995,000 
     for salaries and expenses for the policy and operations of 
     the General Services Administration.
       Office of Governmentwide Policy provides for Government-
     wide policy development, support, and evaluation functions 
     associated with real and personal property, supplies, 
     vehicles, aircraft, information technology, acquisition, 
     transportation and travel management. This office also 
     provides for the Federal Procurement Data Center, Workplace 
     Initiatives, Regulatory Information Service Center, the 
     Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, and the Committee 
     Management Secretariat. The Office of Government-wide Policy, 
     working cooperatively with other agencies, provides the 
     leadership needed to develop and evaluate the implementation 
     of policies designed to achieve the most cost-effective 
     solutions for the delivery of administrative services and 
     sound workplace practices, while reducing regulations and 
     empowering employees.
       Office of Citizen Services provides leadership and support 
     for electronic government initiatives and operates the 
     official Federal portal through which citizens may access 
     Federal information services electronically. The Federal 
     Consumer Information Center is part of this office, though 
     funded under a separate appropriation.


                           Child Care Centers

       The Committee recommends that funds provided to the Office 
     of Policy and Operations continue to be used to issue and 
     enforce regulations requiring any entity operating a child 
     care center in a facility owned or leased by an executive 
     agency to (1) comply with applicable State and local 
     licensing requirements related to the provision of child care 
     and (2) comply with center-based accreditation standards 
     specified by the Administrator, if such a regulatory program 
     is authorized.


                      COMPUTERS TO SCHOOLS PROGRAM

       The Committee is aware that Indian tribal colleges and 
     Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving institutions are 
     being asked to undertake an increasing number of activities 
     in Native communities related to education, employment and 
     other training as part of the ongoing ``welfare to work'' 
     transition mandated by the 1996 welfare reform law. To 
     complement recent private sector donations of computers and 
     related equipment to Indian tribes and Alaska Native and 
     Native Hawaiian serving institutions, as part of its existing 
     ``Computers to Schools'' program, the General Services 
     Administration (GSA) is encouraged to work with the 31 Indian 
     tribal colleges and Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving 
     institutions to provide assistance to them in developing and 
     upgrading the colleges' electronic capabilities. As part of 
     this effort, GSA should utilize the 31 tribal colleges and 
     Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving institutions as a 
     discrete evaluation point as it works to meet these equipment 
     needs. GSA's technical assistance will further enable the 
     tribal colleges and Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian serving 
     institutions to provide a higher quality of education to 
     their students.


                         TELECOMMUTING CENTERS

       The Committee encourages GSA to continue to promote 
     telecommuting centers within the Federal Government in the 
     Washington DC metro area as an effective means to provide an 
     alternative workplace.


              Federal Office Building in Colorado Springs

       The Federal building located at 1520 Willamette Avenue in 
     Colorado Springs, Colorado, is owned by GSA and is currently

[[Page 1017]]

     leased to the U.S. Air Force Space Command. It is the 
     Committee's understanding that Space Command is moving ahead 
     with options to vacate the facility. In the event that Space 
     Command does not renew its lease and the facility becomes 
     vacant and is deemed surplus, the Committee urges GSA to 
     strongly consider the U.S. Olympic Committee's (USOC) need 
     for additional space and to give priority to the USOC's 
     request to gain title or acquire the property.


                        GSA Fleet Vehicle study

       The Committee is aware of commercially-available 
     technologies for standard vehicles that significantly improve 
     fuel efficiencies and reduce harmful emissions through fuel 
     treatments and catalysts. The Committee directs GSA to 
     explore the use of these technologies and, if determined to 
     be appropriate and economically feasible, incorporate them 
     into GSA Fleet vehicles. The Committee directs GSA to report 
     its findings to the Committee within 1 year.


                        federal building access

       The Committee has learned that not all Federal 
     identification is acceptable for immediate access to all 
     Federal facilities. Rather, the tenants of some Federal 
     Buildings have decided that only identification for staff who 
     actually work in the building would allow immediate access 
     and all other Federal visitors must wait in line to sign in 
     before being allowed to enter. While the Committee 
     understands the necessity for strict security, this 
     inconsistency has created problems in some areas. Therefore, 
     the Committee requests that GSA review this situation and 
     report back 30 days after the date of enactment on their 
     recommendations for a resolution to this problem.


                    ANGEL ISLAND IMMIGRATION STATION

       The Committee directs the GSA to submit a report to the 
     Committee within 30 days after the date of enactment on the 
     status of the Angel Island Immigration Station which outlines 
     the role of the GSA, the National Archives, the National Park 
     Service, and any other relevant Federal agency in the effort 
     to properly maintain, preserve and restore the Station as a 
     national landmark.


                    CRAWFORD STREET FEDERAL BUILDING

       The Committee is pleased by the progress that GSA has been 
     making on the transfer of the Crawford Street Federal 
     Building parking lot to the City of Portsmouth, Virginia, but 
     is concerned that the negotiations have been ongoing for 
     nearly a year without any real results. The Committee 
     strongly encourages GSA to work with city officials to 
     effectuate the property transfer.

                           Operating Expenses


                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................$88,263,000
Committee recommendation.....................................94,640,000

       The Committee recommends $94,640,000 for this account.
       Provides for the personal property utilization and donation 
     activities of the Federal Supply Service and for the real 
     property utilization and disposal activities of the Public 
     Buildings Service, as well as agency-wide management and 
     administration. These programs include utilization of real 
     and personal property by Federal agencies and the transfer 
     among agencies of excess real and personal property; disposal 
     of surplus real property by sale, exchange, lease, permit, 
     assignment, or transfer, as well as the protection and 
     maintenance of excess and surplus real property pending its 
     disposition; appraisal of excess and surplus property, 
     necessary environmental and cultural analyses, reuse 
     planning, and real property utilization surveys; Indian Trust 
     Accounting, administrative support of Congressional District 
     and Senate State offices, and Critical Infrastructure 
     Protection initiatives in the Federal Technology Service 
     including the Federal Computer Incident Response Capability, 
     the focal point for detecting and responding to attacks on 
     Federal civilian computer systems, and responsibilities for 
     the Federal Public Key Infrastructure Steering Committee and 
     its activities.


                    VIRTUAL ARCHIVE STORAGE TERMINAL

       The Committee recognizes that in the interest of national 
     security, it is imperative to enhance and expand the 
     capability to capture and archive electronic data on a 
     government-wide scale. As such, the Committee provided funds 
     in fiscal year 2002 to continue development of data mining 
     tools to instantly extract and match data from multiple 
     sources to resolve the critical security issues of today's 
     environment. The Committee recognizes the important 
     advancements of the Virtual Archive Storage Terminal (VAST) 
     and the importance of adding the high performance computing 
     capability of this data mining system and has included 
     $2,500,000 to continue this research effort.


                     DIGITAL LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES

       The Committee has provided an additional $500,000 to 
     continue the development, demonstration, and research of the 
     digital medical education project in connection with the 
     Upper Great Plains Native American Telehealth Program.
       The Committee has also provided $500,000 for The University 
     of Colorado Health Sciences Center's Digital TeleHealth 
     Project. This project will employ digital medical education 
     technology to promote the health and well-being of citizens 
     in the eight-state Rocky Mountain region as well as American 
     Indians and Alaska Natives nationwide.


                  GOVERNMENT RURAL OUTREACH INITIATIVE

       The Committee is pleased with the work performed thus far 
     on this rural areas outreach initiative. The Committee notes 
     that the funds provided in fiscal year 2002 enabled the 
     launching of the initiative to make electronic government 
     services accessible to rural residents and to study and 
     develop the technologies needed to ensure secure transactions 
     of private information. The Committee has provided an 
     additional $1,750,000 to continue this initiative.


                    United States Consensus Council

       The Committee is aware of a bipartisan effort to create a 
     United States Consensus Council. The response by national 
     leaders to the attacks of September 11, 2001 has demonstrated 
     the benefits of working together across party and political 
     lines to address the Nation's most urgent priorities. The 
     Council would provide ongoing support to Congress by bringing 
     conflicting stakeholders to the table to resolve a wide range 
     of difficult national policy issues. The Committee has 
     provided $1,000,000, within existing resources and subject to 
     enactment of the authorizing legislation, to initiate this 
     effort.


                         Veterans' Oral History

       The Committee strongly supports efforts of various 
     organizations to make oral history recordings of the veterans 
     of the Nation's foreign wars. The Committee has provided 
     $250,000 for a grant to the North Dakota State Historical 
     Society for costs associated with this effort in the State.


                     Financial Transaction Software

       The Committee acknowledges the growing homeland security 
     requirement to provide enhanced security for financial 
     transactions. The Committee is aware of the efforts of 
     organizations, such as the New York Institute for Advanced 
     Studies in Software and Information Technology, to research 
     and develop software focused on securing these transactions 
     and has included $1,500,000 to assist in this effort.


                         John Adams Collection

       The Committee is aware of the interest of the Boston Public 
     Library in preserving and making accessible to scholars, 
     researchers, and the general public its holdings of the John 
     Adams collection. The Committee has provided an additional 
     $500,000 to this account to assist in this effort.


                      office of inspector general

Appropriations, 2002........................................$36,346,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................37,617,000
Committee recommendation.....................................37,617,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $37,617,000 
     for the Office of Inspector General.
       This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and 
     investigative functions to identify and correct management 
     and administrative deficiencies within the General Services 
     Administration (GSA), which create conditions for existing or 
     potential instances of fraud, waste and mismanagement. This 
     audit function provides internal audit and contract audit 
     services. Contract audits provide professional advice to GSA 
     contracting officials on accounting and financial matters 
     relative to the negotiation, award, administration, 
     repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal audits 
     review and evaluate all facets of GSA operations and 
     programs, test internal control systems, and develop 
     information to improve operating efficiencies and enhance 
     customer services. The investigative function provides for 
     the detection and investigation of improper and illegal 
     activities involving GSA programs, personnel, and operations.


                   ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT (E-GOV) FUND

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................45,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,000,000

       The Committee has agreed with the administration's request 
     to create a new account to support interagency electronic 
     government or ``e-gov'' initiatives, and has recommended an 
     appropriation of $5,000,000, to remain available through 
     fiscal year 2004. This will allow the administration to begin 
     this effort to develop and implement innovative uses of the 
     Internet and other electronic media to provide individuals, 
     businesses, and other Government agencies with simpler and 
     more timely access to Federal information, benefits, 
     services, and business opportunities. It is hoped that the 
     resulting initiative will allow agencies to provide the 
     public with optional use and acceptance of electronic 
     information, services, and signatures by October 2003 as 
     required under the Government Paperwork Elimination Act.
       Proposals for funding must meet capital planning guidelines 
     and include adequate documentation to demonstrate a sound 
     business case, attention to security and privacy, and a way 
     to measure performance against planned results. The Office of 
     Management

[[Page 1018]]

     and Budget would control the allocation of the fund and 
     direct its use for information systems projects and affect 
     multiple agencies and offer the greatest improvements in 
     access and service.


           allowances and office staff for former presidents

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$3,196,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,339,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,339,000

       The Committee recommends $3,339,000 for allowances and 
     office staff for former Presidents.
       This appropriation provides support consisting of pensions, 
     office staffs, and related expenses for former Presidents 
     Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and 
     William Jefferson Clinton, and for pension and postal 
     franking privileges for the widow of former President Lyndon 
     B. Johnson.
       Below is listed a detailed breakdown of the fiscal year 
     2003 funding:

               GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION--ALLOWANCES AND OFFICE STAFF FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Fiscal year 2003 request--former Presidents
                                           --------------------------------------------------  Widows     Total
                                              Ford     Carter    Reagan     Bush     Clinton
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel Compensation....................        96        96        96        96       150  ........       534
Personnel Benefits........................        24         6        24        35        56  ........       145
Benefits for Former Presidents............       170       170       170       170       175        20       875
Travel....................................        50         2        16        58        58  ........       184
Rental Payments to GSA....................       112       102       140       174       436  ........       964
Communications, Utilities and
 Miscellaneous charges:
    Telephone.............................        25        25        17        14        29  ........       110
    Postage...............................         9        20        10        14        22         2        77
Printing..................................         6         5        13        12        15  ........        51
Other Services............................        14        67        20        26        82  ........       209
Supplies & Materials......................        11         6        21        11        25  ........        74
Equipment.................................         4         9         3        64        36  ........       116
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total Obligations...................       521       508       530       674     1,084        22     3,339
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         gsa general provisions

       The Committee has recommended the inclusion of the 
     following general provisions:
       Section 401 continues a provision which authorizes GSA to 
     credit accounts with certain funds received from Government 
     corporations.
       Section 402 continues a provision which authorizes GSA to 
     use funds for the hire of passenger motor vehicles.
       Section 403 continues a provision which authorizes GSA to 
     transfer funds within the Federal buildings fund for meeting 
     program requirements.
       Section 404 continues a provision which limits funding for 
     courthouse construction which does not meet certain standards 
     of a capital improvement plan.
       Section 405 continues a provision which provides that no 
     funds may be used to increase the amount of occupiable square 
     feet, provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or 
     any other service usually provided, to any agency which does 
     not pay the requested rate.
       Section 406 continues a provision which allows pilot 
     information technology projects to be repaid from the 
     information technology fund.
       Section 407 continues a provision which authorizes GSA to 
     pay claims up to $2,000,000 from construction projects and 
     acquisition of buildings.
       Section 408 is a new provision to name the Judge Dan M. 
     Russell, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse in 
     Gulfport, Mississippi.
       Section 409 is a new provision to name the Alfonse M. 
     D'Amato United States Courthouse in Central Islip, New York.
       Section 410 is a new provision to name the Cesar E. Chavez 
     Memorial Building in Denver, Colorado.
       Section 411 is a new provision to permit GSA to sell a 
     parcel of land on an installment payment basis over a 5-year 
     period.
       Section 412 is a new provision to name the Richard Sheppard 
     Arnold United States Courthouse in Little Rock, Arkansas.
       Section 413 is a new provision to permit GSA to acquire 
     additional parcels of land in Salt Lake City, Utah, in order 
     to relocate an historical building.

                     Merit Systems Protection Board


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$30,555,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................31,790,000
Committee recommendation.....................................31,788,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $31,788,000 
     for the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).
       MSPB assists Federal agencies in running a merit-based 
     civil service system. This is accomplished on a case-by-case 
     basis through hearing and deciding employee appeals, and on a 
     systemic basis by reviewing significant actions and 
     regulations of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and 
     conducting studies of the civil service and other merit 
     systems. These actions are designed to assure that personnel 
     actions taken against employees are processed within the law, 
     and that actions taken by OPM and other agencies support and 
     enhance Federal merit principles.


                               limitation

                       (transfer of trust funds)

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,520,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................2,594,000
Committee recommendation......................................2,594,000

       The Committee has recommended a limitation of $2,594,000 on 
     the amount to be transferred from the civil service 
     retirement and disability fund to the Board to cover 
     administrative expenses to adjudicate retirement appeals 
     cases.

 Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental 
                           Policy Foundation


   federal payment to morris k. udall scholarship and excellence in 
                national environmental policy foundation

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,996,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,996,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,996,000

        The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,996,000 
     for these activities of the Morris K. Udall Foundation. The 
     Committee includes language to allow up to 60 percent of the 
     appropriation to be used for the expenses of the Native 
     Nations Institute. The Committee also includes language 
     requiring the Foundation to report to the Committee on the 
     amount of funding, if any, transferred from the Trust Fund 
     for the Native Nations Institute, and directs that this 
     report include an itemization of planned Native Nations 
     Institute expenditures for fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
     further directs the Foundation to describe as part of the 
     report its justification for such a transfer. Future budget 
     justifications submitted to Congress regarding this effort 
     are to contain detailed information on the actual 
     expenditures of past years as well as detailed information on 
     planned expenditures for the current and budget years.
       The General Fund payment to the Morris K. Udall Fund is 
     invested in Treasury securities with maturities suitable to 
     the needs of the Fund. Interest earnings from the investments 
     are used to carry out the activities of the Morris K. Udall 
     Foundation. The Foundation awards scholarships, fellowships 
     and grants, and funds activities of the Udall Center.
       Public Law 106-568 authorized the Morris K. Udall 
     Foundation to establish training programs for professionals 
     in health care policy and public policy, such as the Native 
     Nations Institute (NNI). NNI, based at the University of 
     Arizona, will provide Native Americans with leadership and 
     management training and analyze policies relevant to tribes.


         Morris K. Udall Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,309,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,309,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,309,000

       The U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution is 
     a Federal program established by Public Law 105-156 to assist 
     parties in resolving environmental, natural resource, and 
     public lands conflicts. The Institute is part of the Morris 
     K. Udall Foundation, and serves as an impartial, non-partisan 
     institution providing professional expertise, services, and 
     resources to all parties involved in such disputes. The 
     Institute helps parties determine whether collaborative 
     problem solving is appropriate for specific environmental 
     conflicts, how and when to bring all the parties to the 
     table, and whether a third-party facilitator or mediator 
     might be helpful in assisting the parties in their efforts to 
     each consensus or to resolve the conflict. In addition, the 
     Institute maintains a roster of qualified facilitators and 
     mediators with substantial experience in environmental 
     conflict resolution, and can help parties in selecting an 
     appropriate neutral.

[[Page 1019]]



              National Archives and Records Administration


                           operating expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$245,847,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................256,731,000
Committee recommendation....................................249,731,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $249,731,000 
     for Operating Expenses of the National Archives and Records 
     Administration (NARA). The Committee has not included funding 
     for Homeland Security records activities because the funds 
     cannot be obligated during fiscal year 2003.
       NARA provides for basic operations dealing with management 
     of the Government's archives and records, operation of 
     Presidential Libraries, and for the review for 
     declassification of classified security information.
       Records services.--This activity provides for selecting, 
     preserving, describing, and making available to the general 
     public, scholars, and Federal agencies the permanently 
     valuable historical records of the Federal Government; the 
     historical materials and Presidential records in Presidential 
     Libraries; for preparing related publications and exhibit 
     programs; and for conducting the appraisal of all Federal 
     records.
       Through the records declassification program, historically 
     valuable information in the records of the Federal Government 
     and in donated historical materials are made available to the 
     public by declassifying as much information as possible 
     without endangering the national security.
       This activity also provides oversight for the information 
     security program established by Executive Order 12958 as 
     amended by Executive Order 13142 and reports annually to the 
     President on the status of that program. It is also 
     responsible for policy oversight for the National Industrial 
     Security Program established under Executive Order 12829.
       NARA, in research and development collaboration with 
     national and international partners, is building an 
     Electronic Records Archives (ERA) that will ensure the 
     preservation of, and access to, Government electronic 
     records. The pace of technological progress makes formats in 
     which the records are stored obsolete within a few years, 
     threatening to make them inaccessible even if they are 
     preserved intact. ERA will preserve electronic records, 
     regardless of the original format, retain them indefinitely, 
     and enable requesters to access them on computer systems now 
     and in the future.
       Archives related services.--This activity provides for the 
     publication of the Federal Register, the Code of Federal 
     Regulations, the U.S. Statutes-at-Large, and Presidential 
     documents, and for a program to improve the quality of 
     regulations and the public's access to them. It also includes 
     the administration and reference services portion for the 
     National Historical Publications and Records Commission. This 
     Commission makes grants nationwide to preserve and publish 
     records that document American history.
       Archives II Facility.--Provides for construction and 
     related services of the new archival facility which was 
     opened to the public in 1993. Costs of construction are 
     financed by $302 million of federally guaranteed debt issued 
     in 1989. Since 1994 and continuing in 2003, the Archives 
     seeks appropriations for the annual payments for interest and 
     redemption of debt to be made under the contract for 
     construction and related services.
       Homeland security information sharing.--Provides for 
     training personnel at the State and local level in the proper 
     use and handling of classified and sensitive but unclassified 
     homeland security information. Funding will also be used to 
     facilitate security clearances for appropriate individuals at 
     the State and local level, and to ensure that Federal 
     agencies have the necessary classification authority for 
     homeland security information.


                      Veteran's Records Processing

       The Committee is pleased to note the exceptional progress 
     being made by the National Military Personnel Records Center, 
     St. Louis, MO in responding to requests for military service 
     records. The Center is ahead of the goals presented to the 
     Committee at the beginning of the year with over 33 percent 
     of requests being fully answered within 10 days and almost 
     half of all requests being filled within 15 days of receipt. 
     The Committee applauds the work of the staff of the Center 
     and requests a report update with the submission of next 
     year's budget.


              archives facilities repairs and restoration

Appropriations, 2002........................................$40,143,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,458,000
Committee recommendation.....................................14,208,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $14,208,000. 
     The Committee has included $3,750,000 to acquire land in 
     Anchorage, Alaska to build a new regional archives and 
     records facility. The funds will be used to reimburse the 
     General Service Administration for land acquisition services 
     and for the purchase of approximately 10 acres of land.
       This account provides for the repair, alteration, and 
     improvement of Archives facilities and Presidential Libraries 
     nationwide, and provides adequate storage for holdings. It 
     will better enable the National Archives to maintain its 
     facilities in proper condition for public visitors, 
     researchers, and employees in NARA facilities, and also 
     maintain the structural integrity of the buildings. These 
     funds will determine appropriate options for preserving and 
     providing access to 20th century military service records. 
     These funds will allow NARA to complete preliminary design 
     studies and analysis, including workflow and cost estimates, 
     for housing and access options for these massive and valuable 
     records. Technology and facility approaches will be examined.

        National Historical Publications and Records Commission


                             grants program

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$6,436,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,000,000. 
     This amount is $2,000,000 above the budget request.
       The National Historical Publications and Records Commission 
     (NHPRC) provides grants nationwide to preserve and publish 
     records that document American history. Administered within 
     the National Archives, which preserves Federal records, NHPRC 
     helps State, local, and private institutions preserve non-
     Federal records, helps publish the papers of major figures in 
     American history, and helps archivists and records managers 
     improve their techniques, training, and ability to serve a 
     range of information users.
       Records Center Revolving Fund.--The NARA Records Center 
     Revolving Fund provides low cost services, on a standard 
     price basis, to Federal agency customers for quality storage 
     and accession, reference, refile, and disposal services for 
     records stored in service centers.
       National Archives Gift Fund.--The National Archives Trust 
     Fund Board may solicit and accept gifts or bequests of money, 
     securities, or other personal property, for the benefit of or 
     in connection with the national archival and records 
     activities administered by the National Archives and Records 
     Administration (44 U.S.C. 2305).
       In accordance with 44 U.S.C. 2112, the Bush Presidential 
     Library received a $4 million endowment from the Bush Library 
     Foundation. The money was deposited in the gift fund and 
     invested in accordance with established National Archives 
     Trust and Gift Fund procedures. Income earned on the 
     investment will be used to offset a portion of the Library's 
     operation and maintenance costs.
       National Archives Trust Fund.--The Archivist of the United 
     States furnishes, for a fee, copies of unrestricted records 
     in the custody of the National Archives (44 U.S.C. 2116). 
     Proceeds from the sale of copies of microfilm publications, 
     reproductions, special works, and other publications, as well 
     as admission fees to Presidential Library museum rooms, are 
     deposited in this fund (44 U.S.C. 2112, 2307).


                          STATEHOOD INITIATIVE

       Communities in Hawaii and Alaska are preparing to celebrate 
     the 50th anniversary of Alaska and Hawaii Statehood. The 
     Committee provides $500,000, to be split evenly between the 
     University of Hawaii and the University of Alaska, to catalog 
     the historic records and artifacts relating to Statehood, and 
     to improve the exhibit presentation in preparation for the 
     Statehood celebrations.

                      Office of Government Ethics


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,117,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,488,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,486,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,486,000 
     for salaries and expenses of the Office of Government Ethics 
     (OGE) in fiscal year 2003.
       OGE is charged by law to provide overall direction of 
     Executive Branch policies designed to prevent conflicts of 
     interest and insure high ethical standards. OGE carries out 
     these responsibilities by developing rules and regulations 
     pertaining to conflicts of interest, post employment 
     restrictions, standards of conduct, and public and 
     confidential financial disclosure in the Executive Branch; by 
     monitoring compliance with the public and confidential 
     disclosure requirements of the Ethics Reform Act of 1978 and 
     the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 to determine possible 
     violations of applicable laws or regulations and recommending 
     appropriate corrective action; by consulting with and 
     assisting various officials in evaluating the effectiveness 
     of applicable laws and the resolution of individual problems; 
     and by preparing formal advisory opinions, informal letter 
     opinions, policy memoranda, and Federal Register entries on 
     how to interpret and comply with the requirements on 
     conflicts of interest, post employment, standards of conduct, 
     and financial disclosure.

                     Office of Personnel Management


                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$99,636,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................128,804,000
Committee recommendation....................................128,736,000


[[Page 1020]]

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $128,736,000 
     for the salaries and expenses of the Office of Personnel 
     Management (OPM).
       OPM is responsible for personnel management functions which 
     include the following activities:
       Merit systems oversight and effectiveness.--Includes 
     evaluating human resources management in Federal agencies 
     through various methods including on-site reviews land 
     special studies; administering classification appeals, Fair 
     Labor Standards Act, and Intergovernmental Personnel programs 
     to ensure that agencies adhere to the statutory requirements; 
     helping agencies develop merit-based human resources 
     management accountability; assessing the effectiveness of 
     Government-wide human resources management policies and 
     programs, and serving as a clearinghouse for best practices; 
     testing and evaluating innovative human resources management 
     practices and systems, including demonstration projects; 
     providing readily accessible statistics on the Federal 
     workforce; and administering parts of the Voting Rights Act 
     of 1965.
       Employment service.--Provides leadership and manages the 
     merit-based employment system for the Federal Government. In 
     partnership with agencies, the Service provides a high-
     quality, diverse workforce through a mix of policy direction, 
     technical assistance, and reimbursable services. These 
     operations are carried out through a network of Service 
     Centers throughout the country.
       Retirement and Insurance.--This activity encompasses 
     administration of earned employee benefits for Federal 
     employees, retired Federal employees, and their families. 
     These programs include the Civil Service Retirement System, 
     the Federal Employees' Retirement System, the Federal 
     Employees Group Life Insurance Program, and the Federal 
     Employees and Retired Employees Health Benefits Programs. In 
     addition, this activity includes OPM's efforts to stay 
     abreast of, and respond to, developments in non-Federal 
     fringe benefits practices.
       Workforce compensation and performance.--This activity 
     includes developing and implementing pay and leave 
     administration policy and evaluating the effectiveness of 
     alternative compensation systems; developing classification 
     policies and systems, and designing flexible alternatives to 
     current systems; and developing Government-wide policy 
     concerning employee performance management.
       Investigations.--Focuses on assuring applicant and 
     appointee fitness and suitability, and oversight of the 
     investigative contract company.
       Workforce relations.--This activity includes developing and 
     administering policies, regulations and guidelines on 
     employee relations, including adverse and performance-based 
     actions and violence in the workplace; facilitating and 
     supporting Federal work and family programs; providing 
     leadership and policy guidance in support of agency human 
     resources development programs and training technology 
     initiatives; and providing guidance and assistance to Federal 
     agencies in labor-management relations and partnerships.
       Executive resources.--Provides Government-wide program 
     leadership, policy direction, and technical assistance on all 
     aspects of the Senior Executive Service personnel system and 
     comparable executive systems.
       Executive and other services.--Includes executive 
     direction, policy development, legal advise and 
     representation, public affairs, legislative activities, 
     financial management, and the operating expenses of the 
     President's Commission on White House Fellows.
       Reimbursable programs.--OPM performs reimbursable work at 
     the request of other agencies. OPM also provides 
     administrative, information resources management, and 
     executive service to other OPM accounts on a reimbursable 
     basis.


                           Voting Rights Act

       The Committee continues to include a provision requested by 
     the administration to allow Federal employees acting as 
     Voting Rights Act observers to receive per diem at their 
     permanent duty station. This provision makes it feasible for 
     these observers to work in local areas and allow the 
     Government to discontinue the practice of recruiting 
     observers from distant locations and assuming the per diem, 
     as well as travel costs.


                         CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE

       The Committee remains concerned that child care expenses 
     are often the second or third largest monthly expense Federal 
     employees face. Additionally, many lower paid Federal workers 
     are unable to afford quality child care. As private industry 
     has increasingly used subsidized child care for its employees 
     as an effective productivity enhancement, retention and 
     recruiting tool, the Committee believes the Federal 
     Government must continue its commitment to do the same.
       The Committee is concerned about the limited number of 
     infant spots in Federal child care facilities and the 
     resulting impact on working parents. Therefore, the Committee 
     directs the Office of Personnel Management, working in 
     consultation with the General Services Administration, to 
     assess the past, current, and future needs of child care 
     centers, including both infant and non-infant needs, in the 
     Federal Government and provide a report to the Committee 
     within 90 days after enactment of this Act on a plan to 
     address these needs and the resources required to do so. The 
     Committee expects OPM to coordinate with all Federal agencies 
     in this effort.


                    BARNSTABLE COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS

       The Committee understands that on October 1, 2002, the 
     Federal Salary Council recommended that Barnstable County be 
     included as part of the Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-
     RI-CT Locality Pay Area (LPA). The Committee directs OPM to 
     provide a report detailing its intention with regard to 
     implementing this recommendation within 45 days after 
     enactment of this Act. Additionally, the Committee directs 
     OPM to consider the Connecticut River Valley for inclusion 
     into the Hartford Locality Pay Area, because of the 
     difficulties some Federal agencies have documented in 
     retaining and attracting Federal employees in the Connecticut 
     River Valley.

                               limitation


                       (transfer of trust funds)

Limitation, 2002...........................................$115,928,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................120,791,000
Committee recommendation....................................120,791,000

       The Committee recommends a limitation of $120,791,000.
       These funds will be transferred from the appropriate trust 
     funds of the Office of Personnel Management to cover 
     administrative expenses for the retirement and insurance 
     programs.


                    RETIREMENT SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION

       Over the past several years, the Federal Government has 
     expended hundreds of millions of dollars on automation 
     hardware and software without significant planning and 
     architectural design. The General Accounting Office (GAO) has 
     documented problems with design and systems procurement on 
     countless occasions. The Committee is supportive of providing 
     the technology necessary to modernize the Federal employee 
     retirement system technology, but is concerned given past 
     history with other Federal agencies. In fiscal year 2002, the 
     Committee recommended that OPM reach out to GAO for guidance 
     and support on this initiative and encouraged the 
     establishment of a relationship for the duration of this 
     project. The Committee is disappointed that OPM did not act 
     upon that suggestion. Therefore, the Committee directs OPM to 
     conduct quarterly meetings with GAO and inform the Committee 
     on the progress of this IT modernization project.


                      Office of Inspector General

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,498,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,498,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,498,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,498,000 for 
     salaries and expenses of the Office of Inspector General in 
     fiscal year 2003.
       The Office of Inspector General is charged with 
     establishing policies for conducting and coordinating efforts 
     which promote economy, efficiency, and integrity in the 
     Office of Personnel Management's activities which prevent and 
     detect fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the agency's 
     programs. Contract audits provide professional advice to 
     agency contracting officials on accounting and financial 
     matters regarding the negotiation, award, administration, 
     repricing, and settlement of contracts. Internal agency 
     audits review and evaluate all facets of agency operations, 
     including financial statements. Evaluation and inspection 
     services provide detailed technical evaluations of agency 
     operations. Insurance audits review the operations of health 
     and life insurance carriers, health care providers, and 
     insurance subscribers. The investigative function provides 
     for the detection and investigation of improper and illegal 
     activities involving programs, personnel, and operations. 
     Administrative sanctions debar from participation in the 
     health insurance program those health care providers whose 
     conduct may pose a threat to the financial integrity of the 
     program itself or to the well-being of insurance program 
     enrollees.


               (limitation on transfer from trust funds)

Limitation, 2002............................................$10,016,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................10,766,000
Committee recommendation.....................................10,766,000

       The Committee recommends a limitation on transfers from the 
     trust funds in support of the Office of Inspector General 
     activities totaling $10,766,000 for fiscal year 2003.

      government payment for annuitants, employees health benefits

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$6,129,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................6,853,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................6,853,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,853,000,000 
     for Government payments for annuitants, employees health 
     benefits. The Committee recommendation equals the budget 
     estimate.
       This appropriation covers the Government's share of the 
     cost of health insurance

[[Page 1021]]

     for annuitants covered by the Federal Employees Health 
     Benefits Program and the Retired Federal Employees Health 
     Benefits Act of 1960, as well as administrative expenses 
     incurred by OPM for these programs.

       government payment for annuitants, employee life insurance

Appropriations, 2002........................................$34,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................34,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................34,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $34,000,000 
     for the Government payment for annuitants, employee life 
     insurance. This amount equals the budget request.
       Public Law 96-427, the Federal Employees' Group Life 
     Insurance Act of 1980 requires that all employees under the 
     age of 65 who separate from the Federal Government for 
     purposes of retirement on or after January 1, 1990, continue 
     to make contributions toward their basic life insurance 
     coverage after retirement until they reach the age of 65. 
     These retirees will contribute two-thirds of the cost of the 
     basic life insurance premium, identical to the amount 
     contributed by active Federal employees for basic life 
     insurance coverage. As with the active Federal employees, the 
     Government is required to contribute one-third of the cost of 
     the premium for basic coverage. OPM, acting as the payroll 
     office on behalf of Federal retirees, has requested, and the 
     Committee has provided, the funding necessary to make the 
     required Government contribution associated with annuitants' 
     postretirement life insurance coverage.

        payment to civil service retirement and disability fund

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$9,229,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................9,410,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................9,410,000,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,410,000,000 
     for payment to the civil service retirement and disability 
     fund. The Committee recommendation equals the budget 
     estimate.
       The civil service retirement and disability fund was 
     established in 1920 to administer the financing and payment 
     of annuities to retired Federal employees and their 
     survivors. The fund covers the operation of the Civil Service 
     Retirement System and the Federal Employees' Retirement 
     System.
       This appropriation provides for the Government's share of 
     retirement costs, transfers of interest on the unfunded 
     liability and annuity disbursements attributable to military 
     service, and survivor annuities to eligible former spouses of 
     some annuitants who did not elect survivor coverage.

                       Office of Special Counsel

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$11,891,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................12,434,000
Committee recommendation.....................................12,434,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $12,434,000 
     for the Office of Special Counsel (OSC).
       OSC investigates Federal employee allegations of prohibited 
     personnel practices and, when appropriate, prosecutes cases 
     before the Merit Systems Protection Board and enforces the 
     Hatch Act. OSC also provides a channel for whistleblowing by 
     Federal employees, and may transmit whistleblowing 
     allegations to the agency head concerned and require an 
     agency investigation and a report to Congress and the 
     President when appropriate.

                             U.S. Tax Court

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$37,305,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................37,305,000
Committee recommendation.....................................37,305,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $37,305,000 
     for the U.S. Tax Court.
       The U.S. Tax Court is an independent judicial body in the 
     legislative branch under article I of the Constitution of the 
     United States. The court is composed of a chief judge and 18 
     judges. Decisions by the court are reviewable by the U.S. 
     Courts of Appeals and, if certiorari is granted, by the 
     Supreme Court.
       In their judicial duties the judges are assisted by senior 
     judges, who participate in the adjudication of regular cases, 
     and by special trial judges, who hear small tax cases and 
     certain regular cases assigned to them by the chief judge.
       The court conducts trial sessions throughout the United 
     States, including Hawaii and Alaska. The matters over which 
     the Court has jurisdiction are set forth in various sections 
     of title 26 of the United States Code.
       Tax Court Independent Counsel Fund.--This fund is 
     established pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 7475. The fund is used by 
     the Tax Court to employ independent counsel to pursue 
     disciplinary matters involving practitioners admitted to 
     practice before the Court.
       Tax Court Judges Survivors Annuity Fund.--This fund 
     established pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 7448, is used to pay 
     survivorship benefits to eligible surviving spouses and 
     dependent children of deceased judges of the U.S. Tax Court. 
     Participating judges pay 3.5 percent of their salaries or 
     retired pay into the fund to cover creditable service for 
     which payment is required. Additional funds, as are needed, 
     are provided through the annual appropriation to the U.S. Tax 
     Court.

      White House Commission on the National Moment of Remembrance

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$500,000
Budget estimate, 2003-----......................................250,000
Committee recommendation----....................................250,000

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $250,000 for 
     the White House Commission on the National Moment of 
     Remembrance. This is the same as the President's request. The 
     Commission was established and authorized by Public Law 106-
     579. The Commission will also accept gifts and generate 
     product royalty revenue in order to revitalize the national 
     understanding and commemoration of Memorial Day. The Defense 
     Emergency Response Fund included $500,000 for the Commission 
     in fiscal year 2002.

                STATEMENT CONCERNING GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Traditionally, the Treasury and General Government 
     appropriation bill has included general provisions which 
     govern both the activities of the agencies covered by the 
     bill, and, in some cases, activities of agencies, programs, 
     and general government activities that are not covered by the 
     bill. Those general provisions that are Governmentwide in 
     scope are contained in title VI of this bill.
       The bill contains a number of general provisions that have 
     been carried in this bill for years and which are routine in 
     nature and scope. General provisions in the bill are 
     explained under this section of the report. Those general 
     provisions that deal with a single agency only are shown 
     immediately following that particular agency's or 
     department's appropriation accounts in the bill. Those 
     general provisions that address activities or directives 
     affecting all of the agencies covered in this bill are 
     contained in title V of the bill.

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                                This Act

       Section 501 continues a provision which limits the use of 
     appropriated funds to the current fiscal year.
       Section 502 continues a provision regarding consultant 
     services.
       Section 503 continues a provision which prohibits the use 
     of funds to engage in activities which would prohibit in the 
     enforcement of section 307 of the 1930 Tariff Act.
       Section 504 continues the provision concerning the 
     employment rights of Federal employees who return to their 
     civilian jobs after assignment with the Armed Forces.
       Section 505 continues a provision which requires compliance 
     with the Buy American Act.
       Section 506 continues a provision which states the sense of 
     Congress regarding notice and purchase of American-made 
     products.
       Section 507 continues a provision which prohibits an 
     individual from eligibility for Government contracts if a 
     court determines that individual has intentionally 
     fraudulently affixed a ``Made in America'' label to any 
     product non-American made.
       Section 508 continues a provision which provides up to 50 
     percent of unobligated balances may remain available for 
     authorized purposes in compliance with reprogramming 
     guidelines.
       Section 509 continues a provision which prohibits the 
     Executive Office of the President from using appropriated 
     funds to request FBI background investigation reports.
       Section 510 continues a provision that cost accounting 
     standards under the Federal Procurement Policy Act shall not 
     apply to the Federal Employees Health Benefits program.
       Section 511 continues a provision permitting OPM to utilize 
     certain funds to resolve litigation and implement settlement 
     agreements regarding the non-foreign area cost-of-living 
     allowance program.
       Section 512 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
     funds to any person or entity convicted of violating the Buy 
     American Act.
       Section 513 is a new provision concerning procurement of 
     goods made with forced or indentured child labor.
       Section 514 is a new provision increasing the size of the 
     endowment for future Presidential libraries.

 TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES, AND CORPORATIONS

       The Committee has recommended the inclusion of the 
     following general provisions:
       Section 601 continues a provision authorizing agencies to 
     pay travel costs of the families of Federal employees on 
     foreign duty to return to the United States in the event of 
     death or a life threatening illness of an employee.
       Section 602 continues a provision requiring agencies to 
     administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its 
     workplaces are free from the illegal use of controlled 
     substances.
       Section 603 continues a provision regarding price 
     limitations on vehicles to be purchased by the Federal 
     Government.
       Section 604 continues a provision allowing funds made 
     available to agencies for travel to also be used for quarters 
     allowances and cost-of-living allowances.

[[Page 1022]]

       Section 605 continues a provision prohibiting the 
     Government, with certain specified exceptions, from employing 
     non-U.S. citizens whose posts of duty would be in the 
     continental United States.
       Section 606 continues a provision ensuring that agencies 
     will have authority to pay the General Services 
     Administration bills for space renovation and other services.
       Section 607 continues a provision allowing agencies to 
     finance the costs of recycling and waste prevention programs 
     with proceeds from the sale of materials recovered through 
     such programs.
       Section 608 continues a provision providing that funds may 
     be used to pay rent and other service costs in the District 
     of Columbia.
       Section 609 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
     appropriated funds to pay the salary of any nominee after the 
     Senate voted not to approve the nomination.
       Section 610 continues a provision precluding interagency 
     financing of groups absent prior statutory approval.
       Section 611 continues a provision authorizing the Postal 
     Service to employ guards.
       Section 612 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
     appropriated funds for enforcing regulations disapproved in 
     accordance with the applicable law of the United States.
       Section 613 continues a provision limiting the pay 
     increases of certain prevailing rate employees.
       Section 614 continues a provision limiting the amount that 
     can be used for redecoration of offices under certain 
     circumstances.
       Section 615 continues provision prohibiting the expenditure 
     of appropriated funds for the acquisition of additional law 
     enforcement training facilities without the advance approval 
     of the Committees on Appropriations and allowing the Federal 
     Law Enforcement Training Center to obtain temporary use of 
     additional facilities for training which cannot be 
     accommodated in existing Center facilities.
       Section 616 continues a provision permitting interagency 
     funding of national security and emergency preparedness 
     telecommunications initiatives, which benefit multiple 
     Federal departments, agencies, and entities.
       Section 617 continues a provision requiring agencies to 
     certify that a schedule C appointment was not created solely 
     or primarily to detail the employee to the White House.
       Section 618 continues a provision requiring agencies to 
     administer a policy designed to ensure that all of its 
     workplaces are free from discrimination and sexual 
     harassment.
       Section 619 continues a provision which prohibits the U.S. 
     Customs Service from allowing the importation of products 
     produced by forced or indentured child labor.
       Section 620 continues a provision which prohibits the use 
     of funds to prevent Federal employees from communicating with 
     Congress or to take disciplinary or personnel actions against 
     employees for such communication.
       Section 621 continues a provision which prohibits training 
     not directly related to the performance of official duties.
       Section 622 continues a provision prohibiting the 
     expenditure of funds for the implementation of agreements in 
     certain nondisclosure policies unless certain provisions are 
     included in the policies.
       Section 623 continues a provision which prohibits use of 
     appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda designed to 
     support or defeat legislation pending before Congress.
       Section 624 continues a provision which prohibits use of 
     appropriated funds by an agency to provide Federal employees 
     home address to labor organizations.
       Section 625 continues a provision which prohibits the use 
     of appropriated funds to provide nonpublic information such 
     as mailing or telephone lists to any person or organization 
     outside of the Government.
       Section 626 continues a provision which prohibits the use 
     of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes 
     within the United States not authorized by Congress.
       Section 627 continues a provision directing agencies 
     employees to use official time in an honest effort to perform 
     official duties.
       Section 628 continues a provision authorizing the use of 
     current fiscal year funds to finance an appropriate share of 
     the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program.
       Section 629 modifies and continues a provision authorizing 
     agencies to transfer funds to or reimburse the Policy and 
     Operations account of GSA to finance an appropriate share of 
     the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program.
       Section 630 continues a provision authorizing breastfeeding 
     at any location in a Federal building or on Federal property.
       Section 631 continues a provision which permits interagency 
     funding of the National Science and Technology Council.
       Section 632 continues a provision requiring identification 
     of the Federal agencies providing Federal funds and the 
     amount provided for all proposals, solicitations, grant 
     applications, forms, notifications, press releases, or other 
     publications related to the distribution of funding to a 
     State.
       Section 633 modifies and continues a provision which 
     extends the authorization for franchise fund pilots for 1 
     year.
       Section 634 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
     funds to monitor personal information relating to the use of 
     Federal internet sites; the conferees apply this provision 
     government-wide.
       Section 635 continues a provision regarding contraceptive 
     coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan.
       Section 636 continues a provision which clarifies that the 
     United States Anti-Doping Agency is the official anti-doping 
     agency for Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic sport in the 
     United States.
       Section 637 is a new provision regarding Federal employee 
     pay adjustments.
       Section 638 continues a provision directing departments and 
     agencies to comply with the Rural Development Act of 1972.
       Section 639 is a new provision extending the expiration 
     date of certain government information security requirements.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
     general appropriations bills identify each Committee 
     amendment to the House bill ``which proposes an item of 
     appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions 
     of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or 
     resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.''
       The Committee recommends the following appropriations which 
     lack authorization:
       Department of the Treasury:
           Departmental Offices:
       Salaries and expenses, $191,887,000
       Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Program, 
     $68,828,000
       Air Transportation Stabilization Program, $6,041,000
       Treasury Building and annex, repair and restoration, 
     $30,932,000
           Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, salaries and 
         expenses, $50,517,000
           Federal Law Enforcement Training Center:
       Salaries and expenses, $126,660,000
       Acquisition, construction, improvements, and related 
     expenses, $32,029,000
           Financial Management Service, salaries and expenses, 
         $220,664,000
           Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms:
       Salaries and expenses, $888,430,000
           U.S. Customs Service:
       Salaries and expenses, $2,501,488,000
       Operation and maintenance, air and marine interdiction 
     programs, $177,829,000
       Automation modernization, $435,332,000
           Internal Revenue Service:
       Processing, assistance, and management, $3,955,770,000
       Tax law enforcement, $3,729,072,000
       Earned Income Tax Credit, $146,000,000
       Information systems, $1,632,444,000
           Executive Office of the President:
       The White House Office, salaries and expenses, $59,735,000
       Office of Homeland Security, $24,844,000
       Executive Residence at the White House, operating expenses, 
     $12,228,000
       Special Assistance to the President, salaries and expenses, 
     $4,066,000
       Council of Economic Advisers, salaries and expenses, 
     $4,405,000
       National Security Council, salaries and expenses, 
     $9,525,000
       Office of Administration, salaries and expenses, 
     $70,128,000
       Office of Management and Budget, salaries and expenses, 
     $70,752,000
           Office of National Drug Control Policy, salaries and 
         expenses, $26,456,000
           Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, salaries and 
         expenses, $40,000,000
           High-intensity drug trafficking areas, $226,350,000
           Federal Election Commission, salaries and expenses, 
         $45,244,000
           Federal Labor Relations Authority, salaries and 
         expenses, $28,677,000
           General Services Administration, Federal buildings 
         fund, limitations on availability of revenue: 
         Construction and Acquisition of Facilities, $631,663,000
           National Historical Publications and Records 
         Commission, $7,000,000
           Office of Government Ethics, salaries and expenses, 
         $10,486,000
           U.S. Tax Court, salaries and expenses, $37,305,000

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
     existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
     follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
     brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law 
     in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

[[Page 1023]]

       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        Senate Committee recommendation
                                                                                                                            compared with (+ or -)
                             Item                                     2002         Budget estimate      Committee    -----------------------------------
                                                                  appropriation                      recommendation         2002
                                                                                                                        appropriation    Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
              TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
 
Departmental Offices..........................................          177,142           191,914           191,887           +14,745               ^27
Department-wide systems and capital investments programs......           68,828            68,828            68,828   ................  ................
Office of Inspector General...................................           35,424            35,428            35,424   ................               ^4
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.............          123,746           123,962           123,962              +216   ................
    9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)....................            2,032   ................  ................           ^2,032   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................          125,778           123,962           123,962            ^1,816   ................
 
Air Transportation Stabilization Program Account..............  ................            6,041             6,041            +6,041   ................
Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration............           28,932            32,932            30,932            +2,000            ^2,000
Expanded Access to Financial Services.........................            2,000             2,000             2,000   ................  ................
Counterterrorism Fund.........................................           40,000            40,000            20,000           ^20,000           ^20,000
Treasury franchise fund.......................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network..........................           45,837            50,517            50,517            +4,680   ................
    9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)....................            1,700   ................  ................           ^1,700   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................           47,537            50,517            50,517            +2,980   ................
 
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center:
    Salaries and Expenses.....................................          105,680           122,393           126,660           +20,980            +4,267
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................           23,000   ................  ................          ^23,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................          128,680           122,393           126,660            ^2,020            +4,267
    Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related                 33,434            23,329            32,029            ^1,405            +8,700
     Expenses.................................................
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................            8,500   ................  ................           ^8,500   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................           41,934            23,329            32,029            ^9,905            +8,700
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total...............................................          170,614           145,722           158,689           ^11,925           +12,967
                                                               =========================================================================================
Interagency Law Enforcement:
    Interagency crime and drug enforcement....................          107,576           107,576           107,576   ................  ................
Financial Management Service..................................          212,850           220,712           220,664            +7,814               ^48
    2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206) (rescission).......          ^14,000   ................  ................          +14,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................          198,850           220,712           220,664           +21,814               ^48
 
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.......................          810,316           870,775           875,430           +65,114            +4,655
    9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)....................           31,431   ................  ................          ^31,431   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................          841,747           870,775           875,430           +33,683            +4,655
 
    GREAT grants..............................................           13,000            13,000            13,000   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................          854,747           883,775           888,430           +33,683            +4,655
                                                               =========================================================================================
United States Customs Service:
    Salaries and Expenses.....................................        2,079,357         2,391,952         2,501,488          +422,131          +109,536
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................          392,603   ................  ................         ^392,603   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................        2,471,960         2,391,952         2,501,488           +29,528          +109,536
 
    Users fees, conveyance/passenger/other....................  ................         ^167,000   ................  ................         +167,000
    Harbor Maintenance Fee Collection.........................            3,000             3,000             3,000   ................  ................
    Operation, Maintenance and Procurement, Air and Marine              177,860           170,829           177,829               ^31            +7,000
     Interdiction Programs....................................
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................            6,700   ................  ................           ^6,700   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................          184,560           170,829           177,829            ^6,731            +7,000
 
        Miscellaneous appropriations (Public Law 106-554).....  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
 
    Automation modernization:
        Automated Commercial System...........................          122,432           122,432           122,432   ................  ................
        International Trade Data System.......................            5,400   ................  ................           ^5,400   ................
        Automated Commercial Environment......................          300,000           312,900           312,900           +12,900   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................          427,832           435,332           435,332            +7,500   ................
 
    Customs Services at Small Airports (to be derived from                3,000             3,000             3,000   ................  ................
     fees collected)..........................................
        Offsetting receipts...................................           ^3,000            ^3,000            ^3,000   ................  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
          Total...............................................        3,087,352         2,834,113         3,117,649           +30,297          +283,536
 
Bureau of the Public Debt.....................................          186,953           191,119           191,073            +4,120               ^46
 
Payment of government losses in shipment......................            1,000             1,000             1,000   ................  ................
Internal Revenue Service:
    Processing, Assistance, and Management....................        3,797,890         3,958,337         3,955,777          +157,887            ^2,560
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................           12,990   ................  ................          ^12,990   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................        3,810,880         3,958,337         3,955,777          +144,897            ^2,560
 
    Tax Law Enforcement.......................................        3,538,347         3,729,072         3,729,072          +190,725   ................
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................            4,544   ................  ................           ^4,544   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................        3,542,891         3,729,072         3,729,072          +186,181   ................
 
    Earned Income Tax Credit Compliance Initiative............          146,000           146,000           146,000   ................  ................
    Information Systems.......................................        1,563,249         1,632,444         1,632,444           +69,195   ................
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................           15,991   ................  ................          ^15,991   ................
        2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206) (rescission)...          ^10,000   ................  ................          +10,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................        1,569,240         1,632,444         1,632,444           +63,204   ................
 
    Business systems modernization............................          391,593           450,000           436,000           +44,407           ^14,000
        2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206)................           14,000   ................  ................          ^14,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................          405,593           450,000           436,000           +30,407           ^14,000
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 1024]]

 
          Total (net).........................................        9,474,604         9,915,853         9,899,293          +424,689           ^16,560
                                                               =========================================================================================
United States Secret Service:
    Salaries and Expenses.....................................          920,615         1,010,435         1,010,817           +90,202              +382
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................          104,769   ................  ................         ^104,769   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................        1,025,384         1,010,435         1,010,817           ^14,567              +382
 
    Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related                  3,457             3,519             3,519               +62   ................
     Expenses.................................................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................        1,028,841         1,013,954         1,014,336           ^14,505              +382
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of the Treasury..............       15,636,178        15,865,446        16,128,301          +492,123          +262,855
          Appropriations......................................       15,041,918        15,865,446        16,128,301        +1,086,383          +262,855
          Rescissions.........................................          ^24,000   ................  ................          +24,000   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
                   TITLE II--POSTAL SERVICE
 
Payment to the Postal Service Fund............................           29,000            29,000            29,000   ................  ................
    9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)....................          500,000   ................  ................         ^500,000   ................
    2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206)....................           87,000   ................  ................          ^87,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................          616,000            29,000            29,000          ^587,000   ................
 
    Advance appropriation, fiscal year 2002/2003..............           67,093            47,619            47,619           ^19,474   ................
    Advance appropriation, fiscal year 2004...................  ................           31,014            31,014           +31,014   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, title II, Postal Service:
          Fiscal year 2002/2003...............................          683,093            76,619            76,619          ^606,474   ................
          Fiscal year 2004....................................  ................           31,014            31,014           +31,014   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
    TITLE III--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS
                 APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT
 
Compensation of the President and the White House Office:
    Compensation of the President.............................              450               450               450   ................  ................
    Salaries and Expenses.....................................           54,651            84,592            59,735            +5,084           ^24,857
    Office of Homeland Security...............................  ................  ................           24,844           +24,844           +24,844
Office of Homeland Security...................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Executive Residence at the White House:
    Operating Expenses........................................           11,695            12,228            12,228              +533   ................
    White House Repair and Restoration........................            8,625             1,200             1,200            ^7,425   ................
Special Assistance to the President and the Official Residence
 of the Vice President:
    Salaries and Expenses.....................................            3,925             4,066             4,066              +141   ................
    Operating expenses........................................              318               324               324                +6   ................
Council of Economic Advisers..................................            4,211             4,405             4,405              +194   ................
Office of Policy Development..................................            4,142             4,221             4,221               +79   ................
National Security Council.....................................            7,494             9,525             9,525            +2,031   ................
Office of Administration......................................           46,955            70,128            70,128           +23,173   ................
    9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)....................           50,040   ................  ................          ^50,040   ................
    2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206)....................            3,800   ................  ................           ^3,800   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................          100,795            70,128            70,128           ^30,667   ................
 
Office of Management and Budget...............................           70,752            70,752            70,752   ................  ................
    2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206) (rescission).......             ^100   ................  ................             +100   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................           70,652            70,752            70,752              +100   ................
 
Electronic Government (E-Gov) Fund............................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Election Administration Reform................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Office of National Drug Control Policy:
    Salaries and expenses.....................................           25,263            25,458            26,456            +1,193              +998
    Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center..................           42,300            40,000            40,000            ^2,300   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................           67,563            65,458            66,456            ^1,107              +998
 
Federal Drug Control Programs:
    High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program.............          226,350           206,350           226,350   ................          +20,000
    Special Forfeiture Fund...................................          239,400           251,300           172,700           ^66,700           ^78,600
Unanticipated Needs...........................................            1,000             1,000             1,000   ................  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title III, Executive Office of the President and           801,271           785,999           728,384           ^72,887           ^57,615
       Funds Appropriated to the President....................
                                                               =========================================================================================
                TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
 
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely              4,629             4,629             4,629   ................  ................
 Disabled.....................................................
Federal Election Commission...................................           43,689            45,244            45,244            +1,555   ................
    2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206)....................              750   ................  ................             ^750   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................           44,439            45,244            45,244              +805   ................
 
Federal Labor Relations Authority.............................           26,524            28,684            28,677            +2,153                ^7
 
General Services Administration:
    Federal Buildings Fund:
        Appropriations........................................          284,400           276,400           363,299           +78,899           +86,899
            9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)............          126,512   ................  ................         ^126,512   ................
            2002 Supplemental (Public Law 107-206)............           21,800   ................  ................          ^21,800   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal........................................          432,712           276,400           363,299           ^69,413           +86,899
 
    Limitations on availability of revenue:
        Construction and acquisition of facilities............         (662,680)         (556,574)         (631,663)         (^31,017)         (+75,089)
        Repairs and alterations...............................         (826,676)         (986,029)         (997,839)        (+171,163)         (+11,810)
            9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)............          (42,700)  ................  ................         (^42,700)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal........................................         (869,376)         (986,029)         (997,839)        (+128,463)         (+11,810)
        Installment acquisition payments......................         (186,427)         (178,960)         (178,960)          (^7,467)  ................
        Rental of space.......................................       (2,952,050)       (3,153,211)       (3,153,211)        (+201,161)  ................
        Building Operations...................................       (1,748,949)       (1,965,160)       (1,965,160)        (+216,211)  ................
            9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)............          (83,812)  ................  ................         (^83,812)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subtotal........................................       (1,832,761)       (1,965,160)       (1,965,160)        (+132,399)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 1025]]

 
              Subtotal, limitations...........................        6,503,294         6,839,934         6,926,833          +423,539           +86,899
 
        Repayment of Debt.....................................          (72,000)          (79,685)          (79,685)          (+7,685)  ................
        Rental income to fund.................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Federal Buildings Fund.......................          432,712           276,400           363,299           ^69,413           +86,899
              (Limitations)...................................       (6,575,294)       (6,919,619)       (7,006,518)        (+431,224)         (+86,899)
                                                               =========================================================================================
    Policy and Operations.....................................          143,139   ................  ................         ^143,139   ................
    Policy and Citizen Services...............................  ................           65,995            65,995           +65,995   ................
    Operating Expenses........................................  ................           88,263            94,640           +94,640            +6,377
    Office of Inspector General...............................           36,346            37,617            37,617            +1,271   ................
    Electronic Government Fund................................            5,000            45,000             5,000   ................          ^40,000
    Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents.........            3,196             3,339             3,339              +143   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, General Services Administration..................          620,393           516,614           569,890           ^50,503           +53,276
                                                               =========================================================================================
Merit Systems Protection Board:
    Salaries and Expenses.....................................           30,555            31,790            31,788            +1,233                ^2
    Limitation on administrative expenses.....................            2,520             2,594             2,594               +74   ................
Morris K. Udall Foundation:
    Morris K. Udall Trust Fund................................            1,996             1,996             1,996   ................  ................
    Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund.....................            1,309             1,309             1,309   ................  ................
National Archives and Records Administration:
    Operating expenses........................................          244,247           256,731           249,731            +5,484            ^7,000
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................            1,600   ................  ................           ^1,600   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................          245,847           256,731           249,731            +3,884            ^7,000
 
    Reduction of debt.........................................           ^6,612            ^7,186            ^7,186              ^574   ................
    Repairs and Restoration...................................           39,143            10,458            14,208           ^24,935            +3,750
        9/11 Supplemental (Public Law 107-117)................            1,000   ................  ................           ^1,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal............................................           40,143            10,458            14,208           ^25,935            +3,750
 
    National Historical Publications and Records Commission:              6,436             5,000             7,000              +564            +2,000
     Grants program...........................................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................          285,814           265,003           263,753           ^22,061            ^1,250
                                                               =========================================================================================
Office of Government Ethics...................................           10,117            10,488            10,486              +369                ^2
 
Office of Personnel Management:
    Salaries and Expenses.....................................           99,636           128,804           128,736           +29,100               ^68
        Limitation on administrative expenses.................          115,928           120,791           120,791            +4,863   ................
    Office of Inspector General...............................            1,498             1,498             1,498   ................  ................
        Limitation on administrative expenses.................           10,016            10,766            10,766              +750   ................
    Government Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health               6,129,000         6,853,000         6,853,000          +724,000   ................
     Benefits.................................................
    Government Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance           34,000            34,000            34,000   ................  ................
    Payment to Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund...        9,229,000         9,410,000         9,410,000          +181,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Personnel Management...................       15,619,078        16,558,859        16,558,791          +939,713               ^68
                                                               =========================================================================================
Office of Special Counsel.....................................           11,891            12,434            12,434              +543   ................
United States Tax Court.......................................           37,305            37,305            37,305   ................  ................
White House Commission on the National Moment of Rememberance.  ................              250               250              +250   ................
Net fiscal year 2002 proceeds from WTC stamp..................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title IV, Independent Agencies...................       16,696,570        17,517,199        17,569,146          +872,576           +51,947
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Grand total (net).......................................       33,817,112        34,276,277        34,533,464          +716,352          +257,187
          Current year, fiscal year 2003......................       33,750,019        34,197,644        34,454,831          +704,812          +257,187
              Appropriations..................................      (32,363,357)      (34,197,644)      (34,454,831)      (+2,091,474)        (+257,187)
              Emergency funding...............................       (1,410,762)  ................  ................      (^1,410,762)  ................
              Rescissions.....................................         (^24,100)  ................  ................         (+24,100)  ................
          Advance appropriations, Fiscal Year 2003/Fiscal Year           67,093            78,633            78,633           +11,540   ................
           2004...............................................
              (Limitations)...................................        6,575,294         6,919,619         7,006,518          +431,224           +86,899
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           [COMMITTEE PRINT]

  [NOTICE: This is a draft for use of the Committee and its staff only, 
in preparation for markup.]

DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2003

                               __________
                               

                January __, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

                               __________
                               

Mr. Bond, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following

                                 REPORT

                         [To accompany S. 0000]

       The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 0000) 
     making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs 
     and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
     agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other 
     purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the 
     bill do pass.


             Amount of new budget (obligational) authority

Amount of bill as reported to Senate...................$121,925,545,000
Amount of appropriations, 2002..........................123,820,208,000
Amount of budget estimates, 2003........................124,979,700,000
    Under estimates for 2003..............................3,054,155,000
    Above appropriations for 2002.........................1,894,663,000

                              INTRODUCTION

       The Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
     Development and Independent Agencies appropriations bill for 
     fiscal year 2003 provides a total of $121,925,545,000 in 
     budget authority, including approximately $31,576,338,000 in 
     mandatory spending. The Committee did its best to meet all 
     important priorities within the bill, with the highest 
     priority given to veterans programs and section 8 contract 
     renewals. Other priorities included maintaining environmental 
     programs at or above current year levels, ensuring needed 
     funds for our Nation's space and scientific research 
     programs, and providing critical funding for emergency 
     management and disaster relief including initial spending for 
     new Homeland Security priorities.
       As recommended by the Committee, this bill attempts to 
     provide a fair and balanced approach to the many competing 
     programs and activities under the VA-HUD subcommittee's 
     jurisdiction.
       The Committee recommendation provides $26,460,257,000 in 
     discretionary funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
     an increase of $2,489,625,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and $1,101,698,000 above the budget request. 
     The Committee has made veterans programs the highest priority 
     in the bill. Increases in VA programs above the

[[Page 1026]]

     budget request are recommended for medical care and medical 
     research.
       For the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the 
     Committee recommendation totals $31,149,157,000, a decrease 
     of $1,044,038,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level 
     and $199,934,000 below the budget request. The Committee has 
     provided significant funding for all HUD programs while also 
     providing the needed funding for all expiring section 8 
     contracts. The Committee believes a balanced approach to the 
     funding of housing programs is key to meeting the housing 
     needs of low-income families.
       For the Environmental Protection Agency, the Committee 
     recommendation totals $8,205,436,000, an increase of 
     $126,623,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and an 
     increase of $584,923,000 above the budget request.
       The Committee recommendation includes $3,203,117,000 for 
     the Federal Emergency Management Agency, including 
     $842,843,000 for disaster relief.
       The Committee recommendation for the National Aeronautics 
     and Space Administration totals $15,125,500,000, an increase 
     of $223,800,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level.
       For the National Science Foundation, the Committee 
     recommendation totals $5,268,980,000, an increase of 
     $460,440,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
     Committee views NSF as a key investment in the future and 
     this funding is intended to reaffirm the strong and 
     longstanding leadership of this Committee in support of 
     scientific research and education.

              Reprogramming and Initiation of New Programs

       The Committee continues to have a particular interest in 
     being informed of reprogrammings which, although they may not 
     change either the total amount available in an account or any 
     of the purposes for which the appropriation is legally 
     available, represent a significant departure from budget 
     plans presented to the Committee in an agency's budget 
     justifications.
       Consequently, the Committee directs the Departments of 
     Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and the 
     agencies funded through this bill, to notify the chairman of 
     the Committee prior to each reprogramming of funds in excess 
     of $250,000 between programs, activities, or elements unless 
     an alternate amount for the agency or department in question 
     is specified elsewhere in this report. The Committee desires 
     to be notified of reprogramming actions which involve less 
     than the above-mentioned amounts if such actions would have 
     the effect of changing an agency's funding requirements in 
     future years or if programs or projects specifically cited in 
     the Committee's reports are affected. Finally, the Committee 
     wishes to be consulted regarding reorganizations of offices, 
     programs, and activities prior to the planned implementation 
     of such reorganizations.
       The Committee also expects the Departments of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, as well as the 
     Corporation for National and Community Service, the 
     Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration, the National Science Foundation, the 
     Corporation for National and Community Service, and the 
     Consumer Product Safety Commission, to submit operating 
     plans, signed by the respective secretary, administrator, 
     chief executive officer, or agency head, for the Committee's 
     approval within 30 days of the bill's enactment. Other 
     agencies within the bill should continue to submit operating 
     plans consistent with prior year policy.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

       The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
     under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on 
     Governmental Affairs to charge to individual agencies, 
     starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully accrued costs related 
     to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System 
     employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 
     employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar 
     amount in each affected discretionary account to cover these 
     accrued costs.
       The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
     legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee 
     has reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request 
     shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority 
     Request and Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in 
     other tables in this report, to exclude the accrual funding 
     proposal.
       The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
     requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
     Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
     schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
     Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment 
     formally modifying the President's appropriation request for 
     discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
     Congress.
       The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
     Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this 
     practice, which has always worked effectively for both 
     Congress and past administrations, was not followed for the 
     accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 
     amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language 
     request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet 
     to be considered and approved by the appropriate committees 
     of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both 
     inside and outside of Congress of what was the ``true'' 
     President's budget request. The Committee believes that, in 
     the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures 
     with respect to discretionary spending proposals that require 
     legislative action.

                TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Appropriations, 2002.................................\1\$52,786,164,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................54,612,197,000
Committee recommendation.................................58,040,545,000

\1\Reflects the latest funding levels for Compensation and Pension in 
the mid-session review in 2002 and 2003.


                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

       The Veterans Administration was established as an 
     independent agency by Executive Order 5398 of July 21, 1930, 
     in accordance with the Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 1016). 
     This act authorized the President to consolidate and 
     coordinate Federal agencies especially created for or 
     concerned with the administration of laws providing benefits 
     to veterans, including the Veterans' Bureau, the Bureau of 
     Pensions, and the National Home for Disabled Volunteer 
     Soldiers. On March 15, 1989, VA was elevated to Cabinet-level 
     status as the Department of Veterans Affairs.
       The VA's mission is to serve America's veterans and their 
     families as their principal advocate in ensuring that they 
     receive the care, support, and recognition they have earned 
     in service to the Nation. The VA's operating units include 
     the Veterans Health Administration, Veterans Benefits 
     Administration, National Cemetery Administration, and staff 
     offices.
       The Veterans Health Administration develops, maintains, and 
     operates a national health care delivery system for eligible 
     veterans; carries out a program of education and training of 
     health care personnel; carries out a program of medical 
     research and development; and furnishes health services to 
     members of the Armed Forces during periods of war or national 
     emergency. A system of 172 medical centers, 864 outpatient 
     clinics, 137 nursing homes, and 43 domiciliaries is 
     maintained to meet the VA's medical mission.
       The Veterans Benefits Administration provides an integrated 
     program of nonmedical veteran benefits. This Administration 
     administers a broad range of benefits to veterans and other 
     eligible beneficiaries through 58 regional offices and the 
     records processing center in St. Louis, MO. The benefits 
     provided include: compensation for service-connected 
     disabilities; pensions for wartime, needy, and totally 
     disabled veterans; vocational rehabilitation assistance; 
     educational and training assistance; home buying assistance; 
     estate protection services for veterans under legal 
     disability; information and assistance through personalized 
     contacts; and six life insurance programs.
       The National Cemetery Administration provides for the 
     interment of the remains of eligible deceased servicepersons 
     and discharged veterans in any national cemetery with 
     available grave space; permanently maintains these graves; 
     marks graves of eligible persons in national and private 
     cemeteries; and administers the grant program for aid to 
     States in establishing, expanding, or improving State 
     veterans' cemeteries. The National Cemetery Administration 
     includes 154 cemeterial installations and activities.
       Other VA offices, including the general counsel, inspector 
     general, Boards of Contract Appeals and Veterans Appeals, and 
     the general administration, support the Secretary, Deputy 
     Secretary, Under Secretary for Health, Under Secretary for 
     Benefits, and the Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $58,040,545,000 for the Department 
     of Veterans Affairs, including $31,580,338,000 in mandatory 
     spending and $26,460,207,000 in discretionary spending. The 
     amount provided for discretionary activities represents an 
     increase of $1,102,170,000 above the budget request and 
     $2,489,625,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       The Committee once again has made VA its top priority in 
     the fiscal year 2003 VA-HUD bill. Specifically, the Committee 
     is committed to ensuring that veterans have access to the 
     quality medical care and services they deserve, in a timely 
     manner.
       The Committee is deeply concerned about overwhelming 
     evidence that the VA medical system is failing its core 
     constituency--service-connected, lower income, and special 
     needs veterans. The Committee has learned of numerous 
     anecdotal examples where VA's core constituency does not have 
     access to timely, quality medical care because the networks 
     that serve them are operating with long waiting lists. 
     According to VA's recent estimate, there are over 310,000 
     veterans on waiting lists for medical care. In many 
     instances, the wait for a doctor's appointment

[[Page 1027]]

     is over 6 months, and VA projects the waiting list will grow 
     even more significantly if current guidelines and 
     expectations do not change.
       The Committee believes that the VA is ``a victim of its own 
     success'' due to its generous healthcare benefits and vastly 
     improved quality healthcare access. Over the last decade, VA 
     has opened over 850 new outpatient clinics around the Nation 
     that have attracted overwhelming numbers of users to the 
     system. This, coupled with a generous pharmacy benefit and 
     expanded eligibility criteria enacted in 1996, has resulted 
     in a rapidly growing VA patient population. Most notably, 
     since 1996, VA has seen a 500 percent increase in Priority 7 
     veterans--veterans who are not service-connected disabled and 
     whose income is currently greater than $24,000 per year.
       Prior to 1996 eligibility reform, only veterans who were 
     service-connected disabled or lower income were eligible for 
     VA medical care. Eligibility reform opened the doors to all 
     veterans--based on available resources and space--with the 
     Secretary of Veterans Affairs expected to make an enrollment 
     decision at the beginning of each year. Veterans were 
     categorized into seven priority groups, with Priority 1-6 
     veterans being those with service-connected conditions or 
     lower incomes. Priority 7 veterans were to be enrolled in the 
     system on a space available basis. Receipts from first and 
     third party payers, co-pays, and insurance, were to offset 
     the cost of the services for Priority 7 veterans.
       Of course, 1996 eligibility reform was predicated on the 
     enactment of Medicare Subvention, whereby the VA would be 
     reimbursed by Medicare for treating Medicare-eligible 
     veterans. This part of the plan, however, has not come to 
     fruition. Additionally, the lack of a national prescription 
     drug benefit, and the failure of many privately managed care 
     health systems, has made the VA's generous prescription 
     benefit even more attractive. At the same time, VA has had a 
     poor record of collecting what it is owed by private 
     insurance companies. In short, Priority 7 veterans came to 
     the system, but the expected funding sources from collections 
     and Medicare did not. These events have pushed the VA 
     healthcare system into crisis.
       It is important to note that funding appropriated for VA 
     medical care, which is allocated through the Veterans 
     Equitable Resource Allocation (VERA) formula, only accounts 
     for Priority 1-6 veterans. Priority 7 veterans are not 
     included in the VERA formula. Yet in many areas of the Nation 
     today, high priority service-connected disabled veterans are 
     waiting in line for a doctor's appointment behind Priority 7 
     veterans. The Committee believes this is evidence that the 
     system is failing its core constituency. The Committee 
     believes it has a responsibility--an obligation--to protect 
     the most vulnerable veterans.
       The Administration's fiscal year 2003 budget proposed a new 
     $1,500 annual medical care deductible for Priority 7 
     veterans. VA estimated that this proposal would have saved 
     over $1,145,543,000 through reduced demand on the system. The 
     Committee is concerned that this proposal would leave many 
     veterans, especially those who do not have private health 
     insurance, without access to affordable medical care. The 
     Committee has, therefore, rejected this proposal.
       The Committee understands that VA simply cannot sustain the 
     timely, quality medical care services that are expected, 
     while attempting to meet this increased demand. While the 
     Committee has provided significant increased resources over 
     the past several years, it recognizes that funding alone will 
     not ensure that VA's core constituency--service-connected, 
     lower-income, and special needs veterans--do not fall through 
     the system's cracks.
       To that end, the Committee has provided an additional 
     $1,145,543,000 in fiscal year 2003 for VA medical care above 
     the Administration's request. The Committee has also given 
     the Secretary discretionary authority to establish a priority 
     for treatment of veterans. If the Secretary takes action, VA 
     can align its resources to meet its original mission of 
     serving its core constituency. Finally, the Committee has 
     extend VA's authority to collect prescription drug co-
     payments. Without this authority, VA projects to lose some 
     $600,000,000 in medical care resources. Further, VA projects 
     that the loss of these valuable resources would result in the 
     loss of care for 110,000 veterans in 2003.
       The Committee notes that the Secretary currently has the 
     authority to suspend enrollment or take other actions, such 
     as creating an open enrollment season, in order to better 
     manage demand on the system within available resources. The 
     Committee further encourages the Secretary to explore other 
     options such as creating a tiered pharmacy co-payment 
     structure, increasing the income thresholds, and allowing 
     current users of the VA system to fill their privately-
     written prescriptions through the VA.
       The Committee expects that its recommendation of 
     significantly increased medical care funding and broad 
     administrative discretion will give the Secretary the 
     necessary tools to address the VA's current healthcare crisis 
     while maintaining its vital mission of providing timely, 
     quality medical care to service-connected disabled, lower 
     income, and special needs veterans.

                    Veterans Benefits Administration

                       compensation and pensions


                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 2002.................................\1\$26,044,288,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................26,524,300,000
Committee recommendation.................................28,949,000,000

\1\Reflects mid-session review funding levels.

                          program description

       Compensation is payable to living veterans who have 
     suffered impairment of earning power from service-connected 
     disabilities. The amount of compensation is based upon the 
     impact of disabilities on earning capacity. Death 
     compensation or dependency and indemnity compensation is 
     payable to the surviving spouses and dependents of veterans 
     whose deaths occur while on active duty or result from 
     service-connected disabilities. A clothing allowance may also 
     be provided for service-connected veterans who use a 
     prosthetic or orthopedic device.
       Pensions are an income security benefit payable to needy 
     wartime veterans who are precluded from gainful employment 
     due to non-service-connected disabilities which render them 
     permanently and totally disabled. Under the Omnibus Budget 
     Reconciliation Act of 1990, veterans 65 years of age or older 
     are no longer considered permanently and totally disabled by 
     law and are thus subject to a medical evaluation. Death 
     pensions are payable to needy surviving spouses and children 
     of deceased wartime veterans. The rate payable for both 
     disability and death pensions is determined on the basis of 
     the annual income of the veteran or his survivors.
       This account also funds burial benefits and miscellaneous 
     assistance.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $28,949,000,000 for compensation 
     and pensions. This is an increase of $2,904,712,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level and $2,424,700,000 above the 
     budget request because it takes into account OMB's mid-
     session review. This amount includes the cost of living 
     adjustment for fiscal year 2003.
       The estimated caseload and cost by program follows:

                                            COMPENSATION AND PENSIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            2002\1\              2003             Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caseload:
    Compensation:
        Veterans....................................          2,356,600           2,433,216             +76,616
        Survivors...................................            308,165             312,297              +4,132
        Children....................................              1,044               1,102                 +58
        (Clothing allowance)........................            (79,618)            (81,104)            (+1,486)
    Pensions:
        Veterans....................................            347,178             340,374              -6,804
        Survivors...................................            234,619             221,072             -13,547
        Minimum income for widows (non-add).........               (523)               (488)               (-35)
        Vocational training (non-add)...............  ..................  ..................  ..................
        Burial allowances and service connected                  97,602              97,393                -209
         deaths.....................................
                                                     ===========================================================
Funds:
    Compensation:
        Veterans....................................    $18,711,705,000     $21,191,850,000     +$2,480,145,000
        Survivors...................................      3,866,386,000       4,113,572,000        +247,186,000
        Children....................................         17,974,000          16,742,000          -1,232,000
        Clothing allowance..........................         46,178,000          47,640,000          +1,462,000
        Payment to GOE (Public Laws 101-508 and 102-          1,286,000             966,000            -320,000
         568........................................
        Medical exams pilot program (Public Law 104-         37,000,000          38,300,000          +1,300,000
         275........................................
    Pensions:
        Veterans....................................      2,596,916,000       2,595,459,000            -457,000
        Survivors...................................        733,584,000         761,037,000         +27,453,000
        Minimum income for widows...................          3,444,000           3,292,000            -152,000
    Vocational training.............................  ..................  ..................  ..................

[[Page 1028]]

 
    Payment to GOE (Public Laws 101-508, 102-568,             8,564,000           7,000,000          -1,564,000
     and 103-446....................................
    Payment to Medical Care (Public Laws 101-508 and          8,090,000           8,575,000            +485,000
     102-568........................................
    Payment to Medical Facilities (non-add).........           (891,000)           (937,000)           (+46,000)
    Burial benefits.................................        141,817,000         159,470,000         +17,653,000
    Other assistance................................          4,887,000           4,935,000             +48,000
    Unobligated balance and transfers...............       -133,543,000            -838,000        +132,705,000
                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------
      Total appropriation...........................     26,044,288,000      28,949,000,000      +2,904,712,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Does not include pending supplemental of $1,100,000 (H.R. 4775).

       The appropriation includes $17,138,000 in payments to the 
     ``General operating expenses'' and ``Medical care'' accounts 
     for expenses related to implementing provisions of the 
     Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, the Veterans' 
     Benefits Act of 1992, the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act 
     of 1994, and the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1996. 
     The amount also includes funds for a projected fiscal year 
     2003 cost-of-living increase of 1.8 percent for pension 
     recipients.

                         readjustment benefits

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,135,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,264,808,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,264,808,000

                          program description

       The readjustment benefits appropriation finances the 
     education and training of veterans and servicepersons whose 
     initial entry on active duty took place on or after July 1, 
     1985. These benefits are included in the All-Volunteer Force 
     Educational Assistance Program (Montgomery GI bill) 
     authorized under 38 U.S.C. 30. Eligibility to receive this 
     assistance began in 1987. Basic benefits are funded through 
     appropriations made to the readjustment benefits 
     appropriation and transfers from the Department of Defense. 
     Supplemental benefits are also provided to certain veterans 
     and this funding is available from transfers from the 
     Department of Defense. This account also finances vocational 
     rehabilitation, specially adapted housing grants, automobile 
     grants with the associated approved adaptive equipment for 
     certain disabled veterans, and finances educational 
     assistance allowances for eligible dependents of those 
     veterans who died from service-connected causes or have a 
     total permanent service-connected disability as well as 
     dependents of servicepersons who were captured or missing in 
     action.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget estimate of 
     $2,264,808,000 for readjustment benefits. The amount 
     recommended is an increase of $129,808,000 above the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level.
       The estimated caseload and cost for this account follows:

                                              READJUSTMENT BENEFITS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  2002              2003           Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of trainees:
    Education and training: dependents....................            49,949            51,746            +1,797
    All-Volunteer Force educational assistance:
        Veterans and servicepersons.......................           326,425           325,815              -610
        Reservists........................................            79,000            81,721            +2,721
        Vocational rehabilitation.........................            64,556            64,879              +323
        Tuition assistance................................           160,000           160,000  ................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
          Total...........................................           679,930           684,161            +4,231
                                                           =====================================================
Licensing and certification tests.........................            25,450            81,150           +55,700
                                                           =====================================================
Funds:
    Education and training: Dependents....................      $206,181,000      $217,472,000      +$11,291,000
    All-Volunteer Force educational assistance:
        Veterans and servicepersons.......................     1,460,321,000     1,759,683,000      +299,362,000
        Reservists........................................       135,750,000       142,858,000        +7,108,000
        Vocational rehabilitation.........................       440,896,000       452,029,000       +11,133,000
        Tuition assistance................................        79,040,000        79,040,000  ................
        Licensing and certification tests.................         5,982,000        19,071,000       +13,089,000
        Housing grants....................................        24,960,000        24,960,000  ................
        Automobiles and other conveyances.................         8,750,000         8,995,000          +245,000
        Adaptive equipment................................        27,200,000        27,100,000          -100,000
        Work-study........................................        45,900,000        51,408,000        +5,508,000
        Payment to States.................................        14,000,000        13,000,000        -1,000,000
        Reporting fees....................................         3,500,000         3,500,000  ................
        Unobligated balance and other adjustments\1\......      -317,480,000      -534,308,000      -216,828,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
          Total appropriation.............................     2,135,000,000     2,264,808,000      +129,808,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Includes offsetting collections.

                   veterans insurance and indemnities

Appropriations, 2002........................................$26,200,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................27,530,000
Committee recommendation.....................................27,530,000

                          program description

       The veterans insurance and indemnities appropriation is 
     made up of the former appropriations for military and naval 
     insurance, applicable to World War I veterans; National 
     Service Life Insurance, applicable to certain World War II 
     veterans; Servicemen's indemnities, applicable to Korean 
     conflict veterans; and veterans mortgage life insurance to 
     individuals who have received a grant for specially adapted 
     housing.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget estimate of $27,530,000 
     for veterans insurance and indemnities. This is an increase 
     of $1,330,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
     Department estimates there will be 4,203,880 policies in 
     force in fiscal year 2003 with a value of $599,263,090,000.


         VETERANS HOUSING BENEFIT PROGRAM FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Administrative
                                        Program account      expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002..................     $203,278,000     $164,497,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................      437,522,000      168,207,000
Committee recommendation..............      437,522,000      168,207,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This appropriation provides for all costs, with the 
     exception of the Native American Veteran Housing Loan 
     Program, of VA's direct and guaranteed loans, as well as the 
     administrative expenses to carry out these programs, which 
     may be transferred to and merged with the general operating 
     expenses appropriation.

       VA loan guaranties are made to service members, veterans, 
     reservists and unremarried surviving spouses for the purchase 
     of homes, condominiums, manufactured homes and for 
     refinancing loans. VA guarantees part of the total loan, 
     permitting the purchaser to obtain a mortgage with a 
     competitive interest rate, even without a downpayment if the 
     lender agrees. VA requires that a downpayment be made for a 
     manufactured home. With a VA guaranty, the lender is 
     protected against loss up to the amount of the guaranty if 
     the borrower fails to repay the loan.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends such sums as may be necessary for 
     funding subsidy payments, estimated to total $437,522,000, 
     and $168,207,000 for administrative expenses. The 
     administrative expenses may be transferred to the ``General 
     operating expenses'' account. Bill language limits gross 
     obligations for direct loans for specially adapted housing to 
     $300,000.

[[Page 1029]]




                  education loan fund program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002....................          $1,000         $64,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................           1,000          70,000
Committee recommendation................           1,000          70,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

       This appropriation covers the cost of direct loans for 
     eligible dependents and, in addition, it includes 
     administrative expenses necessary to carry out the direct 
     loan program. The administrative funds may be transferred to 
     and merged with the appropriation for the general operating 
     expenses to cover the common overhead expenses.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $1,000 for funding subsidy program 
     costs and $70,000 for administrative expenses. The 
     administrative expenses may be transferred to and merged with 
     the ``General operating expenses'' account. Bill language is 
     included limiting program direct loans to $3,400.

            vocational rehabilitation loans program account


                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002....................         $72,000        $274,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................          55,000         289,000
Committee recommendation................          55,000         289,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

       This appropriation covers the funding subsidy cost of 
     direct loans for vocational rehabilitation of eligible 
     veterans and, in addition, it includes administrative 
     expenses necessary to carry out the direct loan program. 
     Loans of up to $896 (based on indexed chapter 31 subsistence 
     allowance rate) are available to service-connected disabled 
     veterans enrolled in vocational rehabilitation programs as 
     provided under 38 U.S.C. chapter 31 when the veteran is 
     temporarily in need of additional assistance. Repayment is 
     made in 10 monthly installments, without interest, through 
     deductions from future payments of compensation, pension, 
     subsistence allowance, educational assistance allowance, or 
     retirement pay.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the requested $55,000 for program 
     costs and $289,000 for administrative expenses for the 
     Vocational Rehabilitation Loans Program account. The 
     administrative expenses may be transferred to and merged with 
     the ``General operating expenses'' account. Bill language is 
     included limiting program direct loans to $3,626,000. It is 
     estimated that VA will make 5,300 loans in fiscal year 2003, 
     with an average amount of $684.

          native american veteran housing loan program account


                     (including transfer of funds)


                                                         Administrative
                                                               expenses

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$544,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................558,000
Committee recommendation........................................558,000

                          program description

       This program will test the feasibility of enabling VA to 
     make direct home loans to native American veterans who live 
     on U.S. trust lands. It is a pilot program that began in 1993 
     and expires on December 31, 2005. Subsidy amounts necessary 
     to support this program were appropriated in fiscal year 
     1993.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget estimate of $558,000 
     for administrative expenses associated with this program in 
     fiscal year 2003. These funds may be transferred to the 
     ``General operating expenses'' account.


  GUARANTEED TRANSITIONAL HOUSING LOANS FOR HOMELESS VETERANS PROGRAM 
                                ACCOUNT

                     (including transfer of funds)

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This program was established by Public Law 105-368, the 
     Veterans Programs Enhancement Act of 1998. The program is a 
     pilot project designed to expand the supply of transitional 
     housing for homeless veterans and to guarantee up to 15 loans 
     with a maximum aggregate value of $100,000,000. Not more than 
     five loans may be guaranteed in the first 3 years of the 
     program. The project must enforce sobriety standards and 
     provide a wide range of supportive services such as 
     counseling for substance abuse and job readiness skills. 
     Residents will be required to pay a reasonable fee.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       All funds authorized for this program have been 
     appropriated. Therefore, additional appropriations are not 
     required. Administrative expenses of the program, estimated 
     at $750,000 for fiscal year 2003, will be borne by the 
     ``Medical care'' and ``General operating expenses'' 
     appropriations.

                     Veterans Health Administration


                              MEDICAL CARE

Appropriations, 2002.................................\1\$21,331,164,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................22,743,761,000
Committee recommendation.................................23,889,304,000

\1\Does not include pending supplemental of $417,000,000 (H.R. 4775) 
and transfers.


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] operates the 
     largest Federal medical care delivery system in the country, 
     with 172 medical centers, 43 domiciliaries, 137 nursing 
     homes, and 864 outpatient clinics which includes independent, 
     satellite, community-based, and rural outreach clinics.
       This appropriation provides for medical care and treatment 
     of eligible beneficiaries in VA hospitals, nursing homes, 
     domiciliaries, and outpatient clinic facilities; contract 
     hospitals; State home facilities on a grant basis; contract 
     community nursing homes; and through the hometown outpatient 
     program, on a fee basis. Hospital and outpatient care also 
     are provided for certain dependents and survivors of veterans 
     under the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the VA 
     [CHAMPVA]. The medical care appropriation also provides for 
     training of medical residents and interns and other 
     professional paramedical and administrative personnel in 
     health science fields to support the Department's and the 
     Nation's health manpower demands.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $23,889,304,000 for VA medical care, an increase of 
     $2,558,140,000 over the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
     $1,145,543,000 above the budget request. In addition, VA has 
     authority to retain co-payments and third-party collections, 
     estimated to total $1,448,874,000 in fiscal year 2003. 
     Therefore, the Committee's recommendation represents total 
     resources for medical care of $25,338,178,000.
       Access to Care.--The Committee is deeply concerned that in 
     some areas of the country, veterans are denied timely access 
     to care because of long waiting lists for appointments for 
     new patients, and directs VA to report by March 3, 2003, on 
     plans to reduce the waitings lists, including a plan for 
     ensuring that veterans who are on waiting lists can continue 
     to have access to pharmaceuticals while they are waiting for 
     their appointments.
       Alaska has the highest percentage of veterans in the 
     Nation, and among Alaskans, Alaskan Natives have an 
     extraordinary high rate of service. However, veterans' 
     services are often spotty or non-existent in most Alaskan 
     Native villages. The Committee urges the Department to 
     provide support to the Alaska Native Veterans Association to 
     provide services to veterans living in Eskimo and Indian 
     villages and communities.
       The Committee commends the Department for opening the 
     community-based outpatient clinic on the Kenai Peninsula, 
     Alaska. The demand for services at the clinic, however, has 
     been so high that many veterans often wait months to receive 
     an appointment for routine care. The Committee urges the 
     Department to address the resource needs of the Kenai clinic 
     to ensure that it can meet the needs of the veterans it 
     serves.
       The Committee understands that the VA has held preliminary 
     discussions with interested parties in Northeastern Minnesota 
     to assess the need for a community based outpatient clinic in 
     the Fosston/Bemidji area. The Committee strongly urges the VA 
     to expedite this assessment, and to report to the Committee 
     by March 3, 2003, on the feasibility of opening a clinic in 
     the region.
       The Committee urges the Department to continue its support 
     for the Brother Francis Shelter, which provides critical 
     services to homeless veterans in Anchorage, Alaska.
       The Committee is very concerned by the results of the 
     Inspector General's audit of the Lexington, Kentucky Research 
     Program and the lack of properly accounting for physician's 
     time split between research and patient care. With 
     significant waiting lists existing and access performance 
     standards not being met, research physicians must be meeting 
     their full commitment to patient care. The Committee expects 
     the Secretary to provide strong oversight in this area and to 
     take steps system-wide, to ensure care for veterans is given 
     the highest priority.
       VERA.--The Committee continues to support the core 
     principles underlying the Veterans Equitable Resource 
     Allocation (VERA) system--that VA health care funds should be 
     allocated fairly according to the number of veterans having 
     the highest priority for health care, and aligning resources 
     according to best practices in health care. At the same time, 
     the Committee is supportive of ongoing studies to recommend 
     ways to increase the level of efficiency and fairness for 
     distributing medical care resources. However, the Committee 
     recognizes that recent studies have indicated that 
     modifications to the VERA formula could better account for 
     infrastructure costs and actual patient care costs. The 
     Committee directs the VA to complete the presently planned 
     work as scheduled, and to continue the study in the coming 
     year, updating the results with the most recent data and 
     utilizing the models developed. The Committee further directs 
     the VA to provide interim reports to the Committee in 
     February and June 2003, and a final study with all findings 
     by the end of fiscal year 2003. The final study should 
     include any recommendations to better account for 
     infrastructure costs and actual patient care costs, as well 
     as ways to increase the level of efficiency and fairness for 
     distributing medical care resources.

[[Page 1030]]

       Finally, the Committee continues to believe that when any 
     Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) experiences an 
     operating shortfall that would threaten its ability to serve 
     eligible veterans, and VHA has determined that the VISN has 
     implemented all appropriate economies and efficiencies, VHA 
     should consider providing supplemental allocations to that 
     VISN. To that end, the Committee urges VA to ensure that it 
     reserves sufficient funds to meet the operating need of those 
     VISNs that may require supplemental funding during the year.
       Prevention of Amputations, Care, and Treatment.--The 
     Committee is aware of studies that have found that collagen 
     based therapies can reduce the need for amputations by 
     increasing wound heal rates, and directs VA to provide a 
     report by April 3, 2003, on the VA's experience in this 
     matter as well as the VA's future plans to utilize collagen 
     based therapies.
       Physician Assistant Advisor.--The Veterans Benefits and 
     Health Care Improvement Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-419) 
     directed the VHA to create a Physician Assistant (PA) Advisor 
     position to the Office of the Under Secretary for Health. The 
     Committee commends VA for filling this position and strongly 
     encourages the VHA to ensure that the PA Advisor position is 
     a full-time position, located in the VA central office or in 
     a VA field medical center that is in close proximity to 
     Washington, DC, and provided sufficient funding to support 
     the administrative and travel requirements associated with 
     the position. The Committee directs VA to report by March 3, 
     2003, as to the progress made on this matter.
       Psychology Post-Doctoral Training Program.--The Committee 
     continues to support the VHA's efforts to strengthen the 
     Psychology Post-Doctoral Training Program. The Committee 
     awaits the progress report due early this year that will 
     include the number of training slots for psychologists and 
     their location.
       Long Distance Learning Program for Nursing.--The Committee 
     supports the joint VA/DOD Distance Learning Program, and 
     recommend that the VA continue the distance learning project 
     designed to transition clinical nurse specialists into roles 
     as adult nurse practitioners.
       Joslin Vision Network (JVN).--The Committee supports the 
     current level of support to expand the JVN to additional 
     pilot sites in fiscal year 2003. This program benefits 
     diabetic patients by offering improved quality of care 
     through increased access to the highest quality medical 
     expertise and education, and the Committee encourages the VA 
     to initiate new pilot sites to advance the JVN technology 
     toward off-the-shelf deployment.
       Homelessness.--The Committee commends the Department's 
     efforts to improve coordination of its homeless programs with 
     other Federal departments and agencies. The Committee is 
     especially pleased with the Department's participation in the 
     Interagency Council on the Homeless. The Committee strongly 
     urges the Department to continue participating in the Council 
     and develop coordinated strategies with other agencies to 
     prevent and end homelessness among veterans.
       Clarksburg/Ruby Memorial demonstration.--The Committee 
     supports continuation at current levels of the Clarksburg 
     VAMC/Ruby Memorial hospital demonstration project.
       Rural Veterans Health Care Initiative.--The Committee 
     supports continuation at the current level of the Rural 
     Veterans Health Care Initiative at White River Junction, VT 
     VAMC.
       Harry S. Truman VAMC.--The Committee strongly urges VA to 
     support development of a new micro-imaging center for the 
     Harry S. Truman VAMC in Columbia, Missouri by providing funds 
     for a micro-MRI, a micro-SPET, and a micro-PET. These 
     research systems will be for imaging experimental mouse or 
     small rat models. These new instruments will assist cancer 
     research specialists in expanding and enhancing their study 
     and treatment of this deadly disease. These additions fill 
     the critical remaining gap in a nationally prominent and 
     unique program in the development of cancer therapeutics and 
     imaging.
       Fort Howard VAMC.--The Committee supports the creation of a 
     continuum of care community for veterans at the Fort Howard 
     VAMC in Maryland, and directs the VA to report by October 30, 
     2002, on the status of these efforts. The report should 
     include specific timelines and milestones for the future.
       Lakeside VAMC.--The Committee is aware of efforts in the 
     City of Chicago, Illinois to impose possible zoning 
     limitations on property occupied by the VA's Lakeside medical 
     facility. The Committee strongly believes the VA must receive 
     fair market value for the property in order to ensure that 
     the best interests of veterans and the Federal Government are 
     met. VA intends to transfer the Lakeside property to a 
     successor user under an enhanced lease use agreement. 
     However, recent efforts in the City would diminish the value 
     of the Lakeside property, resulting in reduced proceeds for 
     medical services needed for local area veterans. The 
     Committee objects to these efforts and supports the VA's 
     efforts to place the needs of veterans as their highest 
     priority. The Committee fully supports the Department's plans 
     to lease the property as described in their CARES plan and 
     will explore all necessary means to prevent any effort to 
     hurt local veterans. The Committee cautions outside 
     interested parties that the lease of VA property in VISN 12 
     will be conducted in accordance with the previously announced 
     CARES process. Accordingly, the Committee directs the VA to 
     enter only into an enhanced lease agreement where the VA 
     receives full value for the use of the facility, consistent 
     with its current CARES plan. Before the VA proceeds with any 
     lease, the Committee directs the Department to provide a 
     professional, independent appraisal of the Lakeside property.
       Ranch Hand Project.--The Committee supports the Ranch Hand 
     project studying the impact of Agent Orange on Alaskan Native 
     veterans and urges the Department to provide the funding 
     necessary to complete this important project.
       Minnesota Veterans Home.--The Committee is aware that the 
     Minnesota Veterans Home has designed a comprehensive dementia 
     care program. The Committee supports these efforts, and urges 
     VA to provide support for this initiative.
       Preventative Medicine.--The Committee is concerned that the 
     Department's focus on acute care has overshadowed the need to 
     include preventative medicine in its strategic healthcare 
     delivery portfolio. To that end, the Committee urges the VA 
     to develop strong collaborative efforts with academic public 
     health institutions.
       Complementary and Alternative Medicine.--The Committee 
     directs the VA to review the recent final report of the White 
     House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine 
     Policy, and to report by June 27, 2003, on the status of the 
     VA's implementation of the report's recommendations to VA.
       The Committee has included bill language delaying the 
     availability until August 1, 2003, of $500,000,000 in the 
     equipment, lands, and structures object classifications.
       The Committee has included bill language to make available 
     through September 30, 2003, up to $900,000,000 of the medical 
     care appropriation. This provides flexibility to the 
     Department as it continues to implement significant program 
     changes.


                     MEDICAL CARE COLLECTIONS FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002--................................\1\$1,031,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003--................................\2\1,448,874,000
Committee recommendation--.............................\2\1,448,874,000

\1\Includes $805,000,000 in MCCF and $226,000,000 in HSIF funds 
proposed to be transferred to the MCCF.
\2\As estimated in the budget request.


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33) 
     established the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Care 
     Collections Fund (MCCF). The Department deposits co-payments 
     and third party insurance payments into this fund.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATON

       The budget request assumes that VA will collect 
     $1,448,874,000 in co-payments, third party collections, and 
     enhanced use lease proceeds. These funds will be transferred 
     to the Medical Care account to provide direct healthcare 
     services to our Nation's veterans. The Committee has included 
     bill language extending VA's authority to collect co-payments 
     for pharmaceuticals. The Committee has also included bill 
     language making an accounting change to VA's collections 
     account structure. The Committee's recommended change will 
     result in all VA collections being deposited into the Medical 
     Care Collections Fund, to be transferred to the Medical Care 
     account in order to provide direct healthcare services to our 
     Nation's veterans. Currently, VA has two separate collections 
     accounts. The Committee's recommendation would place all of 
     VA's collections into the Medical Care Collections Fund, and 
     will result in better oversight to ensure that all co-
     payments, third party collections, and enhanced use lease 
     proceeds are applied toward direct healthcare services for 
     our Nation's veterans.

                    medical and prosthetic research

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$371,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................394,373,000
Committee recommendation....................................400,000,000

                          program description

       The ``Medical and prosthetic research'' account provides 
     funds for medical, rehabilitative, and health services 
     research. Medical research supports basic and clinical 
     studies that advance knowledge leading to improvements in the 
     prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases and 
     disabilities. Rehabilitation research focuses on 
     rehabilitation engineering problems in the fields of 
     prosthetics, orthotics, adaptive equipment for vehicles, 
     sensory aids and related areas. Health services research 
     focuses on improving the effectiveness and economy of 
     delivery of health services.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $400,000,000 for medical and 
     prosthetic research, an increase of $5,627,000 above the 
     budget request and $29,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level. The Committee remains highly supportive of 
     this program, and recognizes its importance both in improving 
     health care services to veterans and recruiting and retaining 
     high-quality medical professionals in the Veterans Health 
     Administration.

[[Page 1031]]

       Neurofibromatosis.--Research has documented the link 
     between neurofibromatosis (NF) and cancer, brain tumors, and 
     heart disease. In view of this link, which suggests that 
     research on NF stands to benefit a vast segment of the 
     veteran population, the Committee encourages the VA to 
     increase its NF research portfolio, in addition to continuing 
     to collaborate with other Federal agencies, such as the 
     Department of Defense, in joint initiatives.
       Nursing Research Program.--The Committee supports the 
     Nursing Research Program to enable nurses to conduct research 
     that focuses on the specific health care needs of aging 
     veterans, and urges the program's continuation.

      medical administration and miscellaneous operating expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$66,731,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................69,716,000
Committee recommendation.....................................69,716,000

                          program description

       This appropriation provides funds for central office 
     executive direction (Under Secretary for Health and staff), 
     administration and supervision of all VA medical and 
     construction programs, including development and 
     implementation of policies, plans, and program objectives.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $69,716,000 for medical 
     administration and miscellaneous operating expenses, an 
     increase of $2,985,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level and the same as the budget request.
       In 2000, VA established a reimbursement process between 
     VHA, NCA, and VBA for project technical and consulting 
     services to be provided by the Facilities Management Service 
     Delivery Office. The estimated level of reimbursement to the 
     Medical Administration and Miscellaneous Operating Expenses 
     account in fiscal year 2003 for facilities management support 
     is $7,155,000.

                      Departmental Administration

                       general operating expenses

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,195,728,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,256,418,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,256,418,000

                          program description

       This appropriation provides for the administration of 
     nonmedical veterans benefits through the Veterans Benefits 
     Administration [VBA], the executive direction of the 
     Department, several top level supporting offices, of the 
     Board of Contract Appeals, and the Board of Veterans' 
     Appeals.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $1,256,418,000 for general 
     operating expenses, an increase of $60,690,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The amount provided includes 
     $992,000,000 for the Veterans Benefits Administration and 
     $264,418,000 for general administration. In addition to this 
     appropriation, resources are made available for general 
     operating expenses through reimbursements totaling 
     $423,239,000 for fiscal year 2003, with total estimated 
     obligations of approximately $1,679,657,000.
       The Committee recommends making available $65,800,000 of 
     the GOE appropriation for 2 years, a travel limitation of 
     $17,082,000, and the current level of $25,000 for official 
     reception and representation expenses.
       Veterans' Employment and Training Programs.--The Committee 
     has not recommended the Administration's proposal to transfer 
     these programs from the Department of Labor to the VA. The 
     Committee expects that these programs will continue through 
     the Department of Labor's Employment and Training Service, 
     and will consider future proposals of this nature subject to 
     the Committee's receiving more specific justifications on how 
     such proposals will improve employment and training services 
     for veterans.
       Management Issues.--The Committee is concerned that there 
     continues to be unclear lines of accountability within the 
     Veterans Benefits Administration, leading to diminished 
     enforcement of quality standards and program policies, and 
     reduced efficiency and timeliness in claims processing. The 
     Committee directs VA to report by May 30, 2003, on efforts to 
     address these management issues.
       VA Healthcare Information Security.--The Committee is 
     pleased with the VA's efforts to modernize its cyber security 
     infrastructure to ensure that sensitive VA records, and those 
     of the VHA patient population are protected from cyber 
     attack, and urges the VA to accomplish this high priority 
     objective as quickly as possible. To that end, the Committee 
     supports continuation at current levels of planning and 
     development efforts related to the recent establishment of 
     the Cyber Security Joint Program Office located at the 
     Martinsburg, WV VAMC.

                    national cemetery administration

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$121,169,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................133,149,000
Committee recommendation....................................133,149,000

                          program description

       The National Cemetery Administration was established in 
     accordance with the National Cemeteries Act of 1973. It has a 
     fourfold mission: to provide for the interment in any 
     national cemetery the remains of eligible deceased 
     servicepersons and discharged veterans, together with their 
     spouses and certain dependents, and permanently to maintain 
     their graves; to mark graves of eligible persons in national 
     and private cemeteries; to administer the grant program for 
     aid to States in establishing, expanding, or improving State 
     veterans' cemeteries; and to administer the Presidential 
     Memorial Certificate Program.
       There are a total of 154 cemeterial installations in 39 
     States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The 
     Committee's recommendation for the National Cemetery 
     Administration provides funds for all of these cemeterial 
     installations.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $133,149,000 for the National 
     Cemetery Administration. This is an increase of $11,980,000 
     over the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and the same as the 
     budget request.

                    office of the inspector general

Appropriations, 2002........................................$52,308,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................55,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................55,000,000

                          program description

       The Office of Inspector General was established by the 
     Inspector General Act of 1978 and is responsible for the 
     audit and investigation and inspections of all Department of 
     Veterans Affairs programs and operations.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $55,000,000 
     for the inspector general. This is an increase of $2,692,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                      construction, major projects

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$183,180,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................193,740,000
Committee recommendation....................................144,790,000

                          program description

       The construction, major projects appropriation provides for 
     constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of the 
     facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of VA, 
     including planning, architectural and engineering services, 
     Capital Asset Realignment Enhanced Services (CARES) 
     activities, assessment, and site acquisition where the 
     estimated cost of a project is $4,000,000 or more.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $144,790,000 
     for construction, major projects, $38,390,000 below the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level and $48,950,000 below the 
     budget request.
       The following table compares the Committee recommendation 
     with the budget request.

                                          CONSTRUCTION, MAJOR PROJECTS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Available                         Committee
                   Location and description                      through 2002     2003 request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veterans Health Administration (VHA):
    Palo Alto (Palo Alto Division), CA, Seismic Corrections,   ...............           14,013           14,013
     Building 2..............................................
    Palo Alto (Palo Alto Division), CA, Seismic Corrections,   ...............           21,750                0
     Building 4 (Research)...................................
    San Francisco, CA, Seismic Corrections, Building 203.....  ...............           31,000           31,000
    West Los Angeles, CA, Seismic Corrections, Building 500..  ...............           27,200                0
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Seismic......................................  ...............           93,963           45,013
                                                              ==================================================
Advance planning fund: Various stations......................  ...............           17,500           17,500
CARES Fund...................................................  ...............            5,000            5,000
Asbestos abatement: Various stations.........................  ...............            7,977            7,977
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, VHA..........................................  ...............          124,440           75,490
                                                              ==================================================
National Cemetery Administration (NCA):
    Pittsburgh, PA National Cemetery, Phase I Development\1\.  ...............           16,400           16,400

[[Page 1032]]

 
    Southern Florida National Cemetery, Phase I                ...............           23,300           23,300
     Development\1\..........................................
    Willamette National Cemetery, OR, Columbarium and          ...............            8,400            8,400
     Cemetery Improvements...................................
    Advance planning fund: Various stations..................  ...............            1,800            1,800
    Design fund: Detroit, MI and Sacramento, CA..............  ...............            3,400            3,400
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, NCA\2\.......................................  ...............           53,300           53,300
                                                              ==================================================
Department Advance Planning..................................  ...............            2,000            2,000
Claims Analyses: Various locations...........................  ...............            1,500            1,500
Emergency Response Security Study............................  ...............            2,000            2,000
Judgment Fund: Various locations.............................  ...............           10,000           10,000
Hazardous Waste: Various locations...........................  ...............              500              500
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Other line-items...............................  ...............           16,000           16,000
                                                              ==================================================
    Total construction, major projects.......................  ...............          193,740      144,790,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Land acquisition funds ($15,000,000) in 2001 and design funds ($2,000,000) in 2002 were provided for a new
  cemetery in Southern Florida. Eighteen million dollars was provided in 2002 for land acquisition in
  Pittsburgh, Detroit, and Sacramento areas.
\2\ National Cemetery Administration major project requests do not include the purchase of pre-placed crypts,
  which are funded by the Compensation and Pensions appropriation.

       The Committee recommends the requested amounts for 2 
     seismic correction projects in California, but directs that 
     the VA proceed with these projects only upon confirmation 
     that they are found to be consistent with the strategic plan 
     which emerges from the CARES process in VISNs 21 and 22. Due 
     to budgetary constraints, the Committee is funding the 
     Administration's two highest priorities under this account.
       The Committee also recommends the requested amounts for 
     development of both the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and the 
     Miami, Florida National Cemeteries, and improvements at the 
     Willamette, Oregon National Cemetery, and design funding for 
     new cemeteries in Detroit, Michigan, and Sacramento, 
     California.
       CARES.--The Committee remains strongly committed to the 
     Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) 
     initiative to ensure the VA healthcare system can meet the 
     needs of veterans today and in the future. The Committee 
     commends the Department for implementing the first phase of 
     CARES in VISN 12 and supports the Department's recently 
     announced plan to complete CARES for the rest of the VA 
     health care system within 2 years. To that end, the Committee 
     recognizes that VA may have additional resource needs to 
     support CARES studies across the Nation, and directs VA to 
     keep the Committee apprised of any additional needs to ensure 
     that the process can move forward as scheduled.
       In support of the new CARES plan, the Committee has 
     provided a total of $40,000,000--$5,000,000 in major 
     construction and $35,000,000 in minor construction--for CARES 
     activities, including advance planning, design development, 
     construction documents, and construction for major capital 
     initiatives stemming from the CARES recommendations.
       The Committee directs VA to propose, not later than 
     February 15, 2002, a framework for prioritization of the 
     capital improvement projects that will be identified as 
     priorities as a result of the CARES studies. This proposal 
     should include any necessary modifications to the VA capital 
     investment and appropriations processes for major and minor 
     construction funding.
       The Committee also directs the VA to submit, not later than 
     May 15, 2003, a 5-year strategic plan that describes the 
     implementation of CARES, criteria used for priority-setting 
     of projects, estimated funding costs per VISN by year, and 
     estimated savings to be reinvested back into each VISN by 
     year. The Committee directs that this plan be inclusive of 
     all VA infrastructure needs--major, minor, research-related, 
     safety, seismic, and other--so that ultimately, VA will 
     produce one master list of all priority infrastructure 
     projects. The Committee believes this is imperative to be 
     able to plan for the future resource needs of VA and to 
     eliminate confusion between and among VA's current differing 
     and conflicting priority setting mechanisms.
       Finally, the Committee directs that any major construction 
     projects included in future budget submissions meet the 
     following five basic criteria: (1) the project is CARES 
     approved; (2) the project is included in the Department's 5-
     year strategic plan; (3) the project is a top priority for 
     the VISN in which it is located; (4) the project is at least 
     30 percent design complete; and (5) the project is 
     authorized.
       Beckley, WV nursing home care unit.--The Committee urges 
     the VA to include sufficient funding in the 2004 budget 
     request for a new nursing home care unit at the Beckley, WV 
     VAMC, upon confirmation that the project is consistent with 
     the strategic plan which emerges from the VISN 6 CARES 
     process.


                      CONSTRUCTION, MINOR PROJECTS

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$210,900,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................210,700,000
Committee recommendation....................................210,700,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The construction, minor projects appropriation provides for 
     constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of the 
     facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of VA, 
     including planning, CARES activities, assessment of needs, 
     architectural and engineering services, and site acquisition, 
     where the estimated cost of a project is less than 
     $4,000,000. Public Law 106-117, the Veterans Millennium 
     Health Care and Benefits Act of 1999, gave VA the authority 
     to make capital contributions from minor construction in 
     enhanced-use leases.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $210,700,000 for minor 
     construction, the same as the budget request and $200,000 
     below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The Committee is 
     aware of the authorizing committees' current efforts to raise 
     the limitation on minor construction projects. The Committee 
     understands that the current limitation has not been raised 
     for several years despite the inflationary cost of 
     construction, and supports the authorizers' efforts to 
     address this matter.
       St. Louis Parking.--The Committee is aware that the 
     Department is examining the use of enhanced-use leasing at 
     the John Cochran Division of the VA Medical Center in St. 
     Louis, Missouri as a means to address a severe parking 
     deficiency and safety problem at the Medical Center. The 
     Department is encouraged to address this problem consistent 
     with the CARES protocols.

                         parking revolving fund

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$4,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation...............................................

                          program description

       The revolving fund provides funds for the construction, 
     alteration, and acquisition (by purchase or lease) of parking 
     garages at VA medical facilities authorized by 38 U.S.C. 
     8109.
       The Secretary is required under certain circumstances to 
     establish and collect fees for the use of such garages and 
     parking facilities. Receipts from the parking fees are to be 
     deposited in the revolving fund and would be used to fund 
     future parking garage initiatives.

                        committee recommendation

       No new budget authority is requested for the parking 
     revolving fund in fiscal year 2003. Leases will be funded 
     from parking fees collected.

       grants for construction of state extended care facilities

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$100,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................100,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................100,000,000

                          program description

       This account is used to provide grants to assist States in 
     acquiring or constructing State home facilities for 
     furnishing domiciliary or nursing home care to veterans, and 
     to expand, remodel or alter existing buildings for furnishing 
     domiciliary, nursing home, or hospital care to veterans in 
     State homes. The grant may not exceed 65 percent of the total 
     cost of the project, and grants to any one State may not 
     exceed one-third of the amount appropriated in any fiscal 
     year. Public Law 102-585 granted permanent authority for this 
     program and Public Law 106-117 provided greater specificity 
     in directing VA to prescribe regulations for the number of 
     beds for which grant assistance may be furnished.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for grants for the 
     construction of State extended care facilities, equal to the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level and the budget request. This 
     program cost-effectively meets long-term health care needs of 
     veterans.

[[Page 1033]]



       grants for the construction of state veterans' cemeteries

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................32,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................32,000,000

                          program description

       Public Law 105-368, amended title 38 U.S.C. 2408, which 
     established authority to provide aid to States for 
     establishment, expansion, and improvement of State veterans' 
     cemeteries which are operated and permanently maintained by 
     the States. This amendment increased the maximum Federal 
     Share from 50 percent to 100 percent in order to fund 
     construction costs and the initial equipment expenses when 
     the cemetery is established. The States remain responsible 
     for providing the land and for paying all costs related to 
     the operation and maintenance of the State cemeteries, 
     including the costs for subsequent equipment purchases.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $32,000,000 for grants for 
     construction of State veterans' cemeteries in fiscal year 
     2003, $7,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
     the same as the budget request.

                       administrative provisions

       The Committee has included 10 administrative provisions 
     (Sections 101-110) carried in earlier bills. Among these are:
       Section 107 enables VA to use surplus earnings from the 
     national service life insurance, U.S. Government life 
     insurance, and veterans special life insurance programs to 
     administer these programs. This provision was included for 
     the first time in fiscal year 1996 appropriations 
     legislation. The Department estimates that $38,110,000 will 
     be reimbursed to the ``General operating expenses'' account 
     as a result of this provision.
       Section 108 extends the VA's Franchise Fund pilot program.
       Section 109 enables the VA to reimburse accounts from 
     enhanced use lease proceeds.
       Section 110 allows for fiscal year 2003 only, the 
     reimbursement of the Office of Resolution Management (ORM) 
     and the Office of Employment Discrimination Complaint 
     Adjudication (OEDCA) for services provided, from funds in any 
     appropriation for salaries and other administrative expenses.
       Section 111 is a new administrative provision that: (1) 
     reauthorizes VA's authority to collect co-payments for 
     prescription drugs; and (2) makes an accounting change to 
     combine the Health Services Improvement Fund (HSIF) and the 
     Medical Care Collections Fund (MCCF), as described earlier in 
     this report.

         TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2002....................................$32,148,695,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................31,348,851,000
Committee recommendation.................................31,149,157,000

                          general description

       The Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD] was 
     established by the Housing and Urban Development Act (Public 
     Law 89-174), effective November 9, 1965. This Department is 
     the principal Federal agency responsible for programs 
     concerned with the Nation's housing needs, fair housing 
     opportunities, and improving and developing the Nation's 
     communities.
       In carrying out the mission of serving the needs and 
     interests of the Nation's communities and of the people who 
     live and work in them, HUD administers mortgage and loan 
     insurance programs that help families become homeowners and 
     facilitate the construction of rental housing; rental and 
     homeownership subsidy programs for low-income families who 
     otherwise could not afford decent housing; programs to combat 
     discrimination in housing and affirmatively further fair 
     housing opportunity; programs aimed at ensuring an adequate 
     supply of mortgage credit; and programs that aid neighborhood 
     rehabilitation, community development, and the preservation 
     of our urban centers from blight and decay.
       HUD administers programs to protect the homebuyer in the 
     marketplace and fosters programs and research that stimulate 
     and guide the housing industry to provide not only housing, 
     but better communities and living environments.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends for fiscal year 2003 an 
     appropriation of $31,149,157,000 for the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development. This is $1,044,038,000 below 
     the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and $199,934,000 below the 
     budget request.


                        housing certificate fund

              (Including Recission and Transfers of Funds)

Appropriations, 2002.................................\1\$15,641,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................\2\17,527,000,000
Committee recommendation.................................16,928,697,000

\1\Includes an advance appropriation of $4,200,000,000 for fiscal year 
2002.
\2\Includes an advance appropriation of $4,200,000,000 for fiscal year 
2003.


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This account provides funding for the section 8 programs, 
     including vouchers, certificates, and project-based 
     assistance. Section 8 assistance is the principal 
     appropriation for Federal housing assistance, with over 3 
     million families assisted under section 8. Under these 
     programs, eligible low-income families pay 30 percent of 
     their adjusted income for rent, and the Federal Government is 
     responsible for the remainder of the rent, up to the fair 
     market rent or some other payment standard.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
     $16,928,697,000, including the necessary funds to renew all 
     expiring section 8 contracts. These funds also cover the 
     costs of enhanced vouchers for families that choose to 
     continue to live in multifamily housing in which a mortgage 
     is refinanced and the housing was previously eligible for the 
     Preservation Program, as well as in certain circumstances 
     where owners of assisted multifamily housing opt out of the 
     section 8 program. Consistent with the budget request, this 
     account includes an advance appropriation of $4,200,000,000 
     for the remaining costs of contracts renewed in calendar year 
     2003 for the months requiring section 8 assistance during 
     fiscal year 2004.
       Other activities eligible for funding under this account 
     include: the conversion of section 23 projects to assistance 
     under section 8; the relocation and replacement of demolished 
     or disposed properties; the family unification program; and 
     the relocation of witnesses in connection with efforts to 
     fight crime in public and assisted housing pursuant to a law 
     enforcement or prosecution agency.
       The Committee did not include the administration's request 
     for an additional 34,000 new vouchers because of ongoing 
     concerns over the effectiveness of tenant-based vouchers in 
     providing decent, safe, and affordable housing to low-income 
     people. The Committee is deeply concerned that the tenant-
     based voucher program offers a false promise of rental choice 
     that recipients cannot realize. In many instances, voucher 
     holders have limited choices, and end up concentrated in the 
     same low-income neighborhoods. This result is antithetical to 
     the goals of the program, which include resident choice, 
     mixed-income housing, and decent living conditions. The 
     Committee urges HUD to make voucher reform a priority for the 
     Department. The Committee strongly supports providing 
     vouchers to people with disabilities, and has made it a 
     priority in this Act. The Committee has included language to 
     prioritize the reallocation of unused vouchers to people with 
     disabilities. New language is also included to ensure that 
     vouchers that were originally funded for use by people with 
     disabilities remain for use by that population. Past practice 
     by HUD and PHAs has resulted in disability vouchers being 
     converted into non-designated vouchers. The Committee expects 
     that these provisions will result in the same--if not 
     greater--number of vouchers serving people with disabilities, 
     despite the absence of a specific appropriation for 
     disability vouchers. The Committee has also included a 
     requirement for a HUD report on the effectiveness of vouchers 
     for people with disabilities.
       As part of a voucher reform effort, the Senate endorses a 
     funding model developed by the House Committee on 
     Appropriations which is designed to ensure that only the 
     funds actually needed for vouchers in use will be made 
     available. This model is designed to avoid the appropriation 
     of budget authority in excess of the amount actually required 
     while continuing the longstanding commitment to renew all 
     currently authorized vouchers. While the Committee wishes to 
     ensure that there are sufficient funds available to support 
     all of the currently authorized vouchers that public housing 
     agencies are able to use, the Committee wishes to avoid the 
     recapture and rescission of large amounts of unused section 8 
     funds in future years.
       The Committee also notes that it is disappointed that HUD 
     has made so little progress in reforming the section 8 
     program, both in terms of poor utilization rates and by 
     requesting funds well in excess of program needs.
       To make the section 8 program more effective, the Committee 
     directs HUD to renew annual contributions contracts with 
     public housing agencies for the full number of vouchers 
     reserved to date for each agency that expire during the 
     period covered by this appropriations act. HUD is authorized, 
     however, to contract with each public housing agency for the 
     amount of funds needed to support the number of vouchers that 
     the agency is expected to use in the 12-month period covered 
     by the contract, even if this amount is less than the full 
     amount of funds the public housing agency otherwise would 
     receive under the current renewal formula established by 24 
     C.F.R. 982.102. In making this determination, HUD is directed 
     to not arbitrarily determine the amount of funds an agency 
     will receive based on the average number of vouchers the 
     agency used during its previous fiscal year, but must make a 
     reasonable determination of the number of vouchers likely to 
     be used in the subsequent 12 months based on current 
     utilization and recent and planned changes in the agency's 
     administrative policies and practices that affect its voucher 
     utilization rate. HUD is directed to collect timely 
     information by the

[[Page 1034]]

     end of each fiscal year that identifies the number of 
     assisted units that are occupied and the cost of these units 
     to HUD for each program under this account. This information 
     is to be provided to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations before the end of each fiscal year. This 
     information also should be updated regularly and available to 
     these committees by demand. The Committee does not intend to 
     override agreements that HUD has entered into with public 
     housing agencies participating in the Moving to Work 
     Demonstration concerning the renewal of contracts for voucher 
     funds, nor does the Committee intend to reduce the number of 
     vouchers reserved for an agency as part of the settlement of 
     litigation.
       In light of the inherent impossibility of calculating 
     exactly how many vouchers can be used and how much they will 
     cost in fiscal year 2003, to ensure that sufficient budget 
     authority is provided for all authorized vouchers that can be 
     used, the Committee bill contains language establishing a 
     central fund that has both a finite appropriation and also 
     includes a ``current, indefinite'' appropriation. This 
     authority is limited to the renewal of voucher contracts 
     under this year's bill. As to the renewal of vouchers, this 
     authority may not exceed the funding necessary for the 
     2,077,336 authorized vouchers for which contracts are 
     expiring or terminating. If a public housing agency is able 
     to lease more vouchers than agreed upon in the annual 
     contract, HUD may fund up to the number of vouchers reserved 
     to date for the agency with either appropriations set aside 
     for renewal of voucher contracts, or appropriations from the 
     central fund. HUD shall not require agencies to use their 
     program reserves for this purpose.
       Before requesting additional funds from the Treasury under 
     the ``current, indefinite'' appropriation language, HUD must 
     use available recaptured Section 8 funds (both project-based 
     and tenant-based funds) that are not needed to meet the 
     rescission amount contained in the bill. The ``current 
     indefinite'' authority may not exceed the amount of funds 
     needed to meet costs associated with fiscal year 2003 for 
     renewal and incremental vouchers, and may not be used for any 
     obligations in fiscal year 2004. In addition, the Committee 
     directs HUD to refrain from taking steps during fiscal year 
     2003 that would substantially increase average per voucher 
     costs and to notify the appropriations subcommittees before 
     revising the regulatory criteria that apply to the 
     determination of Fair Market Rents or exception payment 
     standards. HUD should not, however, delay in developing more 
     accurate methods for determining the likely average cost of 
     vouchers in the renewal funding period.
       The Committee directs HUD to continue current policies on 
     the establishment, use and replenishment of program reserves 
     for each public housing agency, in order to meet increases in 
     current per voucher costs in excess of the costs assumed in 
     calculating renewal funding. The Committee notes that HUD has 
     an obligation to provide public housing agencies with access 
     to up to an additional 30 days of funding, beyond the regular 
     30-day reserve, if necessary to serve the authorized number 
     of families. HUD may use appropriations from the central fund 
     to replenish reserves if prior years' appropriations are not 
     available for this purpose.
       While some agencies have used all or nearly all of their 
     vouchers and voucher budget authority, and others have 
     improved their performance to reach this target, some have 
     chronically failed to utilize more than 10 percent of 
     vouchers and related budget authority. In 2000, HUD began the 
     process to reallocate unused vouchers from such agencies. 
     Agencies that were warned in 2001 that they would lose 
     vouchers if they did not bring their utilization rate up to 
     95 percent or higher within approximately 16 months and that 
     failed to meet this target should have had their contracts 
     with HUD reduced. Due to administrative error, HUD has not 
     followed through on its initial warnings except for welfare-
     to-work vouchers. The Committee directs HUD to move 
     expeditiously to implement fully the voucher reallocation 
     policy, and permits HUD to use appropriations in the central 
     fund for this purpose. Except for vouchers needed to meet 
     urgent housing needs in federally-declared disaster areas, 
     HUD should award contracts for these reallocated vouchers to 
     the agencies most in need and able to make best use of them. 
     If possible, reallocated vouchers should be made available to 
     an agency in the state that can serve eligible families on 
     the waiting list of the agency losing the funding. HUD should 
     be able to make the awards of reallocated vouchers promptly, 
     as interested agencies were given a deadline of August 2002 
     to apply for the initial round of such vouchers that were not 
     reserved for the welfare-to-work program. To improve the 
     reallocation process in fiscal year 2004 and thereafter, the 
     Committee has included statutory language that would govern 
     this process.
       To help ensure that progress continues to be made to 
     improve voucher utilization, HUD shall submit to the 
     appropriations and authorizing committees within 4 months 
     after enactment of this Act, a plan on the steps it intends 
     to take to ensure that vouchers allocated to underperforming 
     agencies are used, including, but not limited to, steps that 
     would require changes in authorizing language or increased 
     appropriations (or more flexibility in use of existing 
     appropriations). The Committee recommends that continuing 
     improvement in voucher utilization be included in the 
     President's Management Agenda.
       The Committee also notes that it is disappointed that HUD 
     has made so little progress in reforming the section 8 
     program, both in terms of poor utilization rates and by 
     requesting funds well in excess of program needs.
       The Committee also directs HUD to identify in its fiscal 
     year 2004 budget justification the renewal costs associated 
     with each project-based section 8 program, such as the 
     section 8 moderate rehabilitation program and the section 515 
     program.
       The Committee urges the administration to use all available 
     tools at its disposal to preserve existing project-based 
     section 8 units. By one estimate, over 675,000 contracts on 
     project-based section 8 units are due to expire by 2005. The 
     Committee is very concerned about the loss of these units, 
     given the shortage in the supply of affordable housing, and 
     in light of this Committee's substantial investment in those 
     units. With an initial report due by April 15, 2003, the 
     Department is directed to submit quarterly reports to this 
     Committee on the number of units and properties where owners 
     have elected to opt out of a section 8 contract, or to prepay 
     the HUD mortgage. The report should also detail the repair 
     needs for apartments covered by expiring section 8 contracts, 
     and actions taken by the Department to preserve and/or 
     improve the units.


                      PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$2,843,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,425,900,000
Committee recommendation..................................2,683,400,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This account provides funding for modernization and capital 
     needs of public housing authorities (except Indian housing 
     authorities), including management improvements, resident 
     relocation and homeownership activities.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,683,400,000 
     for the public housing capital fund, $257,500,000 more than 
     the budget request and $160,000,000 below the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level. The Committee has rejected the reduction 
     proposed by the administration in light of the approximate 
     $20,000,000,000 in public housing captial needs.
       Of the amount made available under this section, up to 
     $55,000,000 is for supportive services for residents of 
     public housing, and up to $15,000,000 is for the Neighborhood 
     Networks Initiative in public housing. Funds for the 
     Neighborhood Networks Initiative are provided to establish 
     and operate computer centers in and around public housing. 
     The Committee provides these funds so that residents of 
     public housing can have access to the technology skills that 
     are increasingly important in the 21st century workplace. The 
     Committee is concerned that HUD does not have a comprehensive 
     plan to address the digital divide, despite the Committee's 
     urging last year to develop such a plan.
       HUD is prohibited from using any funds under this account 
     as an emergency reserve under section 9(k) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, but is provided up to $75,000,000 
     for emergency capital needs.
       The Committee does not accept the administration's 
     legislative proposal to finance privately the capital needs 
     of public housing with secton 8 funds. The Committee is 
     concerned that the proposal could result in a loss of public 
     housing units, and would not benefit public housing units 
     with the greatest capital needs. The Committee agrees, 
     however, that Public Housing Authorities should have the 
     tools they need to finance improvements to public housing 
     units. New authority is needed so that public housing 
     authorities can use funds they receive to address critical, 
     deferred maintenance needs. The Committee includes an 
     administrative provision to allow public housing authorities 
     the flexibility to use public housing funds to leverage 
     private capital to rehabilitate distressed units and develop 
     public housing units in mixed-income housing developments.


                     PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$3,494,868,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,530,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,530,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This account provides funding for the payment of operating 
     subsidies to some 3,050 public housing authorities (except 
     Indian housing authorities) with a total of over 1.2 million 
     units under management in order to augment rent payments by 
     residents in order to provide sufficient revenues to meet 
     reasonable operating costs.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,530,000,000 
     for the public housing operating fund, an increase of 
     $35,132,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level and the same as 
     the budget request. HUD is prohibited from

[[Page 1035]]

     using any funds under this account as an emergency reserve 
     under section 9(k) of the United States Housing Act of 1937.
       The Committee directs HUD to use up to $250,000,000 to meet 
     the operating expenses of those public housing agencies 
     (PHAs) that received a shortfall in their operating 
     assistance in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2002. These 
     funds are included for only those PHAs in fiscal year 2002 
     that received less than the amount of operating assistance 
     expected. Apparently, HUD has engaged in a practice over the 
     last 10 years of paying for prior year operating costs with 
     current year appropriations. This practice has occurred using 
     substantial funds without the apparent knowledge or approval 
     of either Congress or OMB. It also is inconsistent with the 
     intent of Congress and appropriations practice. While HUD has 
     taken steps to address these problems in the Public Housing 
     program, the Committee remains concerned about the impact of 
     this misuse of funds on the operations of PHAs. The Committee 
     also directs HUD to report to the House and Senate Committees 
     on Appropriations by April 15, 2003 on actions taken to 
     address this practice, including all sanctions for poor 
     performance and negligence. The Committee also directs HUD 
     fully to fund the operating assistance needs of PHAs in 
     fiscal year 2003 solely with fiscal year 2003 funds.


     Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing [HOPE VI]

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$573,735,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................574,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................574,000,000


                          Program Description

       The ``Revitalization of severely distressed public 
     housing'' account makes awards to public housing authorities 
     on a competitive basis to demolish obsolete or failed 
     developments or to revitalize, where appropriate, sites upon 
     which these developments exist. This is a focused effort to 
     eliminate public housing which was, in many cases, poorly 
     located, ill-designed, and not well constructed. Such 
     unsuitable housing has been very expensive to operate, and 
     difficult to manage effectively due to multiple deficiencies.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $574,000,000 
     for the ``HOPE VI'' account, the same as the budget request 
     and the same as the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
     Committee urges the Department to continue funding innovative 
     projects that work both as public and mixed-income housing as 
     well as building blocks to revitalizing neighborhoods.
       Of the amount provided under this account, $5,000,000 is 
     for a Neighborhood Networks Initiative in HOPE VI 
     developments. These are additional funds for the development 
     and operation of computer centers, and are not intended to 
     supplant grants for computer centers that are made to PHAs in 
     the normal HOPE VI process.
       The Committee has included bill language to sunset the HOPE 
     VI program on September 30, 2004. This is an important 
     program that has revitalized many distressed communities and 
     funding is expected to be included in the fiscal year 2004 
     budget. The Committee has concerns over the future and 
     mandate of the HOPE VI program. Since the inception of the 
     HOPE VI program, HUD has approved the demolition of 
     approximately 140,000 units. The Committee directs the 
     Department to submit a report by June 15, 2003, on the number 
     and location of severely distressed public housing units that 
     are in need of substantial revitalization or demolition. 
     Further, the Committee urges the Department to use the 
     lessons learned since the inception of the HOPE VI program to 
     inform its reauthorization proposal. Successful HOPE VI 
     developments have spurred the revitalization of low-income 
     neighborhoods and provided new opportunities to residents of 
     public housing. The Committee urges the Department to submit 
     legislation that would codify those practices used by PHAs 
     that have successfully implemented the HOPE VI program. The 
     Committee stresses the importance of a meaningful 
     reauthorization process, and urges the Department to work 
     with the appropriate authorizing committees to make HOPE VI a 
     viable program for future years.


                  NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$648,570,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................646,594,000
Committee recommendation....................................648,570,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This account funds the native American housing block grants 
     program, as authorized under title I of the Native American 
     Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 
     (NAHASDA). This program provides an allocation of funds on a 
     formula basis to Indian tribes and their tribally designated 
     housing entities to help them address the housing needs 
     within their communities. Under this block grant, Indian 
     tribes will use performance measures and benchmarks that are 
     consistent with the national goals of the program, but can 
     base these measures on the needs and priorities established 
     in their own Indian housing plan.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $648,570,000 for the native 
     American housing block grant, of which $5,987,000 is set 
     aside for a credit subsidy for the section 601 Loan Guarantee 
     Program. The Committee recommendation is $1,976,000 more than 
     the budget request and the same as the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level.
       The Committee believes that training and technical 
     assistance in support of NAHASDA should be shared, with 
     $2,200,000 to be administered by the National American Indian 
     Housing Council (NAIHC) and $5,000,000 by HUD in support of 
     the inspection of Indian housing units, contract expertise, 
     training and technical assistance in the training, oversight, 
     and management of Indian housing and tenant-based assistance.
       The Committee notes that there is not a requirement that 
     qualified Indian and Alaska Native owned construction 
     companies be given priority consideration in construction of 
     Indian housing. In many Indian and Native communities, the 
     unemployment rate exceeds 80 percent, and housing contracts 
     would provide much needed employment and training 
     opportunities for Native Americans living on reservations and 
     in Alaska Native villages. The Committee directs the agency 
     and its grantees to give priority consideration to qualified 
     Native owned firms in the design and construction of Indian 
     housing.


           INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,987,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This program provides access to private financing for 
     Indian families, Indian tribes and their tribally designated 
     housing entities who otherwise could not acquire housing 
     financing because of the unique status of Indian trust land. 
     As required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, this 
     account includes the subsidy costs associated with the loan 
     guarantees authorized under this program.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends $5,000,000 in program subsidies to 
     support a loan guarantee level of $197,243,000. This is 
     $987,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and the 
     same as the budget request.


              NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       This program provides access to private financing for 
     Native Hawaiians who otherwise could not acquire housing 
     financing because of the unique status of the Hawaiian Home 
     Lands as trust land. As required by the Federal Credit Reform 
     Act of 1990, this account includes the subsidy costs 
     associated with the loan guarantees authorized under this 
     program.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends $1,000,000 in program subsidies to 
     support a loan guarantee level of $39,712,000. This is the 
     same as the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and the same as 
     the budget request.

                   Community Planning and Development


          Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS [HOPWA]

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$277,432,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................292,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................292,000,000


                          Program Description

       The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS [HOPWA] 
     Program is designed to provide States and localities with 
     resources and incentives to devise long-term comprehensive 
     strategies for meeting the housing needs of persons living 
     with HIV/AIDS and their families.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $292,000,000 
     for this program, $14,568,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and the same as the budget request.
       The Committee requires HUD to allocate these funds in a 
     manner that preserves existing HOPWA programs to the extent 
     those programs are determined to be meeting the needs of 
     persons with AIDS.


            office of rural housing and economic development

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................25,000,000


                          program description

       The Office of Rural Housing and Economic Development was 
     established to ensure that the Department has a comprehensive 
     approach to rural housing and rural economic development 
     issues. The account includes funding for technical assistance 
     and capacity building in rural, underserved areas, and grants 
     for Indian tribes, State housing finance agencies, State 
     economic development agencies, rural nonprofits and rural 
     community development corporations to pursue

[[Page 1036]]

     strategies designed to meet rural housing and economic 
     development needs.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Office of 
     Rural Housing and Economic Development for fiscal year 2003 
     to support housing and economic development in rural 
     communities as defined by USDA and HUD. This funding level is 
     the same as the fiscal year 2002 level and $25,000,000 above 
     the budget request.
       The Committee does not accept the administration's 
     recommendation to eliminate funding for this program. The 
     Committee believes that the Office of Rural Housing and 
     Economic Development plays an important role in HUD's 
     community development activities. Twenty-five percent of 
     nonmetropolitan homes are renter-occupied, and the high cost 
     of housing burdens those in rural areas, as it does in urban 
     communities. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the 
     programs of the Office of Rural Housing and Economic 
     Development are sufficiently different from the housing 
     programs administered by the Department of Agriculture to 
     warrant separate appropriations.
       HUD is directed to administer this program according to 
     existing regulatory requirements. It is expected that any 
     changes to the program shall be made subject to notice and 
     comment rulemaking.


                EMPOWERMENT ZONES/ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES

Appropriations, 2002........................................$45,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................30,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Empowerment Zones/Enterprise Communities (EZ/EC) 
     program was authorized under the Omnibus Budget 
     Reconciliation Act of 1993. The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 
     later authorized two additional Round I urban EZs and 15 
     Round II urban EZs. This interagency initiative is designed 
     to create self-sustaining, long-term development in 
     distressed urban and rural areas throughout the Nation. The 
     program utilizes a combination of Federal tax incentives and 
     flexible grant funds to reinvigorate communities that have 
     been in decline for decades.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $30,000,000 
     for this program, $15,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level and $30,000,000 more than the budget request. 
     These funds will be distributed to the 15 communities that 
     received a second round EZ designation. The Committee remains 
     concerned that the previous Administration acknowledged that 
     this program was intended to be funded as a mandatory program 
     and not as an obligation of this bill. The Committee expects 
     the Senate Finance Committee to fund this program as 
     mandatory. Moreover, the Committee remains concerned over 
     accountability in this program and notes that the HUD 
     Inspector General has been critical about how communities 
     have implemented this program and used EZ funds.

                       community development fund


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002..................................\1\$5,000,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................4,732,500,000
Committee recommendation..................................5,050,000,000

\1\Does not include a $2,000,000,000 appropriation made in the 2002 
emergency supplemental bill.

                          program description

       Under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act 
     of 1974, as amended, the Department is authorized to award 
     block grants to units of general local government and States 
     for the funding of local community development programs. A 
     wide range of physical, economic, and social development 
     activities are eligible with spending priorities determined 
     at the local level, but the law enumerates general objectives 
     which the block grants are designed to fulfill, including 
     adequate housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded 
     economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and 
     moderate income. Grant recipients are required to use at 
     least 70 percent of their block grant funds for activities 
     that benefit low- and moderate-income persons.
       Funds are distributed to eligible recipients for community 
     development purposes utilizing the higher of two objective 
     formulas, one of which gives somewhat greater weight to the 
     age of housing stock. Seventy percent of appropriated funds 
     are distributed to entitlement communities and 30 percent are 
     distributed to nonentitlement communities after deducting 
     designated amounts for special purpose grants and Indian 
     tribes.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,000,000,000 
     for the Community Development Block Grant [CDBG] program in 
     fiscal year 2003. This is an increase of $267,500,000 above 
     the budget request for fiscal year 2003 and the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       The Committee has included $4,580,200,000 for community 
     development block grants (CDBG). The Committee does not 
     include funding for the Administration's Colonias Gateway 
     Initiative. The Committee encourages the Department to seek 
     an authorization of the legislation required for this 
     proposal and to perform a thorough review of the CDBG formula 
     before proposing adjustments.
       Set-asides under this account include $72,500,000 for 
     native Americans; $3,300,000 for the Housing Assistance 
     Council; $2,600,000 for the National American Indian Housing 
     Council; $35,500,000 for the National Community Development 
     Initiative; and $45,500,000 for section 107 grants, including 
     $4,000,000 to support Alaska Native-Serving Institutions and 
     Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions; $3,000,000 for 
     competitive grants awarded to Tribal Colleges and 
     Universities to build, expand, renovate, and equip their 
     facilities; $3,000,000 for community development work study, 
     $11,000,000 for historically black colleges and universities, 
     of which up to $2,000,000 is for technical assistance, 
     $7,000,000 for insular areas; and $7,500,000 for Hispanic-
     serving institutions. The Committee includes $10,000,000 for 
     assistance authorized under the Hawaiian Homelands 
     Homeownership Act of 2000 under section 107. The 
     Administration proposed to fund this program in a separate 
     account.
       In addition, this legislation includes a set-aside of 
     $130,500,000 for the Economic Development Initiative (EDI) to 
     finance efforts that promote economic and social 
     revitalization.
       At a minimum, the Secretary is directed to fund the 
     following grants as part of the economic development 
     initiative (the bill includes language that reduces these 
     grants by ten percent):
       $1,000,000 for Arkansas State University at Mountain Home 
     to develop community outreach programs;
       $1,000,000 for Clark County, Nevada for the construction of 
     a community center;
       $900,000 for the City of Riverton, Utah for reconstruction 
     of a Historic City Civic Center;
       $1,000,000 for the RMC Aviation Training Center in 
     Billings, Montana;
       $500,000 for TechRanch in Bozeman, Montana;
       $200,000 for the Bozeman Rail Depot remediation project;
       $200,000 for Baltimore Clayworks in Baltimore, Maryland to 
     expand the facility;
       $200,000 for the Audubon Center in Sandstone, Minnesota for 
     the capital construction project;
       $500,000 for Boysville of Michigan in Detroit for the 
     Samaritan Outreach Center;
       $500,000 for the Detroit Housing Group Inc., for the Alter 
     Kercheval Housing Project;
       $400,000 for the Asian Pacific Community Center in St. 
     Paul, Minnesota to create an urban village;-
       $250,000 for the Friends of Youth in Redmond, Washington 
     for the Griffin Home renovation;
       $250,000 for Horizons, Inc. in Sunnyside, Washington for 
     technology training centers;
       $400,000 for Audubon Nebraska for the Spring Creek Prairie 
     Education Center;
       $800,000 for Topeka, Kansas for redevelopment activities in 
     Topeka, Kansas;
       $800,000 for the Schenectady Municipal Housing Authority, 
     New York for community development and revitalization;
       $750,000 for the City of Daytona Beach, Florida for 
     boardwalk area revitalization;
       $600,000 for the City of Baltimore, Maryland for the Main 
     Street Initiative;
       $750,000 for the County of Hawaii for the construction of 
     an emergency homeless shelter in Kailua-Kona;
       $750,000 for the City of Cincinnati, Ohio for the 
     development of the Ohio River Trail;
       $750,000 for the city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin for the 
     Menomonee River Valley Redevelopment project;
       $700,000 for the Pojoaque Pueblo of New Mexico to complete 
     the Poeh Cultural Center and Museum;
       $700,000 for Franklin County MetroParks, Franklin County, 
     Ohio for the purchase of land in the Darby Creek Watershed;
       $700,000 for the City of Charleston, South Carolina for 
     pre- and post homeownership classes;
       $1,000,000 for the City of Columbia, South Carolina for the 
     redevelopment of the Drew Park Wellness Center;
       $1,000,000 for El Paso, Texas for the renovation of the El 
     Paso Plaza Theatre;
       $600,000 for the City of Madera, California for a community 
     cultural and youth center;
       $1,300,000 for Sevier County, Utah for development of a 
     Multi-Events Center;
       $1,000,000 for Anchorage, Alaska for an expansion of the 
     Anchorage Museum;
       $600,000 for Marguerite's Place, Nashua, New Hampshire to 
     provide transitional housing for women who are victims of 
     domestic abuse and their children;
       $600,000 for the New Jersey Community Development 
     Corporation for the Transportation Opportunity Center;
       $600,000 for the City of Portland, Oregon for a central 
     city streetcar extension;
       $200,000 for Biddeford, Maine for theater restoration;
       $200,000 for the Mississippi Tribe of Choctaw for the 
     development of a Choctaw Veterans Memorial;
       $500,000 for the Mobile Historic Development Commission in 
     Mobile, Alabama for a Neighborhood Initiative Program;
       $500,000 for the Mananuska-Susitna Borough for an 
     agricultural processing facility in Wasilla, Alaska;
       $500,000 for Ketchikan, Alaska for the Tongass Coast 
     Aquarium in Ketchikan, Alaska;

[[Page 1037]]

       $500,000 for the Southside Community Center in Fairbanks, 
     Alaska for an addition;
       $500,000 for the World War II Lend Lease Museum in 
     Anchorage, Alaska;
       $500,000 for the Arkansas YMCAs for program development;
       $500,000 for the Wilmington Housing Authority, Delaware for 
     redevelopment of blighted land;
       $500,000 for Spellman College in Atlanta, Georgia for 
     renovations of Packard Hall;
       $500,000 for the Dekalb County Community Center, Georgia 
     for the construction of a community center;
       $500,000 for the County of Kauai, Hawaii for the West Kauai 
     High Tech Training Facility;
       $1,000,000 for the City of Rugby, North Dakota to complete 
     information technology and energy projects;
       $350,000 for Providence College, Rhode Island for the 
     construction of a cultural arts center;
       $350,000 to the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board for 
     the development of affordable housing in Vergennes, Vermont;
       $1,000,000 for the North Dakota Tourism Department for the 
     Three Affiliated Tribes Interpretative Center;
       $500,000 for the Clearwater Economic Development 
     Association in Clearwater, Idaho for the Lewis and Clark 
     Bicentennial Solid Waste Disposal program;
       $400,000 for Five Rivers Community Development Corporation 
     in Georgetown, South Carolina for economic development and 
     affordable housing;
       $500,000 for Boise State University, Idaho for a Center for 
     Environmental Science and Economic Development;
       $500,000 to the City of Des Moines, Iowa for the Agriment 
     Technology Park;
       $500,000 for the City of Chicago, Illinois for cleanup 
     associated with economic development in Chicago's Pilsen/
     Little Village Community;
       $500,000 to the Chicago Park District for Phase II of Ping 
     Tom Memorial Park development in Chicago's Chinatown 
     community;
       $500,000 for the Ernest Morial New Orleans Exhibition Hall 
     Authority in Louisiana for the expansion of the Morial 
     Convention Center;
       $500,000 for the University of Louisiana, Lafayette for the 
     National Wetlands Research Center;
       $500,000 for the Biomedical Research Foundation in 
     Shreveport, Louisiana for infrastructure improvements and 
     development of an incubator;
       $500,000 for University of Maine (Fort Kent and Presque 
     Isle) Aroostook County Development Effort;
       $500,000 for the Greektown Community Development 
     Corporation in Baltimore, Maryland for the Housing and 
     Business Stabilization Project;
       $500,000 for Montgomery County, Maryland for the 
     revitalization of Fenton Street Village;
       $500,000 for Prince George's County, Maryland for 
     acquisition and rehabilitation of properties along the Route 
     1 corridor;
       $500,000 for the West Arlington Improvement Center to 
     rehabilitate a water tower and construct a new multi-purpose 
     center in Baltimore, Maryland;
       $500,000 for Anne Arundel County, Maryland for the Wiley 
     Bates High School Redevelopment project;
       $500,000 for the FOCUS: HOPE Institute in Detroit, Michigan 
     to renovate a job-training facility;
       $500,000 for the NorthStar Community Development 
     Corporation in Detroit, Michigan to build affordable housing;
       $500,000 for the Northeast Ventures Corporation in Duluth, 
     Minnesota for a revolving loan fund;
       $500,000 for the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians in Red 
     Lake, Minnesota for the construction of a criminal justice 
     complex;
       $500,000 for Tchula, Mississippi for the development of a 
     municipal complex;
       $500,000 for the City of Kewanee, Mississippi for the 
     development of the Kewanee industrial park;
       $3,000,000 for West Virginia Wesleyan College in 
     Buckhannon, West Virginia for renovation/expansion of a 
     science hall;
       $500,000 for Pearl, Mississippi for the renovation of a 
     community center;
       $500,000 for the Boathouse Museum in St. Charles, Missouri;
       $500,000 for the City of Chillicothe, Missouri for downtown 
     revitalization;
       $100,000 for Montgomery City, Missouri for streetscape 
     improvements;
       $500,000 for the Westside Housing Organization in Kansas 
     City, Missouri for the Westside Agency Collaboration;
       $500,000 for the Advanced Technology Center in Mexico, 
     Missouri for expansion;
       $500,000 for the City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri for 
     downtown revitalization;
       $500,000 for the Thomas Hill Enterprise Center in Macon, 
     Missouri to build low income housing;
       $500,000 for the Palestine Senior Citizens Center in Kansas 
     City, Missouri for the Kansas City Area Assisted Living 
     Center for the Elderly;
       $500,000 for Billings, Montana for the expansion of the 
     HRDC District 7 Building;
       $400,000 for Billings Deaconess Clinic Research Facility in 
     Billings, Montana;
       $400,000 for the Yellowstone Boys and Girls Ranch in 
     Billings, Montana for renovation;
       $500,000 for the Portsmouth Riverwalk, Portsmouth, New 
     Hampshire to assist in the creation of a safe pedestrian link 
     between scenic and historical destinations and New 
     Hampshire's only working deep water seaport;
       $500,000 for the Bayshore Senior Center in Keansburg, New 
     Jersey for renovations;
       $500,000 for the Children's Cultural Center in Red Bank, 
     New Jersey for the renovation of Shrewsbury Township Hall;
       $500,000 for the New Mexico Food Bank Association, 
     Albuquerque, New Mexico, for the Gleaning Project;
       $500,000 for the City of North Las Vegas, Nevada for 
     neighborhood redevelopment;
       $400,000 for the City of Brookings, South Dakota for 
     downtown redevelopment;
       $400,000 for the Southeast Council of Governments, South 
     Dakota to establish a revolving loan fund;
       $500,000 for Spirit Lake Tribal Court in Fort Totten, North 
     Dakota for renovations to the Spirit Lake Courthouse;
       $500,000 for the City of Dayton, Ohio for the development 
     of structures in the Main Street Historic Mission;
       $500,000 for the Lawrence Economic Development Corporation 
     for the development of the Point Commercial/Industrial Park 
     in Ohio;
       $500,000 for the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority for the 
     Northwest Ohio Brownfield Restoration Initiative;
       $500,000 for Capitol University Center, Pierre, South 
     Dakota to construct a facility for job training;
       $500,000 for Center for Rural Collaboration and 
     Partnerships for facility construction;
       $500,000 for the City of Rapid City, South Dakota to build 
     a business incubator;
       $500,000 for the City of Clark, South Dakota for 
     development of an industrial property;
       $500,000 for the City of Chattanooga, Tennessee for the 
     revitalization of Alton Park;
       $500,000 for Nashville, Tennessee for the revitalization of 
     Rolling Mill Road;
       $500,000 for Lubbock, Texas for capital needs of the 
     Lubbock Amphitheater;
       $500,000 for the Vermont Institute of Science for the 
     construction of a new public education and wildlife center;
       $500,000 for the SWIFT Cyber Corporation in Washington for 
     broadband access;
       $500,000 for the YWCA of Seattle, Washington for the YWCA 
     Opportunity Place;
       $500,000 for the city of Madison, Wisconsin for the 
     development of affordable housing;
       $450,000 for Eckerd College in St. Petersburg, Florida for 
     the expansion of the Youth Opportunity and Development 
     Center;
       $450,000 for the Discovery Center for the development of an 
     exhibit in Springfield, Missouri;
       $2,000,000 for Colorado UpLift;
       $2,000,000 for Potomac State College in Keyser, West 
     Virginia for renovation of a library;
       $2,000,000 for Glenville State College in Summersville, 
     West Virginia for the construction of a new campus community 
     education center;
       $430,000 for the Seattle Art Museum, Washington for 
     brownfields cleanup;
       $400,000 for the Town of Ledyart, Connecticut to build a 
     public safety services building;
       $400,000 for the Hartt School of Performing Arts Education 
     Center in West Hartford, Connecticut for building 
     renovations;
       $400,000 for the Riverfront Development Corporation in 
     Wilmington, Delaware for an environmental education center;
       $400,000 to the City of Council Bluffs for land acquisition 
     and clean-up;
       $400,000 to the City of Dubuque, Iowa for land acquisition 
     and clean-up;
       $400,000 to the City of Waterloo for redevelopment of the 
     Rath area brownfields and housing development;
       $1,000,000 for the University of Missouri-Kansas City for 
     academics investments related to the Cardiovascular 
     Proteomics Center; -
       $1,000,000 for Southeast Missouri State University to build 
     a small business incubator;
       $400,000 to the City of Davenport, Iowa for the Scott 
     County Housing Council trust fund;
       $400,000 for the Mercy Home for Boys and Girls in Chicago, 
     Illinois for facility expansion;
       $400,000 for the Merit School of Music in Chicago, Illinois 
     for the construction of a new facility;
       $1,000,000 for the Clearwater Economic Development 
     Association in Clearwater, Idaho for the implementation of 
     the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Plan;
       $300,000 for the City of Vidalia, Louisiana for riverfront 
     redevelopment;
       $750,000 for the County of Maui, Hawaii for senior housing;
       $750,000 for the City of St. Paul, Minnesota for 
     renovations to existing low-income housing;
       $400,000 for Bethel Outreach Center in Baltimore, Maryland 
     for development of a cyber community center;
       $400,000 for Northern Forest Heritage Park, Berlin, New 
     Hampshire to help create heritage based tourism and regional 
     economic development;
       $400,000 for the Mines Falls Park Restoration, Nashua, New 
     Hampshire to restore historic gatehouse and assist in 
     developing an educational resource center;

[[Page 1038]]

       $400,000 for Capitol Center for the Arts, Concord, New 
     Hampshire to enhance programming and make renovations to the 
     facility;
       $400,000 for the Urban League State Council in New 
     Brunswick, New Jersey for the New Futures Projects;
       $100,000 for the Carving Studio in West Rutland, Vermont 
     for building renovations;
       $100,000 for the City of Forks, Washington for 
     telecommunications initiatives;
       $400,000 for Willingboro Township, New Jersey for the 
     Kennedy Senior Center construction project;
       $400,000 for the Pueblo of Cochiti, New Mexico for the 
     construction of a community center;
       $400,000 for Turtle Mountain Community College in Belcourt, 
     North Dakota to complete construction of an economic 
     development complex;
       $200,000 for the Meeting Street School in Providence, Rhode 
     Island for the construction of a National Center of 
     Excellence;
       $200,000 for St. Elizabeth's Home in Providence, Rhode 
     Island for low-income assisted living;
       $400,000 for New Economy Initiative in North Dakota for 
     technology training;
       $400,000 for the Rhode Island Community Food Bank in 
     Providence for a new warehouse facility;
       $400,000 for the City of Vermillion, South Dakota for a 
     business incubator;
       $400,000 for the City of Burlington, Vermont for 
     neighborhood revitalization;
       $400,000 for the Lund Family Center in Burlington, Vermont 
     for building renovations;
       $400,000 for the Town of Madison, Wisconsin for the 
     Novation Technology Campus;
       $350,000 for the Western Massachusetts Enterprise Fund, 
     Inc.'s small business and microenterprise loan and 
     development programs;
       $350,000 for the Missouri School Board Association for the 
     C.L.A.S.S. Program;
       $500,000 for the Alternative Structures International in 
     Waianae, Hawaii for expansion of housing facilities;
       $500,000 for the City of Wichita, Kansas for the 
     development of Mennonite Housing;
       $350,000 for the Center for Economic Growth in Albany, New 
     York for the Regional Technology Roadmap project;
       $350,000 for the Erie Municipal Airport Authority for the 
     redevelopment of the recently acquired, former Fenestra 
     window manufacturing facility in Erie, Pennsylvania, to serve 
     the needs of major air express carriers as an on-airport 
     integrated service center;
       $300,000 for Haleyville, Alabama for a downtown 
     revitalization project;
       $300,000 for the Florence Crittenden Home in Little Rock, 
     Arkansas for the expansion of services, education programs, 
     and emergency shelter;
       $300,000 for the Wadsworth Atheneum in Hartford, 
     Connecticut for expansions and renovations;
       $3,000,000 to Tuscaloosa, Alabama for the Tuscaloosa 
     Downtown Revitalization Project;
       $300,000 for Hall Neighborhood House in Bridgeport, 
     Connecticut to build a child care center;
       $300,000 for the Jacksonville Port Authority, Florida for 
     brownfields clean-up;
       $300,000 for College Partners Inc. in Atlanta, Georgia for 
     neighborhood revitalization;
       $300,000 for the Tubman Museum in Macon, Georgia for a new 
     facility;
       $300,000 for the Nanakuli Neighborhood in Oahu, Hawaii for 
     housing management classes;
       $300,000 for the State of Hawaii for the Boys and Girls 
     Club of Hawaii;
       $300,000 to the City of Clinton, Iowa for development in 
     the business park area;
       $300,000 to the Mid-American Housing Partnership in Cedar 
     Rapids, Iowa for the Housing Trust Fund;
       $900,000 for the South Carolina Association of Community 
     Development Corporations in Charleston for job training;
       $1,000,000 for the City of Summersville, West Virginia for 
     the expansion of the National Guard Readiness Center;
       $300,000 to the City of Cedar Rapids, Iowa for brownfields 
     redevelopment;
       $450,000 for the Audubon Nature Institute in New Orleans, 
     Louisiana for revitalization of a historic building;
       $300,000 for Mott Community College in Flint, Michigan to 
     develop a program and curriculum to improve workforce and 
     manufacturing development;
       $300,000 for Pinola, Mississippi for the renovation of the 
     historic Pinola School House;
       $300,000 for Natchez, Mississippi for the development of 
     the Natchez-Adams County industrial park;
       $300,000 for Petosi/Washington County Industrial 
     Development Authority for the Petosi Industrial Park.
       $300,000 for the City of Omaha, Nebraska for the creation 
     of information technology training;
       $300,000 for Strawberry Banke, Portsmouth, New Hampshire to 
     assist in the design and planning of programming and create 
     partnerships with neighborhood associations and organizations 
     for disadvantaged youth;
       $300,000 for the Borough of Paulsboro, New Jersey for 
     brownfields redevelopment;
       $300,000 for the Community Pantry in Gallup, New Mexico;
       $300,000 for the Boys and Girls Club of Santa Fe, New 
     Mexico for the construction of a facility;
       $300,000 for Chautauqua County, New York for high-speed, 
     broadband fiber installation;
       $300,000 for the Cleveland Foodbank for the development of 
     a new food distribution center;
       $300,000 for Crook County, Oregon to construct a human 
     services building;
       $300,000 for the City of Dalles, Oregon for the 
     construction of the Dalles riverfront access project in 
     Oregon;
       $300,000 for the Community Initiatives Development 
     Corporation, Our City Reading, for the rehabilitation of 
     abandoned houses and parks in Reading, Pennsylvania, to 
     provide quality home ownership opportunities to low-income 
     families;
       $300,000 for Lehigh County, Pennsylvania to construct a 
     Regional Public Training Facility, which will provide 
     services, programs and cross training to professional and 
     volunteer service providers;
       $250,000 for the Mystic Valley Development Corporation in 
     Medford, Massachusetts for the development of a technology 
     and research center;
       $250,000 for the New Bedford Historical Society for the 
     rehabilitation and restoration of the Nathan and Polly 
     Johnson House;
       $300,000 for the City of Sturgis, South Dakota for the 
     construction of a community library;
       $300,000 for the City of Orem, Utah for improvement of 
     Nielsen's Grove Historical Park;
       $300,000 to the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board for 
     rehabilitation and construction of affordable housing in the 
     historic Tuttle Building in Rutland, Vermont;
       $300,000 to the City of Burlington for construction of the 
     Intervale Food Enterprise Center in Burlington, Vermont;
       $300,000 for the Vermont Development Initiative to expand 
     their services throughout Vermont;
       $300,000 for the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board in 
     Stowe, Vermont for the creation of affordable housing;
       $300,000 for the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board in 
     Newport, Vermont for the expansion of affordable senior 
     housing;
       $250,000 for the City of Talladega, Alabama for the 
     restoration of the Historic Antique Talladega;
       $250,000 for Covenant House California in Oakland to 
     purchase and renovate a building;
       $250,000 to the Martin Luther King Jr., Freedom Center in 
     Oakland, California to build a community center;
       $250,000 to the Los Angeles Theatre Group in Culver City, 
     California for building renovations;
       $250,000 for the Corporation for Supportive Housing in 
     California for a homeless intervention program;
       $250,000 for Lewis-Clark State College for the Idaho 
     Virtual Incubator;
       $250,000 for the Historic Silver City Foundation in Silver 
     City, Idaho for the restoration of the historic Silver City 
     School;
       $250,000 for the Youth Services Bureau of Illinois in 
     LaSalle County for improvements and relocation of facilities;
       $1,000,000 for Alaska Pacific University for the 
     restoration of an historic property in Anchorage, Alaska;
       $1,000,000 for Petersburgh, Alaska for waterfront 
     improvements;
       $250,000 for Cornerstone Services in Joliet, Illinois for 
     renovation of facility;
       $250,000 for the City of Quincy, Illinois to renovate the 
     historic downtown Washington Theatre;
       $250,000 for the City of Peoria, Illinois for 
     infrastructure improvements to foster economic development in 
     the biosciences field;
       $250,000 for Dillard University, New Orleans, Louisiana for 
     the International Center for Economic Freedom;
       $250,000 for Advocates for Science and Math Education, New 
     Orleans, Louisiana for construction of a building for the New 
     Orleans Center for Science and Math;
       $250,000 for the City of Westbrook, Maine for a parking 
     facility;
       $250,000 for the City of Brewer, Maine for waterfront 
     redevelopment;
       $250,000 for the Preble Street Resource Center in Maine for 
     a homeless teen center and health clinic;
       $250,000 for the Piscataquis County Economic Development 
     Council for a business incubator in Greenville, Maine to 
     support and house businesses seeking to commercialize wood 
     composite material;
       $250,000 for Harford County, Maryland for a digital 
     inclusion project in Edgewood;
       $250,000 for the Suitland Family and Life Development 
     Corporation in Suitland, Maryland for development of the 
     Suitland Technology Center;
       $250,000 for Montgomery County, Maryland for facade 
     improvements and streetscaping in Wheaton;
       $250,000 for Montgomery County, Maryland for the 
     construction of community centers in Long Branch;
       $500,000 for the City of Worcester, Massachusetts for 
     neighborhood revitalization and redevelopment;
       $500,000 for the City of Boston, Massachusetts for 
     development of low and moderate income housing;

[[Page 1039]]

       $250,000 for Neighborhood House in St. Paul, Minnesota to 
     construct a new city center;
       $250,000 for the City of Warrensberg, Missouri for downtown 
     revitalization;
       $250,000 for the City of Beloit, New Hampshire for 
     neighborhood redevelopment;
       $250,000 for the City of Grove City, Ohio for the 
     development of the All Children Adventure Playground at Fryer 
     Park;
       $250,000 for the Providence Public Library, Rhode Island 
     for the South Providence Branch renovation;
       $250,000 for the Town of Glocester, Rhode Island for the 
     Glocester Senior Center;
       $250,000 to the Vermont Broadband Council to promote 
     broadband accessibility throughout Vermont;
       $250,000 for Mary Baldwin College in Staunton, Virginia for 
     the Center for the Exceptionally Gifted;
       $250,000 for Transitions in Spokane, Washington to purchase 
     a building for the Women's Drop in Center;
       $250,000 for Kent Youth and Family Services in Kent, 
     Washington to build two new community centers;
       $250,000 for the Port of Chelan in Wenatchee, Washington to 
     complete the construction of a community technology center;
       $750,000 for the City of East Palo Alto, California for 
     redevelopment to Ravenswood Industrial Area;
       $250,000 for the Washington State Office of Community 
     Development for a planning and development resource center;
       $250,000 for the YWCA of Milwaukee, Wisconsin for the 
     rehabilitation of two central city properties;
       $500,000 for the City of Inglewood, California for the 
     construction of a senior center;
       $500,000 for the City of Fresno, California for the 
     redevelopment of the Roeding Business Park;
       $250,000 for city of Burlington, Wisconsin for development 
     of the Bel-Mur site;
       $250,000 for the city of Beloit, Wisconsin for the 
     renovation of abandoned Beloit Corporation land;
       $250,000 for the City of Eau Claire, Wisconsin for downtown 
     revitalization;
       $225,000 for the Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny 
     County, Pennsylvania for the redevelopment of the East 
     Commerce Center, which will assist in the cost assessment, 
     remediation and demolition of existing blighted buildings and 
     tenant relocation costs;
       $220,000 for the Sankofa Community Development Corporation 
     in Baltimore, Maryland to renovate a building for a business 
     center;
       $200,000 for Lawson State Community College in Alabama for 
     an information technology training and placement service 
     center;
       $200,000 for the City of Dermott, Arkansas for the Dermott 
     City Community Nursing Home expansion;
       $200,000 for the Seaford Historical Society in Seaford, 
     Delaware for the renovation of a vacant property;
       $200,000 for the Waianae Coast Comprehensive Health Center 
     for construction of an expanded facility;
       $200,000 for the City of Freeport, Illinois for a new 
     library building;
       $200,000 for the City of Shreveport, Louisiana for the 
     redevelopment of a bus terminal;
       $200,000 for Lewiston, Maine for the Franco-American 
     Heritage Center;
       $200,000 for Eastern Maine Technical College for a 
     technical resource center;
       $1,500,000 for Newport News, Virginia for the development 
     of the Newport News Fine Arts Center;
       $900,000 to the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board for 
     infrastructure improvements and other costs related to the 
     development of affordable housing on Depot Street in 
     Burlington, Vermont;
       $200,000 for the Forum Francophone Des Affaires, Maine to 
     facilitate exports to French-speaking markets;
       $200,000 for the University of Maine at Farmington for an 
     education center;
       $200,000 for Jackson, Mississippi for the development of 
     the Farish Street Historic Center;
       $200,000 for Nashua downtown public investment initiative, 
     City of Nashua Community Development, Nashua, New Hampshire, 
     to revitalize the downtown community;
       $200,000 for The State University of New York at Potsdam 
     for the Northern New York Data Center;
       $1,000,000 for the City of Reno, Nevada for the 
     rehabilitation of a building for a senior center;
       $1,000,000 for the Show-Me Aquatic Center in Missouri for 
     development;
       $200,000 for the City of Albany, New York for the Palace 
     Theatre Renovation project; --
       $200,000 for the Tri-County Community College in Murphy, 
     North Carolina to build a TeleCenter;
       $200,000 for the North Carolina Rural Economic Development 
     Center in Eastern to provide housing construction and repair 
     in rural communities;
       $200,000 for the Rogers Regional Performing Arts Center 
     Consortium in Shelby, North Carolina for the Rogers Theatre;
       $200,000 for the Morton County Park District, North Dakota 
     for the Missouri River Trail project;
       $200,000 for Wasco County, Oregon for the development of a 
     fiber optic system;
       $200,000 for the City of Newberg, Oregon for the 
     development of a Community and Family Resource Center;
       $200,000 to the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to 
     support the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, which 
     will demolish abandoned homes as well as revitalize the 
     Philadelphia region;
       $200,000 to the City of Scranton, Pennsylvania for the 
     revitalization of existing vacant and dilapidated buildings 
     in the downtown area;
       $200,000 for the Tides Family Services in Providence and 
     Pawtucket, Rhode Island to acquire and renovate two 
     buildings;
       $200,000 for the Park-McCullough House in North Bennington, 
     Vermont for preservation of property;
       $200,000 for the Rural and Farmworker Housing Trust in 
     Washington for farmworker housing;
       $200,000 for the Squaxin Island tribe in Shelton, 
     Washington for the Squaxin Island Museum, Library and 
     Research Center;
       $1,000,000 for the City of Detroit, Michigan to redevelop 
     the Detroit River Promenade;
       $1,000,000 for Alcorn State University, Mississippi for the 
     construction and rehabilitation of buildings;
       $200,000 for the Wenatchee Valley College Foundation in 
     Wenatchee, Washington to complete construction of the 
     Institute for Rural Innovation and Stewardship;
       $175,000 for the Dorcas Place Adult and Family Learning 
     Center in Providence, Rhode Island for facility expansion;
       $175,000 for the International Institute of Rhode Island 
     for the International Charter School to expand its facility;
       $1,000,000 for the Denver Art Museum, in Denver, Colorado;
       $200,000 for the Mohawk Valley Heritage Corridor Commission 
     in Canajoharie, New York for the Heritage in Upstate New York 
     project;
       $1,000,000 for the City of Madison, Mississippi for 
     downtown renovation;
       $1,000,000 for Ebenezer Baptists Church in Atlanta, Georgia 
     for the continued construction of a senior center;
       $175,000 for the Abilene, Texas for the rehabilitation of 
     the Matera Paper Building, including land acquisition;
       $150,000 for Huntsville, Alabama for development of the 
     Alabama Constitution Village Plaza;
       $100,000 for the City of Opelousas, Louisiana, for downtown 
     development;
       $150,000 for Harford County, Maryland for the Edgewood 
     Mobile Community Substation;
       $150,000 for Assumption College, Worcester, Massachusetts 
     for a science and technology center;
       $150,000 for Universal Community Homes in Philadelphia, 
     Pennsylvania, to continue the conversion of more than 500 
     parcels of land into for-sale units to low- and moderate-
     income families;
       $100,000 for the Las Cruces Police Athletic League for the 
     repair, remodeling and renovation of the facility housing the 
     Sammy Burke Youth Boxing Center and a vehicle to serve the 
     Center and the Police Athletic League Boxing Club in Las 
     Cruces, New Mexico;
       $900,000 for the construction, renovation, and restoration 
     of the historic Rio Grande Theater in Las Cruces, New Mexico, 
     as planned by the Dona Ana Arts Council, Inc;
       $1,000,000 for the Mesilla Valley Community of Hope, Las 
     Cruces, New Mexico for the Casa de Peregrinos Building;
       $150,000 to the Ogontz Avenue Revitalization Corporation in 
     Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to assist with substantial 
     rehabilitation of severely deteriorated vacant properties 
     that will be developed as a part of the West Oak Lane 
     community development rebuilding initiative;
       $150,000 to the Philadelphia Martin Luther King Center for 
     Nonviolence in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for the College for 
     Teens Program;
       $150,000 for the City of Freeman, South Dakota for the 
     construction of a community library;
       $150,000 for the City of Canton, South Dakota for 
     renovations for the conversion of the train depot for 
     economic development;
       $150,000 for the city of Racine, Wisconsin for neighborhood 
     redevelopment.
       $125,000 for the Nellie Byers Training Center in Bogalusa, 
     Louisiana for the construction of a new center;
       $125,000 for Strength Incorporated's Project Blanket in 
     Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for a drug and alcohol prevention 
     program for juveniles in jail;
       $3,000,000 for construction of the University of Louisville 
     library in Louisville, Kentucky;
       $125,000 to the National Trust for Historic Gettysburg for 
     the restoration of the historic Majestic Theater in 
     Gettysburg, Pennsylvania;
       $125,000 to the Westmoreland County Industrial Development 
     Corporation for initiation of the second phase of the 
     Westmoreland Technology Park in Westmoreland County, 
     Pennsylvania;
       $125,000 to the Invest Erie Community Development 
     Corporation for the acquisition and development of property 
     in Erie, Pennsylvania to establish a Parade Street Plaza;
       $100,000 for the City of Prattville, Alabama for the Boys 
     and Girls Club of Prattville;

[[Page 1040]]

       $100,000 for the Arcata House Inc., California for facility 
     renovations;
       $100,000 for Claremont downtown revitalization, City of 
     Claremont, New Hampshire to assist the city in improving and 
     redeveloping the downtown area;
       $100,000 for Winchester economic revitalization, Town of 
     Winchester, New Hampshire to assist the community in 
     redeveloping its downtown area;
       $100,000 for Hood River, Oregon for an Integrated 
     Technology Center;
       $100,000 for the Santo Community Center in Medford, Oregon;
       $100,000 to the City of Philadelphia for the rehabilitation 
     of the Royal Theater, which will serve as an anchor in the 
     emerging African American Cultural and Entertainment 
     District;
       $100,000 to the Philadelphia Chinatown Development 
     Corporation for the construction of a Chinatown Community 
     Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
       $100,000 for the West Warwick Police Department in Rhode 
     Island to create a community center and park;
       $100,000 for the Warwick Shelter Incorporated in Rhode 
     Island to purchase a new facility;
       $100,000 for the Providence Black Repertory Theatre in 
     Rhode Island for renovations to an abandoned building;
       $100,000 for Festival Ballet Providence, Rhode Island for 
     educational programs and a new facility;
       $100,000 to the Northeastern Vermont Development 
     Association to support the Northeast Kingdom Enterprise 
     Collaborative and the Northeast Kingdom REAP zone in 
     promoting economic development throughout the region;
       $825,000 for Fort Worth, Texas for the revitalization of 
     the Fort Worth Polytechnic Heights Historic Commercial and 
     Educational Center;
       $3,000,000 for Wakpa Sica Historical Society in Fort 
     Pierre, South Dakota for the Wakpa Sica Reconciliation 
     Center;
       $100,000 for the Elks Club of Pierce and Thurston Counties 
     in Tacoma, Washington for the Toys for Disabled Youth 
     Project;
       $100,000 for the Washington State Rural Development Council 
     for the Rural Community Assessment Project;
       $100,000 for the Lummi Indian Nation for planning and 
     development of the Semiahmah Memorial and Coast Salish 
     Heritage Park;
       $100,000 for the Burleigh Street CDC in Milwaukee, 
     Wisconsin for a community and enterprise center;
       $100,000 for the Genesis Foundation of Madison, Wisconsin 
     for the South Madison Incubator;
       $75,000 for Oakridge, Oregon for the development of the 
     Oakridge Community Center;
       $75,000 for Deschutes County, Oregon for the renovation of 
     the Tower Theatre;
       $75,000 to the Redevelopment Authority of Cumberland County 
     for the conversion of the Molly Pitcher Hotel in Carlisle, 
     Pennsylvania into apartments for senior citizens who require 
     services to live independently;
       $75,000 to the Philadelphia Commerce Department for the 
     redevelopment of the former Schmidt's Brewery site in the 
     Northern Liberties section of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
       $50,000 for the Children's Therapy and Early Education 
     School in Mexico, Missouri for Mexico Special Needs Kids 
     equipment;
       $50,000 for program and technology initiatives of the 
     Oregon Historical Society;
       $125,000 for the Community Empowerment Association's 
     ``Friend-2-Friend'' Mentoring Program in Pittsburgh, 
     Pennsylvania which will provide mentoring for at-risk youth 
     aged 12 to 15.
       The Committee includes $65,000,000 for the Youthbuild 
     program, of which $10,000,000 is for new programs in 
     underserved and rural areas and $2,000,000 is for capacity 
     building by Youthbuild USA.
       The Committee includes $22,000,000 for the Self Help 
     Homeownership Opportunity Program.
       The Committee includes $2,000,000 for the Girl Scouts of 
     the USA for youth development initiatives in public housing.
       The Committee includes $2,000,000 for the Boys and Girls 
     Clubs of America for the operating and start-up costs of 
     clubs located in or near, and primarily serving residents of, 
     public and Indian housing.


         COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Limitation on
                                     guarantee loans     Program costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002..............       $608,696,000        $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.............        275,000,000          6,325,000
Committee recommendation..........        608,696,000         15,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1974, as amended, authorizes the Secretary to issue Federal 
     loan guarantees of private market loans used by entitlement 
     and non-entitlement communities to cover the costs of 
     acquiring real property, rehabilitation of publicly-owned 
     real property, housing rehabilitation, and other economic 
     development activities.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,000,000 
     for program costs associated with the section 108 loan 
     guarantee program. This amount is the same as the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level and $7,715,000 more than the budget 
     request. Of the funds provided, $14,000,000 is for credit 
     subsidy costs to guarantee $608,696,000 in section 108 loan 
     commitments in fiscal year 2003, and $1,000,000 is for 
     administrative expenses to be transferred to the salaries and 
     expenses account.


                       BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................25,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................25,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       Section 108(q) of the Housing and Community Development Act 
     of 1974, as amended, authorizes the Brownfields Redevelopment 
     program. This program provides competitive economic 
     development grants in conjunction with section 108 loan 
     guarantees for qualified brownfields projects. Grants are 
     made in accordance with section 108(q) selection criteria. 
     The program supports the cleanup and economic redevelopment 
     of contaminated sites.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,000,000 
     for this program. This amount is the same as the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level and the budget request. In order to allow 
     greater flexibility, Brownfields funds are no longer required 
     to be tied to section 108 development funding.

                  home investment partnerships program


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,846,040,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,084,100,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,950,000,000

                          program description

       Title II of the National Affordable Housing Act, as 
     amended, authorizes the HOME Investment Partnerships Program. 
     This program provides assistance to States and units of local 
     government for the purpose of expanding the supply and 
     affordability of housing to low- and very low-income people. 
     Eligible activities include tenant-based rental assistance, 
     acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable rental and 
     ownership housing and, also, construction of housing. To 
     participate in the HOME program, State and local governments 
     must develop a comprehensive housing affordability strategy. 
     There is a 25-percent matching requirement for participating 
     jurisdictions which can be reduced or eliminated if they are 
     experiencing fiscal distress.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,950,000,000 
     for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program. This amount is 
     $103,960,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
     $134,100,000 less than the budget request.
       The Committee did not include any funds for the 
     administration's proposed American Dream Downpayment Fund. 
     The Committee supports expanding homeownership opportunities, 
     but remains concerned that this program lacks authorization 
     and may constrain the ability of local communities to 
     determine how best to use HOME funds. The Committee supports 
     any efforts the Department may undertake to educate 
     communities on how to use HOME funds to expand homeownership, 
     and encourages the Department to use its technical assistance 
     funds towards this end. The Committee also reminds HUD that 
     technical assistance funds available under this heading 
     should be used to provide both Community Housing Development 
     Organization (CHDO) and HOME technical assistance.
       Of the amount provided for the HOME program, $40,000,000 is 
     for housing counseling assistance. The Committee does not 
     fund housing assistance counseling in a new account, as 
     proposed by the administration. Funding for housing 
     counseling assistance has been doubled from the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level. The Committee views homeownership 
     counseling, including pre- and post-purchase counseling, as 
     an essential part of successful homeownership. The Committee 
     expects that this program will remain available to those 
     participating in all of HUD's homeownership programs. The 
     Committee urges HUD to utilize this program as a means of 
     educating homebuyers on the dangers of predatory lending, in 
     addition to the administration's stated purpose of expanding 
     homeownership opportunities.


                       HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,122,525,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,129,500,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,215,025,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The ``Homeless Assistance Grants Program'' account funds 
     the emergency shelter grants program, the supportive housing 
     program, the section 8 moderate rehabilitation single-room 
     occupancy program, and the shelter plus care program.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $1,215,025,000 for homeless 
     assistance grants. The amount

[[Page 1041]]

     recommended is $92,500,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
     appropriated level and $85,525,000 more than the budget 
     request. Of the amount provided, $193,000,000 is to fund 
     Shelter Plus Care renewals on an annual basis and $17,600,000 
     is for technical assistance and management information 
     system.
       The Committee also has provided funds for the Interagency 
     Council on the Homeless through a new account established 
     under title III of this bill.
       The Committee continues to believe that HUD and local 
     providers need to increase, over time, the supply of 
     permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless, 
     chronically ill people until the need is met at an estimated 
     150,000 units. Accordingly, the Committee again includes a 
     requirement that a minimum of 30 percent of the funds 
     appropriated under this account be allocated to permanent 
     housing. To this end, the Committee urges the Department to 
     use its technical assistance funds to increase the capacity 
     of homeless assistance providers to finance, develop, and 
     operate permanent supportive housing.
       The Committee is concerned that the Department is not 
     taking the proper steps to ensure that Shelter Plus Care 
     units are targeted to chronically homeless individuals. The 
     Committee recognizes that the goal of creating 150,000 units 
     of permanent supportive housing will not succeed in ending 
     chronic homelessness if the Shelter Plus Care units are not 
     properly targeted. The Committee directs the Department to 
     report to the Committee by June 15, 2003 on how it is 
     ensuring that Shelter Plus Care grants are made to providers 
     serving chronically disabled, chronically homeless people.
       The Committee remains supportive of the Department's 
     ongoing work on data collection and analysis within the 
     homeless programs. HUD should continue its collaborative 
     efforts with local jurisdictions to collect an array of data 
     on homelessness in order to analyze patterns of use of 
     assistance, including how people enter and exit the homeless 
     assistance system, and to assess the effectiveness of the 
     homeless assistance system. The Committee directs HUD to take 
     the lead in working with communities toward this end, and to 
     analyze jurisdictional data within 1 year. The Committee 
     directs HUD to report on the progress of this data collection 
     and analysis effort by no later than May 12, 2003.
       The Committee remains concerned about the out-year costs of 
     renewing permanent housing programs. Therefore, the Committee 
     directs the Department to include 5-year projections, on an 
     annual basis, for the cost of renewing the permanent housing 
     component of the Supportive Housing Program and Shelter Plus 
     Care grants in its fiscal year 2004 budget justifications. 
     This legislation includes a new provision requiring HUD to 
     include individual line requests for all housing assistance 
     renewal requirements, including the amounts needed for 
     expiring Supportive Housing Program and Shelter Plus Care 
     grants.
       The Committee is aware that HUD did not fund, all or part, 
     of the State of Iowa Continuum of Care application for fiscal 
     year 2002 because a number of pages were not present in the 
     application as reviewed. While there are differences of 
     opinion regarding the responsibility for the missing pages, 
     this result would seem to be a case of form over substance 
     with HUD apparently rejecting the application over the 
     missing pages. Nevertheless, the Committee understands that 
     the failure to fund the application will result in a large 
     number of homeless individuals, including over 300 children, 
     losing housing and supportive services without which their 
     health and perhaps lives will be at risk. The Committee, 
     therefore, directs HUD to quickly review the full application 
     and make an award under the same process that was applied to 
     other homeless grant requests with available Continuum of 
     Care funds.


                   EMERGENCY FOOD AND SHELTER PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003......................................$153,000,000
Committee recommendation...............................................


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Emergency Food and Shelter Program originated as a one-
     time emergency appropriation to combat the effects of high 
     unemployment in the emergency jobs bill (Public Law 98-8) 
     which was enacted in March 1983. It was authorized under 
     title III of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act 
     of 1987, Public Law 100-177.
       The program has been funded by the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency (FEMA) and administered by a national board 
     and the majority of the funding has been spent for providing 
     temporary food and shelter for the homeless. Participating 
     organizations are restricted by legislation from spending 
     more than 3.5 percent of the funding received for 
     administrative costs.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee does not include the Administration's 
     proposal to transfer the Emergency Food and Shelter Program 
     from FEMA to HUD. The Emergency Food and Shelter Program is 
     successfully administered at FEMA, and the Committee does not 
     concur that there is a compelling reason to disrupt the 
     program by transferring it. The Committee has provided 
     funding for this program within FEMA.

                            Housing Programs


                    Housing for special Populations

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$1,024,151,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,024,151,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,033,801,000


                          Program Description

       This account consolidates the housing for the elderly under 
     section 202 and housing for the disabled under section 811. 
     Under these programs, the Department provides capital grants 
     to eligible entities for the acquisition, rehabilitation, or 
     construction of housing. Up to 25 percent of the funding 
     provided for housing for the disabled may be made available 
     for tenant-based assistance under section 8.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,033,801,000 
     for development of additional new subsidized housing. 
     Included in this recommendation is $783,286,000 for capital 
     advances for housing for the elderly (section 202 housing) 
     and $250,515,000 for capital advances for housing for the 
     disabled (section 811 housing). This is $9,650,000 more than 
     the budget request for fiscal year 2002. This represents an 
     increase of $9,650,000 for section 202 above fiscal year 2002 
     level, including recaptures, and an increase of $9,650,000 
     for section 811 over the fiscal year 2002 level. Up to 25 
     percent of the funding allocated for housing for the disabled 
     can be used to fund tenant-based rental assistance for the 
     disabled.
       The section 202 funds include up to $50,000,000 for the 
     conversion of section 202 housing to assisted living 
     facilities, and up to $53,000,000 for service coordinators. 
     HUD is directed to report by June 15, 2003 to the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations on the status of the 
     conversion program, including what steps are being taken to 
     ensure funds are being utilized.
       The Committee is concerned about the growing costs of 
     renewal contracts within the elderly and disabled housing 
     programs. This legislation includes a new provision requiring 
     HUD to include individual line requests for all housing 
     assistance renewal requirements, including the amounts needed 
     for expiring elderly and disabled housing contracts.


                         FLEXIBLE SUBSIDY FUND

                          (TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

                          program description

       The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 authorized 
     HUD to establish a revolving fund into which rental 
     collections in excess of the established basic rents for 
     units in section 236 subsidized projects are deposited. 
     Subject to approval in appropriations acts, the Secretary is 
     authorized under the Housing and Community Development 
     Amendment of 1978 to transfer excess rent collections 
     received after 1978 to the Troubled Projects Operating 
     Subsidy program, renamed the Flexible Subsidy Fund.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends that the account continue to serve 
     as a repository of excess rental charges appropriated from 
     the Rental Housing Assistance Fund. Although these resources 
     will not be used for new reservations, they will continue to 
     offset Flexible Subsidy outlays and other discretionary 
     expenditures.


                       RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE

                          program description

       The section 236 Rental Housing Assistance Program is 
     authorized by the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, 
     as amended. The section 236 program subsidizes the monthly 
     mortgage payment that an owner of a rental or cooperative 
     project is required to make. This interest subsidy reduces 
     rents for lower income tenants. Title V of the 1998 
     Appropriations Act established a program of rehabilitation 
     grants for owners of eligible projects.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee has included a provision that directs HUD to 
     make $100,000,000 from contract authority in excess of 
     required payments for fiscal year 2003 available for the 
     capital costs of rehabilitation for projects eligible under 
     section 236(s) of the National Housing Act. The Committee 
     believes that these funds should be dedicated to the 
     rehabilitation of HUD assisted housing, including housing for 
     elderly and disabled people.


                  MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND

Appropriations, 2002........................................$13,566,000
Budget request, 2002.........................................13,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................13,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety 
     Standards Act of 1974, as amended by the Manufactured Housing 
     Improvement Act of 2000, authorizes the Secretary to 
     establish Federal manufactured home construction and safety 
     standards for the construction, design, and performance of 
     manufactured homes. All manufactured homes are required to 
     meet the Federal standards, and fees are charged to producers 
     to cover the costs of administering the Act.

[[Page 1042]]




                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $13,000,000 to support the 
     manufactured housing standards programs to be derived from 
     fees collected and deposited in the Manufactured Housing Fees 
     Trust Fund account. The amount recommended is the same as the 
     budget request and $556,000 less than the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level.

                     federal housing administration

               mutual mortgage insurance program account


                     (including transfers of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Limitation on       Limitation on      Administrative
                                                         direct loans      guaranteed loans        expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002................................        $250,000,000    $160,000,000,000        $336,700,000
Budget estimate, 2003...............................          50,000,000     160,000,000,000         347,829,000
Committee recommendation............................         250,000,000     160,000,000,000         347,829,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                     GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Limitation on     Limitation on    Administrative
                                            direct loans    guaranteed loans      expenses        Program costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002....................       $50,000,000   $21,000,000,000      $216,100,000       $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................        50,000,000    21,000,000,000       223,716,400        15,000,000
Committee recommendation................        50,000,000    21,000,000,000       223,716,400        15,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

       The Federal Housing Administration [FHA] fund covers the 
     mortgage and loan insurance activity of about 40 HUD 
     mortgage/loan insurance programs which are grouped into the 
     mutual mortgage insurance [MMI] fund, cooperative management 
     housing insurance [CMHI] fund, general insurance fund [GI] 
     fund, and the special risk insurance [SRI] fund. For 
     presentation and accounting control purposes, these are 
     divided into two sets of accounts based on shared 
     characteristics. The unsubsidized insurance programs of the 
     mutual mortgage insurance fund and the cooperative management 
     housing insurance fund constitute one set; and the general 
     risk insurance and special risk insurance funds, which are 
     partially composed of subsidized programs, make up the other.
       The amounts for administrative expenses are to be 
     transferred from appropriations made in the FHA program 
     accounts to the HUD ``Salaries and expenses'' accounts. 
     Additionally, funds are also appropriated for administrative 
     contract expenses for FHA activities.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee has included the following amounts for the 
     ``Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program'' account: a limitation 
     on guaranteed loans of $160,000,000,000, a limitation on 
     direct loans of $250,000,000, and an appropriation of 
     $347,829,000 for administrative expenses. For the GI/SRI 
     account, the Committee recommends $21,000,000,000 as a 
     limitation on guaranteed loans, a limitation on direct loans 
     of $50,000,000, and $223,716,400 for administrative expenses. 
     The administrative expenses appropriation will be transferred 
     and merged with the sums in the Department's ``Salaries and 
     expenses'' account and the ``Office of the Inspector 
     General'' account.
       In addition, the Committee directs HUD to continue direct 
     loan programs in 2003 for multifamily bridge loans and single 
     family purchase money mortgages to finance the sale of 
     certain properties owned by the Department. Temporary 
     financing shall be provided for the acquisition and 
     rehabilitation of multifamily projects by purchasers who have 
     obtained commitments for permanent financing from another 
     lender. Purchase money mortgages will enable governmental and 
     nonprofit intermediaries to acquire properties for resale to 
     owner-occupants in areas undergoing revitalization.
       The Committee included the ``Credit Watch Act of 2001'' in 
     the fiscal year 2002 enacted bill in order to ensure that HUD 
     could maintain its Federal Housing Administration (FHA) 
     lender oversight program. The Committee notes that FHA 
     continues to be a significant engine of homeownership for low 
     income, minority, and first time homebuyers. However, in some 
     cases and in certain neighborhoods, FHA has been misused to 
     underwrite bad loans that lead to defaults and foreclosed 
     homes, contributing to neighborhood decline and 
     destabilization. Defaulted FHA properties sit vacant for 242 
     days, on average, before they are sold. Because the FHA does 
     not then rehabilitate these properties, they cause blight in 
     neighborhoods. Faulty appraisals have contributed 
     significantly to this problem. The Committee notes that HUD 
     cancelled its appraisal oversight program and has yet to 
     implement its proposed alternative, which is based on the 
     Credit Watch model.
       Credit Watch is an excellent tool for uncovering 
     unscrupulous or careless lenders after they have originated 
     bad loans. By eliminating fraudulent or unqualified lenders, 
     the Committee and the Department hope to reduce the number of 
     foreclosed properties in the future. However, the Committee 
     notes that the Credit Watch model is only effective after 
     problem loans default.
       The Committee directs the Department to report to the 
     appropriate Congressional Committees on further actions that 
     can be taken to protect homebuyers and communities in census 
     tracts that experience high rates of FHA defaults and 
     foreclosures. Specifically, the Committee directs the 
     Department to consider making FHA lenders responsible for the 
     appraisals on loans in these census tracts. The Department 
     should also consider: requiring first time homebuyers to 
     receive counseling prior to the closing of an FHA loan; 
     requiring home inspections on FHA-insured homes bought by 
     first time homebuyers; and, requiring the use of specially 
     certified FHA appraisers for the purchase of homes. In 
     considering these and other possible options, the Committee 
     urges the Department to avoid proposals that create 
     additional burdens for the FHA program or FHA homebuyers as a 
     whole.
       Finally, the Committee has heard from numerous parties in 
     areas affected by large numbers of FHA foreclosures and 
     property flipping that certain investors are repeatedly 
     involved in buying FHA foreclosed properties, making 
     superficial repairs, and then reselling, or flipping them 
     quickly at inflated prices. In some instances the 
     unscrupulous investor that caused a borrower to default is 
     then allowed to purchase the same property, post-foreclosure. 
     The Committee asks the Department to explore strategies to 
     identify investors who are involved in such schemes and 
     prevent their purchasing FHA properties.
       While the Committee recognizes that the Department 
     continues to help ameliorate the problems created by FHA 
     property flipping, the Department must become more aggressive 
     in adopting the kind of preventive measures discussed here. 
     The Department is directed to submit a report that responds 
     directly to the issues raised by the Committee by February 
     25, 2003.
       The Committee is concerned about the effect that the 
     accelerated claims disposition demonstration will have in 
     low-income, distressed communities. The Department has been 
     unable to demonstrate how this program--in which HUD bundles 
     delinquent loans and partners with a private bank to 
     mitigate, or foreclose on, delinquent loans--could benefit 
     very low-income communities, especially those where predatory 
     lending has disproportionately occurred. The Committee is 
     concerned that, in those communities, foreclosures will occur 
     more frequently than they do under the current system, 
     contributing to the deterioration of those communities. The 
     Committee directs HUD to implement a system by which 
     revitalization areas can be exempted from the accelerated 
     claims disposition process should they choose to be.
       The Committee remains concerned that HUD has failed to 
     calculate adequately the amount of credit subsidy necessary 
     to support its multifamily mortgage insurance programs. The 
     Committee expects HUD to institute a computer program that 
     accurately identifies the risk of default and financial risk 
     to the insurance fund, including the ability to mark to 
     market each day. The Committee further directs HUD to issue 
     any premium changes through notice and comment rule making, 
     as required by law.
       The Committee further directs the Department to submit a 
     report by February 15, 2003 that details all steps that HUD 
     has taken to get into compliance with section 1303 of Public 
     Law 107-206. The report should document any concerns raised 
     by cities and non-profits over program guidelines and what 
     the Department is doing to address those concerns. The report 
     should also include the Department's plans for the future of 
     the ACA program, and what steps it is taking to implement the 
     program in communities hardest hit by FHA foreclosures. -
       The Committee also requests an audit by the HUD Inspector 
     General of the Department's compliance with section 1303 of 
     Public Law 107-203. That provision required the Secretary to 
     enter into ACA contracts by September 15, 2003.

[[Page 1043]]



                Government National Mortgage Association

guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account


                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 2002:
  Limitation on guaranteed loans.......................$200,000,000,000
  Administrative expenses.....................................9,383,000
Budget estimate, 2003:
  Limitation on guaranteed loans........................200,000,000,000
  Administrative expenses....................................10,343,000
Committee recommendation:
  Limitation on guaranteed loans........................200,000,000,000
  Administrative expenses....................................10,343,000

                          program description

       The Government National Mortgage Association [GNMA], 
     through the mortgage-backed securities program, guarantees 
     privately issued securities backed by pools of mortgages. 
     GNMA is a wholly owned corporate instrumentality of the 
     United States within the Department. Its powers are 
     prescribed generally by title III of the National Housing 
     Act, as amended. GNMA is authorized by section 306(g) of the 
     act to guarantee the timely payment of principal and interest 
     on securities that are based on and backed by a trust, or 
     pool, composed of mortgages that are guaranteed and insured 
     by the Federal Housing Administration, the Farmers Home 
     Administration, or the Department of Veterans Affairs. GNMA's 
     guarantee of mortgage-backed securities is backed by the full 
     faith and credit of the United States.
       In accord with the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
     1990 [OBRA] requirements for direct and guaranteed loan 
     programs, the administration is requesting $10,343,000 for 
     administrative expenses in the mortgage-backed securities 
     program. Amounts to fund this direct appropriation to the 
     ``MBS program'' account are to be derived from offsetting 
     receipts transferred from the ``Mortgage-backed securities 
     financing'' account to a Treasury receipt account.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends a limitation on new commitments of 
     mortgage-backed securities of $200,000,000,000. This amount 
     is the same level as proposed by the budget request. The 
     Committee also has included $10,343,000 for administrative 
     expenses, the same as the budget request and an increase of 
     $960,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                    Policy Development and Research

                        research and technology

Appropriations, 2002........................................$50,250,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................47,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................47,000,000

                          program description

       Title V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, 
     as amended, directs the Secretary of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development to undertake programs of 
     research, evaluation, and reports relating to the 
     Department's mission and programs. These functions are 
     carried out internally and through grants and contracts with 
     industry, nonprofit research organizations, educational 
     institutions, and through agreements with State and local 
     governments and other Federal agencies. The research programs 
     seek ways to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and 
     equity of HUD programs and to identify methods to achieve 
     cost reductions. Additionally, this appropriation is used to 
     support HUD evaluation and monitoring activities and to 
     conduct housing surveys.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $47,000,000 for research and 
     technology activities in fiscal year 2003. This amount is 
     $3,250,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and the 
     same as the budget request. Of this funding, $8,750,000 is 
     for the Partnership for Advancing Technologies in Housing 
     (PATH) program. The Committee expects the PATH program to 
     continue its cold climate housing research with the Cold 
     Climate Housing Research Center in Fairbanks, Alaska. In 
     addition, because in the past HUD has used this office's 
     broad authority to administer new and unauthorized programs, 
     this office is denied demonstration authority except where 
     approval is provided by Congress in response to a 
     reprogramming request.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

                        fair housing activities

Appropriations, 2002........................................$45,899,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................45,899,000
Committee recommendation.....................................45,899,000

                          program description

       The fair housing activities appropriation includes funding 
     for both the Fair Housing Assistance Program [FHAP] and the 
     Fair Housing Initiatives Program [FHIP].
       The Fair Housing Assistance Program helps State and local 
     agencies to implement title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 
     1968, as amended, which prohibits discrimination in the sale, 
     rental, and financing of housing and in the provision of 
     brokerage services. The major objective of the program is to 
     assure prompt and effective processing of title VIII 
     complaints with appropriate remedies for complaints by State 
     and local fair housing agencies.
       The Fair Housing Initiatives Program is authorized by 
     section 561 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1987, as amended, and by section 905 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1992. This initiative is 
     designed to alleviate housing discrimination by increasing 
     support to public and private organizations for the purpose 
     of eliminating or preventing discrimination in housing, and 
     to enhance fair housing opportunities.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommendation provides $45,899,000, of which 
     $25,649,000 is for the fair housing assistance program [FHAP] 
     and no more than $20,250,000 is for the fair housing 
     initiatives program [FHIP].
       The Committee emphasizes that State and local agencies 
     under FHAP should have the primary responsibility for 
     identifying and addressing discrimination in the sale, 
     rental, and financing of housing and in the provision of 
     brokerage services. It is critical that consistent fair 
     housing policies be identified and implemented to insure 
     continuity and fairness, and that States and localities 
     continue to increase their understanding, expertise, and 
     implementation of the law.

                     Office of Lead Hazard Control


                         LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$109,758,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................126,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................201,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
     1992 established the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
     Reduction Act under which HUD is authorized to make grants to 
     States, localities and native American tribes to conduct 
     lead-based paint hazard reduction and abatement activities in 
     private low-income housing. This has become a significant 
     health hazard, especially for children. According to the 
     Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], some 
     890,000 children have elevated blood levels, down from 1.7 
     million in the late 1980s. Despite this improvement, lead 
     poisoning remains a serious childhood environmental 
     condition, with some 4.4 percent of all children aged 1 to 5 
     years having elevated blood lead levels. This percentage is 
     much higher for low-income children living in older housing.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $201,000,000 for lead-based paint 
     hazard reduction and abatement activities for fiscal year 
     2003. This amount is $75,000,000 more than the budget request 
     and $91,242,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. 
     Of this amount, HUD may use up to $10,000,000 for the Healthy 
     Homes Initiative under which HUD conducts a number of 
     activities designed to identify and address housing-related 
     illnesses. The Committee supports the research being 
     conducted by the National Foundation for Environmental 
     Education on black mold, and encourages the Department to use 
     funds provided for the Healthy Homes Initiative to fund this 
     type of research.
       The Committee recommends $75,000,000 to establish a new 
     lead hazard reduction demonstration program focused on major 
     urban areas where children are disproportionately at risk for 
     lead poisoning. For more than a dozen years, the Committee 
     has taken an active interest in ending the highest public 
     health threat to children under the age of 6 in the United 
     States--lead poisoning from lead-based paint. Through a 
     combination of initiatives, the Committee's efforts have 
     resulted in dramatic reductions to lead hazards in low-income 
     public housing.
       Unfortunately, the progress has not been as great in 
     privately-owned housing, particularly in unsubsidized low-
     income units. For that reason, approximately 1 million 
     children under the age of 6 in the United States suffer from 
     lead poisoning. While lead poisoning crosses all 
     socioeconomic, geographic, and racial boundaries, the burden 
     of this disease falls disproportionately on low-income and 
     minority families. In the United States, children from poor 
     families are eight times more likely to be poisoned than 
     those from higher income families.
       The urban lead hazard reduction program is designed to 
     target funding to major urban areas where the lead hazard 
     risk for low-income children under the age of 6 is greatest. 
     Qualified applicants are the 25 major urban areas identified 
     by the Secretary as having: (1) the highest number of pre-
     1940 units of rental housing; (2) significant deterioration 
     of paint and; (3) a disproportionately high number of 
     documented cases of lead-poisoned children. At least 80 
     percent of funds must be used for abatement and interim 
     control of lead-based paint hazards. Further, the program 
     targets abatement to units that serve low-income families. In 
     order to ensure that occupants of all units in multi-family 
     housing developments are adequately protected by lead hazard 
     reduction activities, grantees are permitted to treat all 
     residential units in structures with 5 or more units, a 
     majority of which are occupied by low-income families, as 
     though they were occupied entirely by low-income people. As a 
     condition of assistance, each major urban area shall submit

[[Page 1044]]

     a detailed plan for use of funds that demonstrates sufficient 
     capcity acceptable to the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development. The plans should identify units with the most 
     significant risk, and should include strategies to reduce the 
     risk of lead hazards and to mobilize public and private 
     resources.
       Nothing in this language is intended to mitigate the 
     responsibility of housing owners to address the existence of 
     lead-based paint hazards in a timely and expeditious manner.
       The Committee has made this program subject to 
     authorization by the proper committees.

                     Management and Administration

                         salaries and expenses


                     (including transfers of funds)

                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                      Native
                                                                                     FHA      GNMA      CGDB                         Hawaiian
                                                                   Appropriation  funds by  funds by  funds by  Title VI   Indian      loan      Total
                                                                                  transfer  transfer  transfer  transfer   housing  guarantee
                                                                                                                                       fund
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002.............................................      556,067     530,457     9,383     1,000       150       200         35  1,097,292
Budget estimate, 2003............................................      510,299     548,202    10,343     1,000       150       200         35  1,070,229
Committee recommendation.........................................      510,299     548,202    10,343     1,000       150       200         35  1,070,229
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

       The ``Salaries and expenses'' account finances all salaries 
     and related expenses associated with administering the 
     programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 
     These include the following activities:
       Housing and mortgage credit programs.--This activity 
     includes staff salaries and related expenses associated with 
     administering housing programs, the implementation of 
     consumer protection activities in the areas of interstate 
     land sales, mobile home construction and safety, and real 
     estate settlement procedures.
       Community planning and development programs.--Funds in this 
     activity are for staff salaries and expenses necessary to 
     administer community planning and development programs.
       Equal opportunity and research programs.--This activity 
     includes salaries and related expenses associated with 
     implementing equal opportunity programs in housing and 
     employment as required by law and Executive orders and the 
     administration of research programs and demonstrations.
       Departmental management, legal, and audit services.--This 
     activity includes a variety of general functions required for 
     the Department's overall administration and management. These 
     include the Office of the Secretary, Office of General 
     Counsel, Office of Chief Financial Officer, as well as 
     administrative support in such areas as accounting, personnel 
     management, contracting and procurement, and office services.
       Field direction and administration.--This activity includes 
     salaries and expenses for the regional administrators, area 
     office managers, and their staff who are responsible for the 
     direction, supervision, and performance of the Department's 
     field offices, as well as administrative support in areas 
     such as accounting, personnel management, contracting and 
     procurement, and office services.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,070,229,000 
     for salaries and expenses. This amount is $27,063,000 less 
     than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and the same as the 
     budget request. The appropriation includes the requested 
     amount of $548,202,000 transferred from various funds from 
     the Federal Housing Administration, $10,343,000 transferred 
     from the Government National Mortgage Association, $1,000,000 
     from the community development block grant funds, $150,000 
     from title VI, $200,000 from the Native American Housing 
     Block Grant, and $35,000 from the Native Hawaiian Housing 
     Program.
       In addition, the Department is prohibited from employing 
     more than 77 schedule C and 20 noncareer senior executive 
     service employees. The Committee understands that the 
     Department is staffed largely by personnel who are close to 
     retirement and at the top of the civil service pay schedule. 
     The Committee encourages HUD to implement hiring practices 
     that result in the hiring of young professionals who can gain 
     experience and advancement.

                      Office of Inspector General


                     (including transfer of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Drug
                                                                   FHA funds by     elimination
                                                   Appropriation     transfer         grants           Total
                                                                                     transfer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............................     $66,555,000     $22,343,000          $5,000     $93,898,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................      74,341,000      23,343,000  ..............      97,684,000
Committee recommendation........................      74,341,000      23,343,000  ..............      97,684,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

       This appropriation will finance all salaries and related 
     expenses associated with the operation of the Office of the 
     Inspector General [OIG].

                       committee recommendations

       The Committee recommends a funding level of $97,684,000 for 
     the Office of Inspector General (OIG). This amount is 
     $3,786,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and the 
     same as the budget request. This funding level includes 
     $23,343,000 by transfer from various FHA funds. The Committee 
     commends OIG for its commitment and its efforts in reducing 
     waste, fraud and abuse in HUD programs. The Committee directs 
     that of the funds provided, $10,000,000 is to be targeted to 
     anti-predatory lending and anti-flipping activities.
       The Committee directs OIG to assess the compensation levels 
     of employees in the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise 
     Oversight (OFHEO) to determine whether salaries are 
     comparable to those of the employees of other Federal 
     financial regulators. The Committee also directs OIG to 
     review the appropriateness of travel expenditures at OFHEO 
     over the last 4 years.


                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003......................................$276,737,000
Committee recommendation....................................276,737,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The working capital fund, authorized by the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, finances 
     information technology and office automation initiatives on a 
     centralized basis.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $276,737,000 for the working 
     capital fund for fiscal year 2003. In 2001 and 2002 the fund 
     was financed from fees charged for services performed. Fees 
     will continue for services to develop and modify systems 
     where the benefit is limited to a specific program.


                         CONSOLIDATED FEE FUND

                              (RESCISSION)

Appropriations, 2002........................................-$6,700,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................-8,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................-8,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       Section 7(j) of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development Act establishes fees and charges from selected 
     programs which are deposited in a fund to offset the costs of 
     audits, inspections, and other related expenses that may be 
     incurred by the Department in monitoring these programs. 
     These fees were misclassified for many years as deposit 
     funds, and are now re-classified as on-budget Federal funds.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends a rescission of all unobligated 
     balances from the fee fund, as requested by the 
     Administration.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight


                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 2002........................................$27,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................30,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,000,000

                          program description

       This appropriation funds the Office of Federal Housing 
     Enterprise Oversight [OFHEO], which was established in 1992 
     to regulate the financial safety and soundness of the two 
     housing Government sponsored enterprises [GSE's], the Federal 
     National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan 
     Mortgage Corporation. The Office was authorized in the 
     Federal Housing Enterprise Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, 
     which also instituted a three-part capital standard for the

[[Page 1045]]

     GSE's, and gave the regulator enhanced authority to enforce 
     those standards.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for the Office of 
     Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is the same as 
     the budget request and $3,000,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level.

                       Administrative Provisions

       The Committee recommends 20 administrative provisions. A 
     brief description follows.
       Sec. 201. Financing Adjustment Factor. Promotes the 
     refinancing of bonds.
       Sec. 202. Fair Housing and Free Speech. Provides free 
     speech protections.
       Sec. 203. HOPWA. Technical correction for allocations.
       Sec. 204. HOPWA Technical. Extends provision requiring HUD 
     to allocate funds directly to Wake County, North Carolina.
       Sec. 205. Assisted Living Project Waiver. Extends the 
     authority to waive the 40 percent rent ceiling under section 
     8 for certain projects.
       Sec. 206. HUD Reform Act Compliance. Requires HUD to award 
     funds on a competitive basis.
       Sec. 207. Section 811 Housing. Includes Section 811 housing 
     as eligible housing in the definition of ``federally assisted 
     housing''.
       Sec. 208. Public Housing Financing. Facilitates the 
     financing of rehabilitation and development of public 
     housing.
       Sec. 209. Payments to Public Housing Units. Prohibits 
     assistance for housing units defined under section 9(n) of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937.
       Sec. 210. Administrative Funds Reimbursement. Allows funds 
     to be used to reimburse GSEs and other Federal entities for 
     various administrative expenses.
       Sec. 211. Restrictions on Spending Activities. Limits 
     spending to amounts set out in the budget justification.
       Sec. 212. Government Corporation Control Act. Clarifies 
     expenditure authority for entities subject to the Government 
     Corporation Control Act.
       Sec. 213. Repeal of Federalization of Public Housing Units. 
     Amends federalization provisions.
       Sec. 214. Multifamily Disposition. Requires HUD to maintain 
     section 8 assistance on properties occupied by elderly or 
     disabled families.
       Sec. 215. Welfare-to-Work Vouchers. Amends the welfare-to-
     work housing voucher program.
       Sec. 216. Exemption from requirement of resident on board 
     of PHA. Exempts Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi from the 
     requirement of having a PHA resident on the board of 
     directors for fiscal year 2003. Instead, the public housing 
     agencies in these States are required to establish advisory 
     boards that include public housing tenants and section 8 
     recipients.
       Sec. 217. Renewal Requirements. Requires HUD to include the 
     specific funds needed to renew expiring housing assistance 
     grants in future budgets.
       Sec. 218. Sunset of HOPE VI Program. Sunsets the HOPE VI 
     program on September 30, 2004.
       Sec. 219. Section 8 Prohibition on Funds. Prohibits HUD 
     from waiving income eligibility on section 8 housing. Applies 
     to instances in which a refinancing of the project occurs.
       Sec. 220. Reports on Uncommitted, Unobligated, and Excess 
     Funds. Requires quarterly reports on all uncommitted, 
     unobligated and excess funds associated with HUD programs.
       Sec. 221. Multifamily Disposition and Revitalization. 
     Allows flexible use of certain FHA grants to be used in the 
     revitalization of properties.
       Sec. 222. Reports on Section 8 Costs. Requires HUD to 
     report on the number of units being assisted under section 8 
     and the per unit cost of these units.
       Sec. 223. Allows use of a HOPE III grant in the East 
     Baltimore, Maryland community to serve people who are not 
     first-time homeowners. All other program requirements, 
     including any low-income requirements, must be adhered to.
       Sec. 224. Provides a waiver for a technical violation the 
     CDBG program.

                    TITLE III--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  American Battle Monuments Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$35,466,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................30,400,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,400,000

                          program description

       The American Battle Monuments Commission [ABMC] is 
     responsible for the maintenance and construction of U.S. 
     monuments and memorials commemorating the achievements in 
     battle of our Armed Forces where they have served since April 
     1917; for controlling the erection of monuments and markers 
     by U.S. citizens and organizations in foreign countries; and 
     for the design, construction, and maintenance of permanent 
     military cemetery memorials in foreign countries. The 
     Commission maintains 24 military memorial cemeteries and 31 
     monuments, memorials, markers, and offices in 15 countries 
     around the world, including three large memorials on U.S. 
     soil. It is presently charged with erecting a World War II 
     Memorial in the Washington, DC, area.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $30,400,000 
     for the American Battle Monuments Commission, which is 
     $5,066,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

             Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board


                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,850,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,850,000
Committee recommendation......................................7,850,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board was 
     authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 to 
     investigate accidental releases of certain chemical 
     substances resulting in serious injury, death, or substantial 
     property damage. It became operational in fiscal year 1998.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $7,850,000 
     for the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, equal 
     to the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       The Committee believes that the Chemical Safety and Hazard 
     Investigation Board serves the very important mission of 
     promoting the prevention of accidents at chemical plants. The 
     Committee is deeply concerned that the Board's management 
     deficiencies, as identified in a March 2002, FEMA IG report, 
     have done a disservice to the Board's main constituency--the 
     workers in our Nation's chemical plants.
       The Committee recognizes that the Board has accepted the 
     FEMA IG's recommendations to rectify these unacceptable 
     deficiencies, and has taken positive steps to implement the 
     recommendations. The Committee continues to support the FEMA 
     IG's ongoing review of the Board's activities.
       The Committee has included bill language authorizing the 
     Inspector General of FEMA to act as the Inspector General of 
     the Chemical Safety Board. Funds have been included to 
     accomplish this requirement in the FEMA OIG appropriation.
       Not later than March 1, 2002, and each year thereafter, the 
     Chief Operating Officer of the Board shall prepare a 
     financial statement for the preceding fiscal year, covering 
     all accounts and associated activities of the Board. Each 
     financial statement of the Board will be prepared according 
     to the form and content of the financial statements 
     prescribed by the Office of Management and Budget for 
     executive agencies required to prepare financial statements 
     under the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended by 
     the Government Management Reform Act of 1994. Each financial 
     statement prepared under 31 USC 3515 by the Board shall be 
     audited according to applicable generally accepted government 
     auditing standards by the Inspector General of the Board or 
     an independent external auditor, as determined by the 
     Inspector General. The IG shall submit to the Chief Operating 
     Officer of the Board a report on the audit not later than 
     June 30 following the fiscal year for which a statement was 
     prepared.
       The Committee has again included bill language limiting the 
     number of career senior executive service positions to three.

                       Department of the Treasury


              Community Development Financial Institutions

   Community Development Financial Institutions Fund Program Account

Appropriations, 2002........................................$80,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................68,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................73,000,000


                   program description for cdfi fund

       The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund makes 
     investments in the form of grants, loans, equity investments, 
     deposits, and technical assistance grants to new and existing 
     community development financial institutions (CDFIs), through 
     the CDFI program. CDFIs include community development banks, 
     credit unions, venture capital funds, revolving loan funds, 
     and microloan funds, among others. Recipient institutions 
     engage in lending and investment for affordable housing, 
     small business and community development within underserved 
     communities. The CDFI Fund administers the Bank Enterprise 
     Award (BEA) Program, which provides a financial incentive to 
     insured depository institutions to undertake community 
     development finance activities. The CDFI Fund also 
     administers the New Markets Tax Credit Program, a newly 
     created program that will provide an incentive to investors 
     in the form of a tax credit, which is expected to stimulate 
     private community and economic development activities.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends $73,000,000 for the CDFI Fund, 
     which is $7,000,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $5,000,000 above the administration's request.
       The Committee also recommends a set-aside of $5,000,000 for 
     grants, loans, and technical assistance and training programs 
     to benefit Native American, Alaskan Natives, and Native 
     Hawaiian communities in the coordination of development 
     strategies, increased access to equity investments, and

[[Page 1046]]

     loans for development activities. This amount is an increase 
     of $5,000,000 above the budget request and the same as the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The Committee is concerned 
     that the CDFI Fund has not released all funds appropriated in 
     fiscal years 2001 and 2002 for this purpose. The Committee 
     has included this set-aside in fiscal year 2003 because the 
     Native American, Alaskan Natives, and Native Hawaiian 
     communities have been historically underserved by CDFIs.
       The Department of the Treasury's November 2001 Native 
     American Lending Study confirmed the inadequacy of capital 
     investment in Indian communities and found that the 
     investment gap between Native American economies and the 
     United States overall totals $44,000,000,000. The Committee 
     directs the Fund to submit a 5-year strategic plan to the 
     Committee that outlines its efforts to improve the economic 
     needs of Native Americans. This report is due to the 
     Committee by February 17, 2003.
       The Committee remains concerned over the CDFI Fund's lack 
     of data on its programs' outputs and outcomes. The Committee 
     has difficulty making funding decisions for the Fund without 
     an accurate accounting of the activities that the Fund has 
     contributed to in low-income communities. The Committee 
     recognizes that this has been a long-standing problem with 
     the CDFI Fund, and urges the Administration to improve its 
     monitoring systems. This is especially important now that the 
     CDFI Fund will have administrative responsibilities for the 
     New Markets Tax Credit Program.

                  Interagency Council on the Homeless


                           OPERATING EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002...........................................$500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,500,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Interagency Council on the Homeless is an independent 
     agency created by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act 
     of 1987 to coordinate and direct the multiple efforts of 
     Federal agencies and other designated groups. The Council was 
     authorized to review Federal programs that assist homeless 
     persons and to take necessary actions to reduce duplication. 
     The Council can recommend improvements in programs and 
     activities conducted by Federal, State and local government 
     as well as local volunteer organizations. The Council 
     consists of the heads of 18 Federal agencies such as the 
     Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Health and 
     Human Services, Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Commerce, 
     Defense, Education, Labor, and Transportation; and other 
     entities as deemed appropriate.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $1,500,000 for the Interagency 
     Council on the Homeless (ICH), $500,000 more than the budget 
     request and $1,000,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level. These funds are for carrying out the functions 
     authorized under section 203 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act.
       The Council was previously funded under the HUD Homeless 
     assistance grants account. The Committee has created a 
     separate account for the Council to reflect better the law's 
     intent that it operate and function as an independent agency. 
     The Committee, however, expects HUD to continue providing 
     administrative support for the Council as mandated under 
     section 204(d) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act.
       The Committee expects the primary activity of the ICH to be 
     the development of a comprehensive Federal approach to end 
     homelessness. In order for the ICH to be successful in this 
     endeavor relevant Federal departments and agencies should 
     defer to the ICH on policy and funding proposals that affect 
     homelessness. The Committee understands that homelessness is 
     affected by factors that cut across Federal agencies, 
     including housing costs, job readiness, education, substance 
     abuse and mental health. The Committee believes it is 
     important to have an independent ICH in order to assess how 
     the multitude of Federal programs have contributed to the 
     rise in homelessness, and how they can contribute to ending 
     homelessness.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$55,200,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................56,767,000
Committee recommendation.....................................56,767,000

                          program description

       The Commission is an independent regulatory agency that was 
     established on May 14, 1973, and is responsible for 
     protecting the public against unreasonable risks of injury 
     from consumer products; assisting consumers to evaluate the 
     comparative safety of consumer products; developing uniform 
     safety standards for consumer products and minimizing 
     conflicting State and local regulations; and promoting 
     research and investigation into the causes and prevention of 
     product-related deaths, illnesses, and injuries.
       In carrying out its mandate, the Commission establishes 
     mandatory product safety standards, where appropriate, to 
     reduce the unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from 
     consumer products; helps industry develop voluntary safety 
     standards; bans unsafe products if it finds that a safety 
     standard is not feasible; monitors recalls of defective 
     products; informs and educates consumers about product 
     hazards; conducts research and develops test methods; 
     collects and publishes injury and hazard data, and promotes 
     uniform product regulations by governmental units.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $56,767,000 for the Consumer 
     Product Safety Commission, equal to the budget request and an 
     increase of $1,567,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level.
       The Committee does not recommend the administration's 
     request for an exemption of CPSC's litigation travel from the 
     travel ceiling imposed by General Provision 401 of this Act. 
     Instead, the Committee will continue to consider CPSC's 
     increased travel requirements through regular reprogramming 
     requests.

             Corporation for National and Community Service


                national and community service programs

                           operating expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$401,980,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................631,342,000
Committee recommendation....................................407,242,000

                          program description

       The Corporation for National and Community Service, a 
     Corporation owned by the Federal Government, was established 
     by the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 
     (Public Law 103-82) to enhance opportunities for national and 
     community service and provide national service educational 
     awards. The Corporation makes grants to States, institutions 
     of higher education, public and private nonprofit 
     organizations, and others to create service opportunities for 
     a wide variety of individuals such as students, out-of-school 
     youth, and adults through innovative, full- and part-time 
     national and community service programs. National service 
     participants may receive education awards which may be used 
     for full-time or part-time higher education, vocational 
     education, job training, or school-to-work programs.
       The Corporation is governed by a Board of Directors and 
     headed by the Chief Executive Officer. Board members and the 
     Chief Executive Officer are appointed by the President of the 
     United States and confirmed by the Senate.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $407,242,000 for the Corporation 
     for National and Community Service, approximately the same as 
     the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and $224,600,000 below the 
     budget request.
       The Committee has included bill language that caps the 
     number of AmeriCorps volunteers at 50,000 for program year 
     2003. The Committee has taken this step in light of recent 
     information that the Corporation had committed more 
     enrollment slots than it could fund under its budget. In a 
     preliminary report to the Committee, the Corporation recently 
     revealed that the AmeriCorps program had both approved and 
     enrolled far more volunteer slots than budgeted. 
     Specifically, in program year 2000, 50,000 slots were 
     budgeted, but the Corporation approved 67,000 slots, and 
     actually enrolled 53,000. In program year 2001, 50,000 slots 
     were budgeted, but the Corporation approved 71,800 slots and 
     enrolled 59,200 slots. The Corporation has also exceeded its 
     target level for 2002. Because of these practices, the 
     Committee is deeply concerned that the Corporation may not 
     have adequate funds in the National Service Trust Fund to 
     meet its outstanding liabilities, and the Committee has 
     requested investigations by both GAO and the IG into this 
     matter to ensure the solvency of the National Service Trust. 
     To that end, the Committee has included $15,000,000 for the 
     Trust Fund and $240,492,000 in the AmeriCorps program account 
     to fund 50,000 volunteers in program year 2003. The 
     Committee, however, recognizes that the Corporation and the 
     Office of Management and Budget are still reviewing the 
     AmeriCorps program budgetary needs and will work with the 
     administration on ensuring that the Corporation has adequate 
     funds to enroll 50,000 members. The Committee applauds the 
     recent steps taken by the Corporation's CEO and CFO and will 
     continue to work closely with the Corporation to ensure that 
     the AmeriCorps budgetary and management problems are resolved 
     as expeditiously as possible. The Committee expects the 
     Corporation to submit a final report to the Committee on its 
     budgetary needs for fiscal year 2003 and any legislative 
     language, if necessary, to ensure that the Corporation is 
     able to meet its outstanding liabilities to those AmeriCorps 
     members enrolled in the program. In this report, the 
     Committee directs the Corporation to include details on the 
     steps implemented to prevent the Corporation from over-
     enrolling members in the future and disciplinary actions 
     taken to those individuals responsible for the problems with 
     the Trust Fund.
       The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
     budget request:
       -$162,277,000 for AmeriCorps Grants, National Direct and 
     State Funds, for a total of

[[Page 1047]]

     $290,342,000. This amount is equal to the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level.
       Within the amount provided, the Committee directs the 
     Corporation to continue at the least the current level of 
     support for programs designed to help teach children to read 
     by the third grade ($100,000,000), and for activities 
     dedicated to developing computer and information technology 
     skills for students and teachers in low-income communities 
     ($25,000,000). The Committee directs the Corporation to 
     provide specifics in its fiscal year 2003 operating plan 
     detailing how the Corporation will fulfill these directives.
       The Committee is aware that the Corporation has recently 
     added a new criterion in its AmeriCorps application process 
     that takes into account the leveraging of unpaid volunteers. 
     The Committee supports this new criterion and encourages the 
     Chief Executive Officer to focus heavily on an applicant's 
     ability to leverage and mobilize unpaid volunteers when 
     awarding grants under the National and Community Service Act.
       In order to ensure that as many qualified grant applicants 
     as possible have the opportunity to access Corporation 
     resources, the Committee supports efforts to reduce grantee 
     reliance on Federal funding, and expects that some grantees 
     should eventually be able to operate without Federal funding. 
     The Inspector General recently reviewed the Corporation's 
     National Direct Grant Application Review Process and 
     recommended that the Corporation establish a means of clearly 
     measuring a grantee's reliance on Federal funding and 
     consider developing a performance goal for reducing grantees' 
     reliance on Federal funds. Accordingly, the Committee directs 
     the Corporation to provide a report by February 21, 2003, 
     that details its efforts to measure a grantee's reliance on 
     Federal funding and to reduce grantee reliance on Federal 
     funds both in terms of total Corporation resources provided 
     to grantees, and as a percentage of grantee operating costs. 
     Further, the Committee directs the Corporation to provide 
     quarterly reports with the initial report due on March 5, 
     2003 that lists every grantee that receives a minimum of 
     $500,000 from the Corporation. These quarterly reports should 
     include the name of the grantee, the amount of Corporation 
     funds it has received, the Corporation program source of 
     funding, the amount of private sector funds it has received, 
     and sources of other Federal or public funding.
       The Committee is encouraged by the Corporation's goal to 
     improve the accountability of its grantees. Accordingly, the 
     Committee directs the Corporation to establish, in 
     consultation with grantees receiving assistance under all 
     parts of the National and Community Service Act, performance 
     measures for each grantee. The Corporation shall require any 
     grantee that does not achieve the established levels of 
     performance on the measures, as determined by the 
     Corporation, to submit to the Corporation for approval a plan 
     of correction. If the grantee fails to achieve the 
     established levels of performance, the Committee directs the 
     Corporation to either reduce some portion or terminate the 
     entire amount of assistance provided to the grantee 
     consistent with established due process requirements.
       The Committee does not recommend the request to transfer 
     the Education Award and Promise Fellows programs from 
     Innovation Activities to AmeriCorps grants. The Committee 
     supports the Administration's efforts to integrate AmeriCorps 
     activities. However, the request to transfer the program 
     would require legislative language to exempt grantee 
     organizations from AmeriCorps administration cost, matching 
     requirements, and participant benefit requirements. The 
     Committee notes that these requirements have never been part 
     of the Education Award or Promise Fellows programs, but the 
     Committee believes that any necessary exemptions should be 
     addressed in the context of reauthorization of the 
     Corporation's programs.
       -$8,638,000 for innovation, demonstration, and assistance 
     activities, for a total of $29,850,000. Within the amount 
     provided, the Committee recommends $10,000,000 for 
     demonstration programs, an increase of $5,000,000 above the 
     request. The Committee directs that the Corporation use this 
     increase to provide seed funding to start-up organizations to 
     foster the ``next generation'' of National Direct 
     organizations. Also within the amount provided, the Committee 
     recommends $10,000,000 for Challenge Grants, the same as the 
     request. The Committee intends for these grants to be 
     administered in a manner that allows eligibility of: (1) 
     AmeriCorps organizations; (2) non-profit organizations that 
     may not otherwise qualify for AmeriCorps funding because they 
     do not use AmeriCorps volunteers; and (3) non-profit 
     organizations that are not direct service organizations. The 
     Committee also intends for Challenge Grants to require a 
     match of $1 in private funding for every $1 in Challenge 
     Grant funding. The Committee directs the Corporation to 
     notify the Committee at least 5 business days in advance of 
     making any Challenge Grant award. Finally, the Committee's 
     recommendation for AmeriCorps grants includes sufficient 
     funding for the Corporation to continue the Education Award 
     and Promise Fellows programs within this amount.
       -$2,500,000 for America's Promise, for a total of 
     $5,000,000. This amount is $2,500,000 below the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level. The Committee directs America's Promise 
     to provide the Committee a full accounting of funds from the 
     Federal Government and non-public sources, a breakdown of 
     these funds for its operating expenses, and performance 
     outputs and outcomes such as the number of volunteers it has 
     leveraged with Federal dollars and the number of communities 
     it has served since its inception. The report should be 
     submitted by March 1, 2003.
       -$10,000,000 for the National Civilian Community Corps, for 
     a total program level of $25,000,000 in fiscal year 2003. 
     This amount is equal to the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. 
     The Committee does not recommend funding for two additional 
     NCCC campuses. The Committee emphasizes that it has taken 
     this action without prejudice to a future expansion of the 
     program, and directs the Corporation to provide a report by 
     March 4, 2003, with a comprehensive, strategic expansion 
     plan. The plan should include dates and milestones for 
     establishing new campuses, including cost estimates.
       -$2,575,000 for program administration/State commissions, 
     for a total of $32,500,000 to provide support for an 
     oversight of the Corporation's programs and projects. This 
     amount is $1,500,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level. The Committee directs the Corporation to set-aside up 
     to $2,000,000 for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer 
     (CFO). These funds are to be used at the CFO's sole 
     discretion for staffing, information systems, and other 
     relevant purposes for ensuring the financial and management 
     integrity of the Corporation's programs. The Committee 
     intends $19,500,000 for program administration, including 
     staffing, compensation, and operating expenses, and 
     $13,000,000 as support for Governor-appointed State 
     Commissions on National and Community Service. The Committee 
     notes that State Commissions are required to provide a 50 
     percent match of this funding.
       The Committee commends the Corporation for the significant 
     improvements it has made in management and financial 
     accounting and for its second consecutive ``clean'' opinion 
     on its financial statements audit. Nevertheless, the 
     Committee remains concerned about the Corporation's remaining 
     reportable condition related to grants management. Many 
     grantees fail to provide accurate and timely information on 
     grant expenditures and in some cases, the Inspector General 
     has identified significant questionable costs. The Committee 
     commends the Corporation's progress in ensuring that its new 
     grants management and cost accounting system is fully 
     operational by no later than the fall of 2002. The Committee 
     also supports the recommendations from a recent 
     PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC) report, especially the 
     recommendation that the new cost accounting system is able to 
     calculate cost per grant or cost per grant dollar so that 
     improvements in administrative cost management can be 
     monitored.
       -$42,000,000 for the National Service Trust, for a total of 
     $15,000,000 to support service awards, interest forbearance, 
     and President's Student Service Scholarship payments. This 
     reduction reflects the Committee's recommendation not to fund 
     the Senior Service Initiative, which is a proposed new 
     activity to allow senior volunteers to transfer their 
     education awards to a child or grandchild. Instead, the 
     Committee recommends that this proposal be considered in the 
     context of reauthorization of the Corporation's programs. 
     Further, the Committee recognizes that the Corporation may 
     need additional funds in the Trust to meet its outstanding 
     liabilities in 2003. The Committee did not appropriate 
     funding into the Trust in fiscal year 2002 as it was 
     determined that sufficient funds were available from previous 
     years to cover all estimated awards for fiscal year 2002. The 
     Committee directs the Corporation to provide quarterly 
     activity reports to the Committee and the Inspector General 
     on the expenditure of awards under the National Service Trust 
     Fund. The initial report should be submitted by February 25, 
     2003.
       The Committee's recommendation for the Trust includes up to 
     $5,000,000 to support an estimated 8,000 President's Student 
     Service Scholarship awards. This program provides $1,000 
     scholarships to high school juniors and seniors who have 
     performed outstanding service to their communities during 
     their high school years. The Corporation provides one-half of 
     the scholarship, and local funding from schools, businesses, 
     nonprofit organizations, or civic groups provides the other 
     half.
       The Committee also recommends the budget request of 
     $5,000,000 for audits and evaluations, $43,000,000 for Learn 
     and Save America, and $10,000,000 for the Points of Light 
     Foundation. The Committee supports the Corporation's efforts 
     to track the performance of its programs and measure 
     outcomes.


                      Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................6,900,000


                          Program Description

       The Office of Inspector General within the Corporation for 
     National and Community Service is authorized by the Inspector 
     General Act of 1978, as amended. The goals of the

[[Page 1048]]

     Office are to increase organizational efficiency and 
     effectiveness and to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. The 
     Office of Inspector General within the Corporation for 
     National and Community Service was transferred to the 
     Corporation from the former ACTION agency when ACTION was 
     abolished and merged into the Corporation in April 1994.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,900,000 for 
     the Office of Inspector General (OIG). This amount is 
     $1,400,000 above the budget request and the 2002 level. The 
     Committee recommends an increase for the Office of Inspector 
     General in order to increase oversight of the Corporation's 
     activities.


                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

       The Committee recommends bill language to ensure that loans 
     made, insured, or guaranteed by State agencies are considered 
     to be qualified student loans for the purpose of making 
     AmeriCorps education awards. A modified version of this 
     provision has been carried in prior year appropriations acts.
       The Committee also recommends new bill language to allow 
     disability placement funds, which are primarily used to pay 
     for reasonable accommodations and other efforts to make 
     AmeriCorps programs accessible to persons with disabilities, 
     available to any AmeriCorps program funded under subtitle C.

               U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$13,221,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................14,326,000
Committee recommendation.....................................14,612,000

                          program description

       The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims was established by 
     the Veterans' Judicial Review Act. The court is an 
     independent judicial tribunal with exclusive jurisdiction to 
     review decisions of the Board of Veterans' Appeals. It has 
     the authority to decide all relevant questions of law; 
     interpret constitutional, statutory, and regulatory 
     provisions; and determine the meaning or applicability of the 
     terms of an action by the Department of Veterans Affairs. It 
     is authorized to compel action by the Department unlawfully 
     withheld or unreasonably delayed. It is authorized to hold 
     unconstitutional or otherwise unlawful and set-aside 
     decisions, findings, conclusions, rules and regulations 
     issued or adopted by the Department of Veterans Affairs or 
     the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $14,612,000 
     for the Court of Appeals for Veterans claims, an increase of 
     $1,105,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                      Department of Defense--Civil

                       Cemeterial Expenses, Army

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002........................................$22,537,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................24,445,000
Committee recommendation.....................................24,445,000

                          program description

       Responsibility for the operation of Arlington National 
     Cemetery and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery is 
     vested in the Secretary of the Army. As of September 30, 
     2001, Arlington and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National 
     Cemeteries contained the remains of 289,494 persons and 
     comprised a total of approximately 628 acres. There were 
     3,727 interments and 2,212 inurnments in fiscal year 2001; 
     3,800 interments and 2,500 inurnments are estimated for the 
     current fiscal year; and 3,925 interments and 2,700 
     inurnments are estimated for fiscal year 2003.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $24,445,000 
     for the Army's cemeterial expenses. This amount is $1,908,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                Department of Health and Human Services

                     National Institutes of Health


          National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

Appropriations, 2002........................................$80,728,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................\1\74,471,000
Committee recommendation.....................................76,074,000

\1\Does not include $1,603,000 proposed transfer from the National 
Cancer Institute.

                          program description

       The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, an 
     agency within the National Institutes of Health, was 
     authorized in section 311(a) of the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980, as amended, to conduct multidisciplinary research and 
     training activities associated with the Nation's Hazardous 
     Substance Superfund program, and in section 126(g) of the 
     Superfund Amendments and Reauthorizations Act of 1986, to 
     conduct training and education of workers who are or may be 
     engaged in activities related to hazardous waste removal or 
     containment or emergency response.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends $76,074,000 for the National 
     Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, which is 
     $4,654,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
     recommendation includes $27,137,520 for worker training 
     grants and $48,936,480 for research.

            Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry


            toxic substances and environmental public health

Appropriations, 2002........................................$78,235,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................77,388,000
Committee recommendation.....................................81,000,000


                          program description

       The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 
     (ATSDR), an agency of the Public Health Service, was created 
     in section 104(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. The 
     ATSDR's primary mission is to conduct surveys and screening 
     programs to determine relationships between exposure to toxic 
     substances and illness. Other activities include the 
     maintenance and annual update of a list of hazardous 
     substances most commonly found at Superfund sites, the 
     preparation of toxicological profiles on each such hazardous 
     substance, consultations on health issues relating to 
     exposure to hazardous or toxic substances, and the 
     development and implementation of certain research activities 
     related to ATSDR's mission.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee recommends $81,000,000 for the Agency for 
     Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, which is $3,612,000 
     above the budget request and $2,765,000 above the fiscal year 
     2002 enacted level.
       Within the amount provided, the Committee directs ATSDR to 
     continue at least the current level of support for the Great 
     Lakes Fish Consumption Study. Additionally, the Committee 
     directs ATSDR to establish a fish consumption advisory pilot 
     program in Michigan based on the information included in the 
     Agency's December 2001 feasibility report.
       Also within the amount provided, the Committee directs 
     ATSDR to implement a multi-faceted health study of 
     polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) exposure in Anniston, Alabama. 
     The study should be undertaken in consultation with community 
     residents and in cooperation with the Alabama Department of 
     Public Health.
       The Committee also directs that within the amount provided, 
     ATSDR monitor and assess the long-term health status of 
     children, adolescents and young adults in Herculaneum, 
     Missouri regarding their potential exposure to lead.

                    Environmental Protection Agency

Appropriations, 2002..................................\1\$8,078,813,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................7,620,513,000
Committee recommendation..................................8,205,436,000

\1\Includes $175,600,000 in fiscal year 2002 supplemental funding.


                          general description

       The Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] was created 
     through Executive Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 designed 
     to consolidate certain Federal Government environmental 
     activities into a single agency. The plan was submitted by 
     the President to the Congress on July 8, 1970, and the Agency 
     was established as an independent agency in the executive 
     branch on December 2, 1970, by consolidating 15 components 
     from 5 departments and independent agencies.
       A description of EPA's pollution control programs by media 
     follows:
       Air.--The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 authorize a 
     national program of air pollution research, regulation, 
     prevention, and enforcement activities.
       Water quality.--The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as 
     amended, provides the framework for protection of the 
     Nation's surface waters. The law recognizes that it is the 
     primary responsibility of the States to prevent, reduce, and 
     eliminate water pollution. The States determine the desired 
     uses for their waters, set standards, identify current uses 
     and, where uses are being impaired or threatened, develop 
     plans for the protection or restoration of the designated 
     use. They implement the plans through control programs such 
     as permitting and enforcement, construction of municipal 
     waste water treatment works, and nonpoint source control 
     practices. The CWA also regulates discharge of dredge or fill 
     material into waters of the United States, including 
     wetlands.
       Drinking water.--The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as 
     amended in 1996, charges EPA with the responsibility of 
     implementing a program to assure that the Nation's public 
     drinking water supplies are free of contamination that may 
     pose a human health risk, and to protect and prevent the 
     endangerment of ground water resources which serve as 
     drinking water supplies.
       Hazardous waste.--The Resource Conservation and Recovery 
     Act of 1976 mandated EPA to develop a regulatory program to 
     protect human health and the environment from improper 
     hazardous waste disposal practices. The RCRA Program manages 
     hazardous wastes from generation through disposal.

[[Page 1049]]

       EPA's responsibilities and authorities to manage hazardous 
     waste were greatly expanded under the Hazardous and Solid 
     Waste Amendments of 1984. Not only did the regulated universe 
     of wastes and facilities dealing with hazardous waste 
     increase significantly, but past mismanagement practices, in 
     particular prior releases at inactive hazardous and solid 
     waste management units, were to be identified and corrective 
     action taken. The 1984 amendments also authorized a 
     regulatory and implementation program directed to owners and 
     operators of underground storage tanks.
       Pesticides.--The objective of the Pesticide Program is to 
     protect the public health and the environment from 
     unreasonable risks while permitting the use of necessary pest 
     control approaches. This objective is pursued by EPA under 
     the Food Quality Protection Act, the Federal Insecticide, 
     Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and the Federal Food, Drug, 
     and Cosmetic Act through three principal means: (1) review of 
     existing and new pesticide products; (2) enforcement of 
     pesticide use rules; and (3) research and development to 
     reinforce the ability to evaluate the risks and benefits of 
     pesticides.
       Radiation.--The radiation program's major emphasis is to 
     minimize the exposure of persons to ionizing radiation, 
     whether from naturally occurring sources, from medical or 
     industrial applications, nuclear power sources, or weapons 
     development.
       Toxic substances.--The Toxic Substances Control Act 
     establishes a program to stimulate the development of 
     adequate data on the effects of chemical substances on health 
     and the environment, and institute control action for those 
     chemicals which present an unreasonable risk of injury to 
     health or the environment. The act's coverage affects more 
     than 60,000 chemicals currently in commerce, and all new 
     chemicals.
       Multimedia.--Multimedia activities are designed to support 
     programs where the problems, tools, and results are cross 
     media and must be integrated to effect results. This 
     integrated program encompasses the Agency's research, 
     enforcement, and abatement activities.
       Superfund.--The Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
     Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 established a 
     national program to protect public health and the environment 
     from the threats posed by inactive hazardous waste sites and 
     uncontrolled spills of hazardous substances. The original 
     statute was amended by the Superfund Amendments and 
     Reauthorization Act of 1986. Under these authorities, EPA 
     manages a hazardous waste site cleanup program including 
     emergency response and long-term remediation.
       Leaking underground storage tanks.--The Superfund 
     Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 established the 
     leaking underground storage tank [LUST] trust fund to conduct 
     corrective actions for releases from leaking underground 
     storage tanks that contain petroleum or other hazardous 
     substances. EPA implements the LUST response program 
     primarily through cooperative agreements with the States.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends a total of $8,205,436,000 for EPA. 
     This is an increase of $584,923,000 above the budget request 
     and an increase of $126,623,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level.
       The Agency is directed to notify the Committee prior to 
     each reprogramming in excess of $500,000 between objectives, 
     when those reprogrammings are for different purposes. The 
     exceptions to this limitation are as follows: (1) for the 
     ``Environmental programs and management'' account, Committee 
     notification is required at $500,000; Committee approval is 
     required only above $1,000,000; and (2) for the ``State and 
     tribal assistance grants'' account, reprogramming of 
     performance partnership grant funds is exempt from this 
     limitation.


                         SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 2002....................................\1\$788,397,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................670,008,000
Committee recommendation....................................707,203,000

\1\Includes $90,308,000 in fiscal year 2002 supplemental funding.

                          program description

       EPA's ``Science and technology'' account provides funding 
     for the scientific knowledge and tools necessary to support 
     decisions on preventing, regulating, and abating 
     environmental pollution and to advance the base of 
     understanding on environmental sciences. These efforts are 
     conducted through contracts, grants, and cooperative 
     agreements with universities, industries, other private 
     commercial firms, nonprofit organizations, State and local 
     government, and Federal agencies, as well as through work 
     performed at EPA's laboratories and various field stations 
     and field offices. In addition, Hazardous Substance Superfund 
     Trust Fund resources are transferred to this account directly 
     from the Hazardous Substance Superfund.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $707,203,000 for science and 
     technology, $37,195,000 above the budget request and 
     $81,194,000 below the enacted level including supplemental 
     funding. In addition, the Committee recommends the transfer 
     of $86,168,000 from the Superfund account, for a total of 
     $793,371,000 for science and technology.
       The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
     budget request:
       +$9,750,000 for the STAR Fellowships Program. The budget 
     request proposed to transfer this program to the National 
     Science Foundation.
       -$9,750,000 for the National Environmental Technology 
     Competition. The Committee supports the Agency's efforts to 
     foster private and public sector development of new, cost-
     effective environmental technologies, and has instead 
     recommended full funding of the budget request of two 
     existing Agency programs designed to achieve this objective--
     the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program, 
     whereby 2.5 percent of all extramural research funding is 
     set-aside for work with small businesses, and the 
     Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program 
     ($3,618,000). The Committee urges EPA to develop a ``one stop 
     shop'' office to coordinate these programs to ensure the 
     greatest impact without duplication or overlap, and directs 
     the Agency to report to the Committee by March 3, 2003, 
     detailing such efforts.
       +$10,000,000 for small system arsenic removal research, for 
     a total of $16,800,000 in fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
     strongly encourages EPA to utilize a significant portion of 
     this funding to carry out demonstrations of implementation of 
     low-cost treatment technology, and directs the Agency to 
     report to the Committee by March 3, 2003, on its plans to 
     carry out such demonstrations.
       The following increases to the budget request are each to 
     be reduced by 10 percent:
       +$700,000 for the Center for the Conservation of Biological 
     Resources at Black Hills State University, South Dakota.
       +$750,000 for Clean Air Counts of Northeastern Illinois to 
     develop an innovative and cost effective method to reduce 
     smog-causing emissions in the Chicago metropolitan region. 
     The funding will provide support for an ongoing partnership 
     involving EPA, the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, Illinois EPA, 
     and the Delta Institute.
       +$800,000 for the Contra Costa Water District, California, 
     for applied research studies related to the water quality and 
     water treatment challenges facing Bay Delta water users.
       +$800,000 for Lake Superior State University for education 
     and research on aquatic biota and their associated habitats.
       +$750,000 for the Louisiana Environmental Research Center 
     at McNeese State University for research into wetland ecology 
     and the environmental effects of oil spills.
       +$300,000 for the Foundation for the Advancement of Science 
     and Education's pesticides recording project.
       +$750,000 for the Southwest Clean Air Quality Agency's 
     Columbia Gorge Air Quality Technical Foundation Study.
       +$500,000 for the Center for the Study of Metals in the 
     Environment.
       +$1,200,000 for the Center for Air Toxic Metals at the 
     Energy and Environmental Research Center.
       +$100,000 for the University of Vermont's Proctor Maple 
     Research Center to continue mercury deposition monitoring 
     effects.
       +$350,000 for acid rain research at the University of 
     Vermont.
       +$500,000 for the City of Glendale, California for research 
     and development of technology for the removal of Chromium 6 
     from water.
       +$750,000 for the Integrated Public/Private Energy and 
     Environmental Consortium (IPEC) to develop cost-effective 
     environmental technology, improved business practices, and 
     technology transfer for the domestic petroleum industry.
       +$500,000 for the Consortium for Plant Biotechnology 
     Research
       +$1,000,000 for the National Environmental Respiratory 
     Center at the Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute.
       +$3,900,000 for the Mine Waste Technology Program at the 
     National Environmental Waste Technology, Testing, and 
     Evaluation Center.
       +$1,500,000 for the Connecticut River Airshed-Watershed 
     Consortium.
       +$3,600,000 for the Water Environment Research Foundation.
       +$3,600,000 for the American Water Works Association 
     Research Foundation.
       +$700,000 for the Mid-America Regional Council to apply 
     urban agroforestry technologies to meet community green 
     infrastructure needs.
       +$1,000,000 for the Center for Estuarine Research at the 
     University of South Alabama.
       +$1,000,000 for the Alabama Department of Environmental 
     Management for the Alabama Water and Wastewater Training 
     Program.
       +$1,000,000 for the Environmental Lung Center at the 
     National Jewish Medical and Research Center.
       +$2,000,000 for air quality program for Fairbanks North 
     Star Borough, Alaska.
       Drinking Water Security.--The Committee supports the budget 
     request of $21,900,000 in fiscal year 2003, which includes 
     $16,900,000 in Science and Technology and $5,000,000 in STAG 
     for water security coordinator State grants to address the 
     security of our Nation's drinking water and wastewater 
     systems. The Committee notes these funds, in

[[Page 1050]]

     addition to the approximately $140,000,000 provided by the 
     Committee in previous supplemental appropriations acts, will 
     result in the Committee's having recommended a total of 
     $160,000,000 for drinking water security efforts. The 
     Committee is disappointed that the Administration did not 
     release $50,000,000 of this funding. The Committee directs 
     that by March 31, 2003, the Agency provide a full accounting 
     of how these funds have been or will be expended. 
     Additionally, within the funds provided, the Committee 
     strongly encourages EPA to support water infrastructure 
     research and development activities as well as security 
     vulnerability assessments. The Committee is also aware of 
     efforts to develop a Water Information Security Analysis 
     Center (ISAC), and strongly encourages EPA to provide support 
     for the implementation of this system to provide a secure 
     communications network linking law enforcement and local 
     drinking water systems.
       Emission standards study.--EPA is directed to submit a 
     report no later than February 15, 2004 on the practices and 
     procedures by which States develop separate emission 
     standards, including standards for nonroad engines or 
     vehicles, as compared to the development by EPA of national 
     emission standards under the Clean Air Act. This report shall 
     include an assessment of the procedures, practices, standards 
     and requirements used by States as opposed to those used by 
     the EPA, including how States and the EPA take into account 
     technological feasibility, economic feasibility, impact on 
     the economy, costs, safety, noise and energy factors 
     associated in the development of these standards.
       Coeur d'Alene Superfund site.--In accordance with the 
     Record of Decision (ROD) for the Bunker Hill Mining and 
     Metallurgical Complex Operable Unit 3 issued in September 
     2002, remediation work has begun in the Coeur d'Alene River 
     Basin in northern Idaho. Because of the estimated expense and 
     duration of this remediation, the Committee makes available 
     $850,000 from within available funds for the Agency to 
     contract with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) so that 
     the NAS can independently evaluate the Coeur d'Alene 
     Superfund site. This evaluation is to include an examination 
     of EPA's scientific and technical practices in Superfund site 
     area definition, human and ecological risk assessment, 
     remedial planning, and decision making. NAS further is 
     expected to assess the adequacy and application of EPA's own 
     Superfund guidance in this case in terms of currently 
     available scientific and technical knowledge and best 
     practices, as well as to provide guidance to facilitate 
     scientifically based and timely decision making for the Coeur 
     d'Alene site. This funding is intended to implement the 
     specific tasks outlined in an NAS plan of action dated June 
     11, 2002.
       The Agency is directed to execute a contract with the NAS 
     for this study within 120 days of approval of this 
     legislation, and the NAS is expected to complete the study 
     within 24 months of the contract date. In directing this 
     study, it is the intent of the Committee that ongoing and 
     planned remediation activities within the 21-square mile 
     Bunker Hill site and Coeur d'Alene Basin under the Records of 
     Decision not be disrupted, delayed, or adversely impacted in 
     any way prior to completion of the NAS study. The EPA may 
     choose to amend the RODs based on the findings of the NAS 
     study once it has been completed, consistent with CERCLA.
       The Committee has not included proposed bill language 
     relative to the environmental services fund.

                 environmental programs and management

Appropriations, 2002..................................\1\$2,093,511,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................2,047,703,800
Committee recommendation..................................2,136,569,000

\1\Includes $39,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 supplemental funding.

                          program description

       The Agency's ``Environmental programs and management'' 
     account includes the development of environmental standards; 
     monitoring and surveillance of pollution conditions; direct 
     Federal pollution control planning; technical assistance to 
     pollution control agencies and organizations; preparation of 
     environmental impact statements; enforcement and compliance 
     assurance; and assistance to Federal agencies in complying 
     with environmental standards and insuring that their 
     activities have minimal environmental impact. It provides 
     personnel compensation, benefits, and travel and other 
     administrative expenses for all agency programs except 
     hazardous substance Superfund, LUST, Science and Technology, 
     Oil Spill Response, and OIG.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $2,136,569,000 for environmental 
     programs and management, an increase of $88,865,200 above the 
     budget request and $82,058,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted level.
       The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
     budget request:
       +$20,100,000 to fully fund enforcement FTEs at no less than 
     the 2001 level, consistent with the 2001 operating plan. The 
     Committee does not recommend the Administration's request to 
     reduce funding for Federal enforcement of environmental laws 
     to instead fund a new State enforcement grant program.
       +$9,160,000 for Environmental Education, equal to the 2002 
     level. The budget request proposed to eliminate this program.
       +$2,000,000 for Environmental Justice, for a total of 
     $6,079,000. This amount is $1,915,000 above the 2002 program 
     level.
       +$5,275,000 for the National Estuary Program, for a total 
     of $24,521,000. This amount is equal to the 2002 program 
     level.
       +$5,200,000 for the Energy Star program, for a total 
     program level of $55,000,000. This amount is $6,400,000 above 
     the 2002 level.
       -$8,969,000 for regulatory development, for a total program 
     level of $27,412,000, equal to the 2002 level.
       -$3,156,500 as a general reduction, subject to normal 
     reprogramming guidelines.
       +$2,000,000 for Chesapeake Bay small watershed grants. The 
     Committee expects that the funds provided for this program, 
     managed by the Fish and Wildlife Foundation, shall be used 
     for community-based projects including those that design and 
     implement on-the-ground and in-the-water environmental 
     restoration or protection activities to help meet Chesapeake 
     Bay Program goals and objectives. This increase will result 
     in a total of $22,651,000 available in fiscal year 2003 for 
     the Chesapeake Bay Program, which is $1,383,600 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 program level.
       +$1,372,000 for the Great Lakes National Program Office, 
     for a total program level of $16,500,000. This amount is 
     $1,570,000 above the 2002 program level.
       +$2,320,000 for the Lake Champlain Basin Program, for a 
     total program level of $3,275,000. This amount is $775,000 
     above the 2002 program level.
       +$2,000,000 for the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Restoration 
     Program. The Committee directs the Administrator to give 
     priority consideration to the proposals of the Lake 
     Pontchartrain Basin Foundation.
       +$2,523,000 for the Long Island Sound Program, for a total 
     program level of $3,000,000. This amount is $500,000 above 
     the 2002 program level.
       The following increases to the budget are each to be 
     reduced by 10 percent:
       +$250,000 for the Maryland Bureau of Mines for an acid mine 
     drainage remediation project.
       +$5,000,000 for America's Clean Water Foundation for 
     implementation of on-farm environmental assessments for 
     livestock operations.
       +$1,000,000 for projects demonstrating the benefits of Low 
     Impact Development along the Anacostia Watershed in Prince 
     Georges County, Maryland.
       +$500,000 for the University of Arkansas to develop bio-
     environmental engineering solutions to watershed management.
       +$50,000 for the Northwest Straits Commission.
       +$700,000 for the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission 
     with distribution as follows: $160,000 to the Northwest 
     Indian Fisheries Commission for coordination and $540,000 to 
     be divided among the 26 participating tribes to implement 
     this tribal initiative by integrating state, Federal, tribal 
     and local governmental efforts to develop common water 
     quality protection goals and reduce jurisdictional barriers.
       +$200,000 for the Columbia Basin Groundwater Area 
     Management Study.
       +$500,000 for the Gateway Cities Council of Governments, 
     California, pilot program to reduce diesel emissions.
       +$750,000 for Columbus Water Works, Georgia, biosolids 
     thermophilic treatment technology demonstration.
       +$250,000 for the Illinois Department of Agriculture's 
     Council on Best Management Practices initiative to reduce 
     nitrate contamination in drinking water.
       +$250,000 for the CropLife Foundation North Carolina 
     environmental stewardship project.
       +$500,000 for the Central California ozone study.
       +$500,000 for the Center for Agricultural and Rural 
     Development at Iowa State University for the Resource and 
     Agricultural Policy Systems program.
       +$500,000 for the Small Business Pollution Prevention 
     Center at the University of Northern Iowa.
       +$750,000 for the painting and coating assistance 
     initiative through the University of Northern Iowa.
       +$100,000 for the American Farmland Trust Center for 
     Agriculture in the Environment for sustainable agriculture in 
     Hawaii and the American Pacific.
       +$500,000 for the Economic Development Alliance of Hawaii 
     promote biotechnology to reduce pesticide use in tropical and 
     subtropical agricultural production
       +$250,000 for the County of Hawaii and the Hawaii Island 
     Economic Development Board to establish and implement a 
     community development model for renewable resource management 
     by upgrading solid waste transfer stations into community 
     recycling centers.
       +$250,000 for a storm water research initiative at the 
     University of Vermont.
       +$200,000 for the Vermont small business compliance 
     assistance project conducted by the Vermont Small Business 
     Development Center.

[[Page 1051]]

       +$500,000 for Boston Metropolitan Area Planning Council 
     (MAPC) and the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (MTC) 
     to develop regional solutions for managing and protecting 
     water resources.
       +$160,000 for the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Commission 
     Crandon Mine analysis.
       +$500,000 for the Sand County Foundation in Wisconsin for 
     an incentive program to promote the reduction of nitrogen 
     discharge in the Upper Mississippi River Basin.
       +$250,000 for Livingston Parish, Louisiana, for a water and 
     wastewater infrastructure feasibility study.
       +$250,000 for the Vermont Department of Agriculture to work 
     with conservation districts and local communities to reduce 
     non-point source run-off in the Potash Brook watershed.
       +$500,000 for the Lohontan Regional Water Quality Control 
     Board in California for the Board, working with California 
     water officials and the State of Nevada, to address Lake 
     Tahoe water quality issues.
       +$50,000 for the Tioga County Department of Economic 
     Development and Planning, New York, for the Owego 
     infrastructure master plan.
       +$200,000 for design, engineering, and planning activities 
     related to the pollution prevention of Wreck Pond and nearby 
     beaches in Spring Lake, New Jersey.
       +$150,000 for the New Jersey EnvironMentors project.
       +$350,000 for planning and engineering studies for the 
     Storm Lake, Iowa, cleanup project.
       +$250,000 for a study to address the characterization and 
     remediation of ash sites in Jacksonville, Florida.
       +$16,000,000 for rural water training and technical 
     assistance activities and source water protection initiatives 
     with distribution as follows: $9,000,000 for the National 
     Rural Water Association, $3,500,000 for the Rural Community 
     Assistance Program, $750,000 for the Ground Water Protection 
     Council, $750,000 for the Water Systems Council to assist in 
     the effective delivery of water to rural citizens nationwide, 
     and $2,000,000 for the source water protection program.
       +$200,000 for the Northeast Waste Management Officials 
     Association to continue solid waste, hazardous waste, 
     cleanup, and pollution prevention programs.
       +$200,000 for the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use 
     Management (NESCAUM).
       +$2,500,000 for the National Alternative Fuels Training 
     Consortium.
       +$1,500,000 for the Ecological and Water Resources 
     Assessment Project.
       +$500,000 for the Valley Water Mill Watershed Education and 
     Demonstration Center.
       +$175,000 for the Hypoxia Education and Stewardship 
     Project.
       +$200,000 for the Sutherlin, Oregon Water Control 
     District's Watershed Assessment Project.
       +$500,000 for the Kenai river Center in Kenai, Alaska.
       +$2,000,000 for Region 10 environmental compliance 
     activities in Alaska.
       +$2,000,000 for the Coeur d'Alene Basin Commission to 
     continue a pilot program for environmental response, natural 
     resource restoration and related activities.
       +$1,500,000 for ORSANCO for the Ohio River Pollution 
     Reduction Program.
       +$500,000 for the University of Southern Maine for 
     environmental education activities.
       +$1,500,000 for the University of Louisville for the Stream 
     Restoration Institute.
       +$2,500,000 for the Southwest Center for Environmental 
     Research and Policy.
       +$4,000,000 for the Small Public Water System Technology 
     Centers at Western Kentucky University, the University of New 
     Hampshire, the University of Alaska-Sitka, Pennsylvania State 
     University, the University of Missouri-Columbia, Montana 
     State University, the University of Illinois, and Mississippi 
     State University.
       +$1,000,000 to complete the full feasibility study/
     environmental impact statement for the Medford, Oregon, 
     effluent reuse project.
       Brownfields.--The Committee supports the request of 
     $29,500,000 for Brownfields administrative costs, and has 
     included bill language, as requested by the administration, 
     to specify that funds in this account are available for these 
     purposes. The Committee notes that this amount, coupled with 
     the $170,500,000 provided in the State and Tribal Assistance 
     Grants accounts, makes $200,000,000 available in fiscal year 
     2003 for implementation of the Small Business Liability 
     Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002.
       Enforcement.--The Committee is deeply concerned that the 
     Agency's implementation of fiscal year 2002 enforcement 
     funding has been inconsistent with the Committee's direction. 
     Specifically, the fiscal year 2002 VA-HUD conference report 
     rejected proposed cuts to enforcement, and directed the 
     Agency to restore enforcement funding in a manner consistent 
     with the fiscal year 2001 operating plan. Instead, the Agency 
     has redirected 30 civil enforcement FTE to the criminal 
     enforcement program. The Agency asserts that the conference 
     directive occurred prior to management's understanding of the 
     full scope and role of the EPA's participation in criminal 
     enforcement efforts associated with homeland security. The 
     Committee recognizes and appreciates the vital investigative 
     expertise of EPA's criminal enforcement program--that is why 
     the Committee also provided an additional $6,000,000 in 
     fiscal year 2002 supplemental funds to assist the Agency's 
     increased response to terrorism in the area of criminal 
     investigations. Instead, the Agency has planned to spend this 
     funding on other homeland security related priorities that 
     the Committee did not intend to fund. The Committee maintains 
     that any increase in criminal enforcement activities 
     necessary should be funded through these additional 
     supplemental funds, not at the expense of other important 
     enforcement functions. Therefore, the Committee directs the 
     Agency to halt the redirection of enforcement positions from 
     civil to criminal activities, to restore civil enforcement 
     funding to not less than the 2001 level. The Committee notes 
     that the Agency submitted a report responding to this 
     directive, and further directs the Agency to report to the 
     Committee no later than February 3, 2003, on how the Agency 
     has accomplished this directive. Additionally, the Committee 
     continues to be concerned about the vacancy rate in the 
     Office of Enforcement and Compliance (OECA), where over 100 
     FTE positions are unfilled. The Committee directs the Agency 
     to report by February 3, 2003, with an aggressive plan to 
     fill and retain these vacancies.
       Chromated copper arsenate (CCA).--The Committee continues 
     to be concerned about whether there are significant health 
     and safety risks related to CCA-treated consumer products, 
     including playground equipment, decks, picnic tables, 
     walkways/boardwalks, landscaping timers and fences. In a 
     February 2002 report required by the Committee, EPA informed 
     the Committee that the Agency is currently conducting a risk 
     assessment of CCA-treated consumer products. The Committee 
     directs the Agency to accelerate the schedule for this risk 
     assessment and to complete it by February 3, 2003. The 
     Committee expects this assessment to include concrete 
     findings and conclusions about whether there are significant 
     health and safety risks of CCA-treated wood products. The 
     Committee also expects the assessment to include 
     recommendations on ways to mitigate potential risks, and the 
     Agency's plans to conduct public education to ensure that 
     consumers, local governments, and school systems are aware of 
     potential risks and ways to mitigate them.
       Food Quality Protection Act.--The Committee directs EPA to 
     submit to Congress by February 3, 2003, a resource plan 
     detailing the number of pesticide tolerance re-assessments 
     and re-registrations required under FQPA, the number and kind 
     of such activities completed since 1996, the status of the 
     remaining activities, including the projected number to be 
     completed year-by-year under FQPA, and the level of resources 
     needed to meet these deadlines. In estimating resources, EPA 
     should indicate the number of FTEs or contracted activities 
     that would be required for these activities.

                      office of inspector general

Appropriations, 2002........................................$34,019,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................35,325,000
Committee recommendation.....................................37,325,000

                          program description

       The Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides audit, 
     evaluation, and investigation products and advisory services 
     to improve the performance and integrity of EPA programs and 
     operations.
       Trust fund resources are transferred to this account 
     directly from the hazardous substance Superfund.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $37,325,000 for the Office of 
     Inspector General, $2,000,000 above the budget request and 
     $3,306,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. In addition, 
     $12,742,000 will be available by transfer from the Superfund 
     account, for a total of $48,067,000. The trust fund resources 
     will be transferred to the inspector general ``General fund'' 
     account with an expenditure transfer.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,318,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................42,918,000
Committee recommendation.....................................42,918,000

                          program description

       The appropriation for buildings and facilities at EPA 
     covers the necessary maintenance, and major repairs and 
     improvements to existing installations which are used by the 
     Agency. This appropriation also covers new construction 
     projects when appropriate.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $42,918,000 for buildings and 
     facilities, $17,600,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     the same as the budget request.
       The Committee notes that with this appropriation, the 
     Committee has provided a total of $49,000,000 account-wide in 
     fiscal years 2002 and 2003 for EPA to better secure its 
     offices and laboratory facilities. The Committee directs that 
     by March 31, 2002, the Agency supply an accounting of how 
     these funds have provided a safer working environment for its

[[Page 1052]]

     employees. This report should include a description of 
     activities undertaken at each office or facility.

                     hazardous substance superfund


                     (including transfers of funds)

Appropriations, 2002..................................\1\$1,311,292,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,272,888,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,272,888,000

\1\Includes $41,292,000 in fiscal year 2002 supplemental funding.

                          program description

       On October 17, 1986, Congress amended the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 
     1980 [CERCLA] through the Superfund Amendments and 
     Reauthorization Act of 1986 [SARA]. SARA reauthorized and 
     expanded the Hazardous Substance Superfund to address the 
     problems of uncontrolled hazardous waste sites and spills. 
     Specifically, the legislation mandates that EPA: (1) provide 
     emergency response to hazardous waste spills; (2) take 
     emergency action at hazardous waste sites that pose an 
     imminent hazard to public health or environmentally sensitive 
     ecosystems; (3) engage in long-term planning, remedial 
     design, and construction to clean up hazardous waste sites 
     where no financially viable responsible party can be found; 
     (4) take enforcement actions to require responsible private 
     and Federal parties to clean up hazardous waste sites; and 
     (5) take enforcement actions to recover costs where the fund 
     has been used for cleanup. Due to the site-specific nature of 
     the Agency's Superfund program, site-specific travel is not 
     considered part of the overall travel ceiling set for the 
     Superfund account.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $1,272,888,000 for Superfund, 
     equal to the budget request and $38,404,000 below the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level including supplemental funding. The 
     amount provided includes equal amounts of $636,444,000 from 
     general revenues.
       The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
     budget request:
    +$25,000,000 for response, for a total response level of 
      $856,900,000.
    -$25,000,000 for building decontamination research. The Committee 
      commends EPA for its leadership role in anthrax decontamination 
      of the Capitol complex, and supports the Agency's increased 
      efforts in developing new technologies to decontaminate buildings 
      from future releases of chemical and biological substances. 
      However, the Committee is concerned that the budget proposed to 
      fund this initiative at the expense of core Superfund cleanup 
      activities. The Committee notes that this reduction will result 
      in a total of $50,000,000 for EPA's building decontamination 
      research initiative for fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee does not recommend the past practice of 
     delaying the availability of Superfund resources until later 
     in the year.

              leaking underground storage tank trust fund

Appropriations, 2002........................................$73,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................72,313,000
Committee recommendation.....................................72,313,000

                          program description

       The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorizations Act of 1986 
     [SARA] established the leaking underground storage tank 
     [LUST] trust fund to conduct corrective actions for releases 
     from leaking underground storage tanks containing petroleum 
     and other hazardous substances. EPA implements the LUST 
     program through State cooperative agreement grants which 
     enable States to conduct corrective actions to protect human 
     health and the environment, and through non-State entities 
     including Indian tribes under section 8001 of RCRA. The trust 
     fund is also used to enforce responsible parties to finance 
     corrective actions and to recover expended funds used to 
     clean up abandoned tanks.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $72,313,000 
     for the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund, a 
     decrease of $687,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level. The Committee directs that not less than 85 percent of 
     these funds be provided to the States and tribal governments.

                           oil spill response

Appropriations, 2002........................................$15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................15,581,000
Committee recommendation.....................................15,581,000

                          program description

       This appropriation, authorized by the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act of 1987 and amended by the Oil 
     Pollution Act of 1990, provides funds to prepare for and 
     prevent releases of oil and other petroleum products in 
     navigable waterways. Also EPA is reimbursed for incident 
     specific response costs through the Oil Spill Liability Trust 
     Fund managed by the United States Coast Guard. EPA is 
     responsible for: directing all cleanup and removal activities 
     posing a threat to public health and the environment; 
     conducting site inspections, including compelling responsible 
     parties to undertake cleanup actions; reviewing containment 
     plans at facilities; reviewing area contingency plans; 
     pursuing cost recovery of fund-financed cleanups; and 
     conducting research of oil cleanup techniques. Funds for this 
     appropriation are provided through the Oilspill Liability 
     Trust Fund which is composed of fees and collections made 
     through provisions of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the 
     Comprehensive Oil Pollution Liability and Compensation Act, 
     the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, the Outer Continental Shelf 
     Lands Act Amendments of 1978, and the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act as amended. Pursuant to law, the Trust Fund is 
     managed by the United States Coast Guard.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $15,581,000 for the oil spill 
     response trust fund, $581,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
     enacted and the level budget request.


                   state and tribal ASSISTANCE grants

Appropriations, 2002..................................\1\$3,738,276,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,463,776,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,920,639,000

\1\Includes $5,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 supplemental funding.


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The ``State and tribal assistance grants'' account funds 
     grants to support the State revolving fund programs; State, 
     tribal, regional, and local environmental programs; and 
     special projects to address critical water and waste water 
     treatment needs.
       Included in this account are funds for the following 
     infrastructure grant programs: Clean Water and Drinking Water 
     State Revolving Funds; United States-Mexico Border Program; 
     Alaska Native villages; and Brownfield assessment and 
     revitalization grants.
       It also contains the following environmental grants, State/
     tribal program grants, and assistance and capacity building 
     grants: (1) nonpoint source (sec. 319 of the Federal Water 
     Pollution Control Act); (2) water quality cooperative 
     agreements (sec. 104(b)(3) of FWPCA; (3) public water system 
     supervision; (4) air resource assistance to State, regional, 
     local, and tribal governments (secs. 105 and 103 of the Clean 
     Air Act); (5) radon State grants; (6) water pollution control 
     agency resource supplementation (sec. 106 of the FWPCA); (7) 
     wetlands State program development; (8) underground injection 
     control; (9) Pesticides Program implementation; (10) lead 
     grants; (11) hazardous waste financial assistance; (12) 
     pesticides enforcement grants; (13) pollution prevention; 
     (14) toxic substances compliance; (15) Indians general 
     assistance grants; (16) underground storage tanks; (17) 
     enforcement and compliance assurance; (18) BEACHS Protection 
     grants (sec. 406 of FWPCA as amended); and (19) PWSS State 
     Counter-terrorism Coordinator grants; (20) Brownfields 
     cleanup grants; (21) targeted watershed grants; and (22) 
     pesticides enforcement. As with the case in past fiscal 
     years, no reprogramming requests associated with States and 
     Tribes applying for Performance Partnership Grants need to be 
     submitted to the Committee for approval should such grants 
     exceed the normal reprogramming limitations.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,920,639,000 
     for State and tribal assistance grants, an increase of 
     $456,863,000 over the budget request and an increase of 
     $187,363,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
     budget request:
       +$213,000,000 for the Clean Water State Revolving Loan 
     Fund, for a total of $1,425,000,000. This amount is 
     $75,000,000 above the 2002 level.
       +$25,000,000 for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, 
     for a total of $875,000,000. This amount is $25,000,000 above 
     the 2002 level.
       +$3,459,900 for Section 103 and 105 State and Local 
     Assistance grants, for a total of $225,000,000.
       +$12,100,000 for the Section 106 State Pollution Control 
     Grant Program, which includes support for State Total Maximum 
     Daily Load programs, for a total program level of 
     $192,477,000. This amount is equal to the 2002 level.
       +5,000,000 for Alaska Native Villages, for a total of 
     $45,000,000.
       +$3,000,000 for remediation of above ground leaking fuel 
     tanks in Alaska as authorized by Public Law 106-554.
       -$15,000,000 for State Multimedia Enforcement Grants. 
     Instead, the Committee has recommended increased funding for 
     Federal enforcement activities in the Environmental Programs 
     and Management account.
       -$25,000,000 for Information Exchange Network grants. The 
     Committee supports the Agency's efforts to build an internet-
     based system that will enable environmental information 
     exchanges among States, tribes, localities, the regulated 
     community, the public and the Agency. In fiscal year 2002, 
     the Committee provided $25,000,000 for these

[[Page 1053]]

     grants, which the Committee understands will be awarded late 
     in fiscal year 2002 and should be sufficient to cover State 
     needs for fiscal year 2003. Instead, the Committee has 
     provided only the requested $20,157,000, which includes 
     $3,100,000 in Superfund and $17,057,000 in EPM, for the 
     Agency's component of the information integration project.
       -$8,000,000 for Homestake Mine.
       -$10,000,000 for targeted watershed grants, for a total of 
     $11,000,000 for this new program, which includes $10,000,000 
     within the STAG account and $1,000,000 in EPM.
       +$140,000,000 for special needs infrastructure grants. This 
     amount is to be reduced by 10 percent by reducing each grant 
     by 10 percent. This amount, together with an additional 
     $2,241,450 previously made available in fiscal year 2000, is 
     to be allocated in the following manner:
    $885,000 for Washoe County, Nevada for the Spanish Valley Nitrate 
      Remediation Pilot Program;
    $875,000 for the Orleans Parish Sewer and Water Board, New Orleans, 
      Louisiana, for an inflow and infiltration project;
    $875,000 for East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, for water and 
      wastewater infrastructure improvements;
    $770,000 for the Mason County Public Utility District, Washington 
      to construct a wastewater and collection facility in Hoodsport, 
      Washington;
    $750,000 for the Village of Pomeroy, Ohio for the construction of 
      an iron and manganese removal water treatment plant;
    $875,000 for the City of Lake Charles, Louisiana, for wastewater 
      treatment plant improvements;
    $2,000,000 for South and North Valley of Albuquerque and Bernalillo 
      County, New Mexico, for water and wastewater treatment;
    $2,000,000 for San Antonio, Texas for water and sewer improvements;
    $2,000,000 for Flowood, Mississippi for the Hogg Creek Interceptor 
      System;
    $1,850,000 for the City of Cynthiana, Kentucky for the Cynthiana 
      Water Treatment Plant;
    $1,800,000 for the Palmer, Alaska for a water main;
    $1,700,000 to Kansas City, Missouri for the water component of the 
      Beacon Hill Redevelopment Plan;
    $875,000 for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, for sewer infrastructure 
      improvements;
    $750,000 for the Village of Belmont, Ohio for the construction of a 
      wastewater treatment plant and collection system;
    $750,000 for the County of Nassau, New York for water quality 
      infrastructure improvements at Nassau County Park facilities;
    $750,000 for the City of Van Wert, Ohio for the expansion of the 
      reservoir;
    $750,000 for the City of Huntington Beach, California for the 
      Alabama Storm Drain project;
    $750,000 for the City of Compton, California, for a water well 
      replacement project;
    $750,000 for the City of Centerville, South Dakota, for drinking 
      water infrastructure improvements;
    $575,000 for the Alabama Rural Utilities Authority for remedial on-
      site and collective wastewater treatment systems in Lowndes 
      County, Alabama;
    $550,000 for the State of Hawaii Health Department, for cesspool 
      system replacement;
    $550,000 for the City of Hood River, Oregon, drinking water 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $500,000 to Dudley, Missouri for the City Water Expansion Project;
    $500,000 for Wrangell, Alaska for sewer expansion;
    $1,000,000 for the Town of Bridgeville, Delaware, for wastewater 
      treatment plant improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe in Agency Village, 
      South Dakota, for the expansion of the Brown Marshall Day Water 
      System;
    $1,000,000 for the Mount Pleasant Waterworks Commission, South 
      Carolina, for the Snowden Community Wastewater Collection 
      Project;
    $1,000,000 for the Fairbanks City, Alaska sewer and storm drain 
      connection;
    $1,000,000 for the Coolin Sewer District in Idaho for a wastewater 
      facility upgrade project;
    $500,000 for Vinalhaven, Maine for its sewer system;
    $500,000 for Vigo County, Indiana for the Sugar Creek Township 
      Sanitary Sewer Project;
    $500,000 for the Village of Port Byron, Illinois for drinking water 
      improvements;
    $500,000 for the Township of Vernon, New Jersey, for wastewater 
      improvement;
    $500,000 for the Town of Robbins, North Carolina, for water 
      treatment plant improvements;
    $600,000 for the Pawtucket Water Supply Board for the purchase of 
      the City of Central Falls Water Distribution System;
    $200,000 for water and sewer improvements in Morgantown, North 
      Carolina;
    $150,000 for water and sewer improvements in Albermarle, North 
      Carolina;
    $200,000 for water and sewer improvements in Gastonia, North 
      Carolina;
    $50,000 for water and sewer improvements in Valdese, North 
      Carolina;
    $500,000 for the Town of Coventry, Rhode Island, for drinking water 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $500,000 for the Northeast Public Sewer District, Missouri for the 
      Old Highway 141 Collection System;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Akron, Ohio for sewer infrastructure 
      improvements;
    $1,000,000 for Meridian, Mississippi for wastewater improvements;
    $1,000,000 for Jackson, Mississippi for water infrastructure 
      improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the Upper and Lower River Road Water and Sewer 
      District, Montana for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
    $1,000,000 for Fayette, Mississippi for Jefferson County water and 
      sewer improvements project;
    $500,000 for the Kodiak, Alaska for water and sewer upgrades;
    $500,000 for the Holland Regional Water System in Effingham, 
      Illinois for a water treatment facility to improve regional 
      drinking water;
    $500,000 for the Glaize Creek Public Sewer District, Missouri for 
      the Barnhart Subdivisions Project;
    $500,000 for the Fairfax County Water Authority, Virginia for 
      infrastructure enhancements;-
    $500,000 for the City of Wilmington, Illinois to develop a new 
      wastewater facility;
    $500,000 for the City of Whittier, California, for water and sewer 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $500,000 for the City of West Liberty, Iowa, for wastewater 
      treatment improvements;
    $500,000 for the City of Shelton, Washington for design and 
      construction of the Shelton Area Regional Water and Sewer 
      Project;
    $500,000 for the City of Sacramento, California, for Combined Sewer 
      System Improvement and Rehabilitation Project;
    $500,000 for the City of Pevely, Missouri, for wastewater treatment 
      plant improvements;
    $500,000 for the City of Omaha, Nebraska, for sewer separation 
      construction;
    $500,000 for the City of Moline, Illinois for drinking water 
      improvements;
    $500,000 for the City of Middletown, New York for the City of 
      Middletown Filtration Plant;
    $500,000 for the City of Huron, South Dakota, for drinking water 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $500,000 for the City of Georgetown, Illinois for drinking water 
      improvements;
    $500,000 for the City of Gallup, New Mexico, for wastewater 
      treatment plant improvements and upgrades;
    $500,000 for the City of Galena, Illinois to expand and improve 
      wastewater facilities;
    $500,000 for the City of Flint, Michigan to upgrade the Pierson 
      Road water main system;
    $500,000 for the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas for regional 
      wastewater system improvements;

[[Page 1054]]

    $500,000 for the City of Eureka, California, for the Martin Slough 
      Interceptor project;
    $500,000 for the City of Alexandria, Virginia for wastewater 
      treatment facility upgrades;
    $500,000 for the City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii, for 
      wastewater treatment technologies;
    $500,000 for Sumiton, Alabama for the Sumiton Sanitary Sewer 
      System;
    $500,000 for Saco, Maine for its sewer system; $500,000 for 
      Latimer, Kansas for a pipeline project;
    $500,000 for Lake County, California, for the Clear Lake Basin 2000 
      project;
    $500,000 for Box Elder, South Dakota, for water and wastewater 
      system improvements;
    $500,000 for Berry, Alabama for the construction of a new sanitary 
      wastewater lagoon system;
    $500,000 for Augusta, Maine for its sewer system;
    $500,000 for a water supply project in Guin, Alabama;
    $450,000 to Bolivar, Missouri for the Bolivar Industrial Park Sewer 
      and Water System;
    $450,000 for Talladega, Alabama for county water supply facilities 
      upgrades and construction;
    $400,000 for the City of Deadwood, South Dakota, for a drinking 
      water extension project;
    $400,000 for Mountain Village, Colorado for water infrastructure 
      investment;
    $4,000,000 for Baltimore City, Maryland, for sewer infrastructure 
      improvements;
    $350,000 to Warrenton, Missouri for the Warrenton Industrial Park 
      Lift Station;
    $350,000 for the Community of Dakota Dunes, South Dakota, for a 
      drinking water infrastructure connection project;
    $325,000 for the Town of Notasulga, Alabama for the Notasulga 
      Wastewater System;
    $300,000 for Tillamook, Oregon for infrastructure;
    $300,000 for the Albany-Millersburg Joint Water Project in Oregon;
    $300,000 for Muscle Shoals, Alabama for a wastewater project;
    $300,000 for Mountain Village, Colorado for remediation of above-
      ground storage tanks;
    $250,000 to Warrensburg, Missouri for the water component of the 
      Warrensburg Downtown Revitalization Project;
    $250,000 for the Wahkiakum County Public Utility District, 
      Washington for the Puget Island Drinking Water Project;
    $250,000 for the United Water Conservation District of Ventura 
      County, California, for the Oxnard Plain Groundwater Recharge 
      Project;
    $250,000 for the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission, 
      Eugene and Springfield, Oregon, drinking and wastewater 
      improvements;
    $250,000 for the Community Water System Public Water Authority of 
      Arkansas in Lonoke and White Counties for the Green Ferry 
      drinking water project;
    $250,000 for the City of St. George, Utah for water and sewer line 
      extensions;
    $250,000 for the City of South Salt Lake, Utah for water 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $250,000 for the City of Filer, Idaho for a new drinking water 
      system;
    $250,000 for Park City, Utah for the Judge Tunnel Water Treatment 
      Facility;
    $200,000 for Eva, Alabama for a sewer system project;
    $2,500,000 for the Narragansett Bay Commission in Providence and 
      other Bay communities in Rhode Island for sewer infrastructure 
      improvements;
    $2,500,000 for the City of Mason City, Iowa, for the Municipal 
      Water System Radium Removal Project;
    $2,500,000 for Monticello, Utah for a primary water supply 
      pipeline;
    $2,000,000 to Joplin, Missouri for the Crossroads Relief Sewer #2 
      and Sewer Extension Project;
    $2,000,000 for the Three Rivers Wet Weather Demonstration Program, 
      Allegheny County, Pennsylvania to fund several innovative 
      demonstration projects in municipalities in the greater 
      Pittsburgh area to plan, design, and construct projects to 
      eliminate separate sewer overflows;
    $2,000,000 for the Maryland Department of Environment for Woodland 
      Village sewer and water improvements;
    $2,000,000 for the City of Park River, North Dakota for the Park 
      River Water System Improvements;
    $2,000,000 for the City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin for the Central 
      Metropolitan Interceptor Improvement Project;
    $2,000,000 for the City of Atlanta, Georgia for the Nancy Creek 
      sewer infrastructure improvement project;
    $1,700,000 for the Champlain Water District, Vermont, for 
      Chittenden County stormwater infrastructure improvements;
    $500,000 for the Durango Water Treatment Facility in Durango, 
      Colorado
    $1,650,000 for the Town of Klickitat, Washington, to construct a 
      new wastewater water treatment facility;
    $1,600,000 for Brownsville District Sewer Development, Colorado for 
      water and wastewater investments;
    $1,500,000 to Monett, Missouri for the Monett Sewer Treatment Plant 
      Upgrade;
    $1,500,000 for the Town of Warren, Vermont, for wastewater 
      treatment facility upgrades;
    $1,500,000 for the City of Safford, Arizona for wastewater 
      treatment plant construction;
    $1,500,000 for the City of Norman, Oklahoma for wastewater system 
      improvements;
    $1,500,000 for the City of Lead, South Dakota, for water and 
      wastewater system improvements;
    $1,500,000 for the City of Franklin, Tennessee for water quality 
      improvements;
    $1,500,000 for the City of Conrad, Montana for a wastewater and 
      drinking water project;
    $1,500,000 for the City of Belgrade, Montana, for wastewater 
      treatment;
    $1,500,000 for the Camden County Municipal Authority, New Jersey, 
      for sewer infrastructure improvements;
    $1,500,000 for Nacogdoches, Texas for the development of a water 
      and sewer drainage system;
    $1,500,000 for Missoula, Montana for the Mullan Road Corridor 
      Project;
    $1,300,000 for the Town of Richmond, Vermont, for wastewater 
      treatment facility upgrades;
    $1,250,000 for South Florida Water Management District Tri-County 
      (Palm Beach, Martin and St. Lucie Counties) Biosolids Project;
    $1,250,000 for Eastern Orange and Seminole Counties, Florida, for 
      the Regional Reuse Project;
    $1,200,000 for the Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility for the 
      development of a water and sewer facility in Anchorage, Alaska;
    $1,100,000 for the City of Fallon, Nevada, for construction of an 
      arsenic treatment facility;
    $1,000,000 to the Eastern Snyder County Regional Authority in 
      Pennsylvania to upgrade its wastewater treatment plant, including 
      replacing equipment, improving the treatment system, and 
      installing new technology for nutrient removal, in order to 
      improve the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay;
    $700,000 for Virgin Valley Water District, Mesquite, Nevada, for 
      construction of an arsenic treatment facility;
    $1,000,000 for Upper Allen Township, Cumberland County, 
      Pennsylvania to increase sewer treatment capacity by repairing 
      inflow and infiltration problems in older sections of the 
      collection

[[Page 1055]]

      system, divert sewage to a treatment plant, and install new 
      sanitary sewer collection system extensions to replace 
      malfunctioning on-lot disposal systems;
    $1,000,000 for the Wasilla, Alaska for water and sewer 
      improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the Town of Harrington, Delaware, for wastewater 
      treatment plant improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission in West 
      Springfield, Massachusetts, for combined sewer overflow 
      improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the Commission of Public Works of the City of 
      Charleston, South Carolina, for wastewater tunnel replacement;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Saginaw, Michigan, for sewer 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Racine, Wisconsin for the Racine 
      Advanced Water Treatment System;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Port Huron, Michigan, for sewer 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the City of New Britain, Connecticut for the New 
      Britain Water Filtration Replacement Project;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Nashua, New Hampshire to upgrade the 
      waste water treatment system;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Manchester, New Hampshire to assist in 
      the water treatment plant upgrade and renovation;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Greenville, South Carolina, for water 
      and sewer infrastructure related to the Greenline-Spartanburg 
      Neighborhood Redevelopment Project;
    $750,000 for the City of Bancroft, Idaho for water system upgrades;
    $750,000 for Morristown, Ohio for a sanitary sewer collection 
      system;
    $750,000 for Blanding, Utah for water infrastructure improvements;
    $300,000 for the City of Las Vegas, Nevada, sewer replacement 
      project;
    $650,000 for the City of Sebree, Kentucky for the City of Sebree 
      Sewer project,
    $650,000 for Autauga County, Alabama for a sewer infrastructure 
      construction project;
    $600,000 for the Gold Hill, Oregon for a water intake relocation 
      project;
    $580,000 for the City of Richland, Washington, for wastewater 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Grafton, North Dakota for the Grafton 
      Water Treatment Plant Improvement;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Espanola, New Mexico for water and 
      wastewater treatment;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Clay, Kentucky for the Clay Sewer 
      project;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Burley, Idaho for improvements to the 
      wastewater treatment system;
    $1,000,000 for the City of Berlin, New Hampshire to assist in 
      construction of water delivery infrastructure;
    $1,000,000 for Eastern Calhoun County, Michigan, for regional 
      wastewater treatment infrastructure improvements;
    $1,000,000 for Corinna, Maine for its sewer system;
    $1,000,000 for Bristol County, Massachusetts, for sewer 
      infrastructure improvements;
    $1,000,000 for Alamogordo, New Mexico for the Alamogordo Regional 
      Desalination Project.
       Of the amount provided for high priority water and 
     wastewater facilities in the area of the United States-Mexico 
     border, the Committee intends $4,000,000 for the El Paso-Las 
     Cruces Sustainable Water Project and $2,000,000 for the 
     Brownsville water supply project.
       EPA is to work with the grant recipients on appropriate 
     cost-share arrangements consistent with past practice.
       In addition, the Committee recommends the budget request 
     for the following programs: BEACH grants ($10,000,000); 
     Section 319 non-point source pollution grants ($238,476,800); 
     United States-Mexico Border ($75,000,000); the Indian General 
     Assistance Program ($57,469,700); and Brownfields 
     infrastructure projects and grants ($170,500,000). The 
     Committee notes that this amount, along with $29,500,000 
     provided in the Environmental Programs and Management 
     account, brings total funding for Brownfields activities to 
     $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
       The Committee has included bill language, as carried in 
     previous appropriations acts, to clarify that drinking water 
     health effects studies are to be funded through the science 
     and technology account.
       The Committee has also included bill language, as requested 
     by the administration and as carried in previous 
     appropriations acts, to: (1) extend for an additional year 
     the authority for States to transfer funds between the Clean 
     Water SRF and the Drinking Water SRF; (2) waive the 1.5 
     percent cap on the Tribal set aside from non-point source 
     grants; (3) increase to 1.5 percent the cap on the Tribal 
     set-aside for the Clean Water SRF; and (4) require that any 
     funds provided to address the water infrastructure needs of 
     colonias within the United States along the United States-
     Mexico border be spent only in areas where the local 
     governmental entity has established an enforceable ordinance 
     or rule which prevents additional development within colonias 
     that lacks water, wastewater, or other necessary 
     infrastructure.
       Finally, the Committee has included bill language making a 
     technical correction to a grant provided to the City of 
     Welch, West Virginia, in fiscal year 2000.


                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

       Cooperative Agreements with Tribes.--The Committee has 
     included bill language, as proposed in the budget request and 
     as carried in previous appropriations acts, permitting EPA, 
     in carrying out environmental programs required or authorized 
     by law in the absence of an acceptable tribal program, to use 
     cooperative agreements with federally-recognized tribes and 
     inter-tribal consortia.
       Pesticide Tolerance Processing Fees.--The Committee has 
     included a provision prohibiting the Agency from collecting 
     pesticide tolerance processing fees as envisioned in the 
     proposed rule issued on June 9, 1999. The budget request 
     assumes that in 2003, EPA will have available to spend 
     approximately $25,000,000 in both retroactive and current 
     fees based on this proposed rule. However, the Committee 
     notes that the conference agreement on the Farm Bill (H. Rpt. 
     107-424, page 666) questioned the legal basis of this 
     proposed rule, and strongly encouraged the EPA to withdraw 
     the proposed rule and work with the appropriate House and 
     Senate oversight Committees to develop comprehensive 
     pesticide user fee legislation. Because of this lack of 
     consensus on the tolerance processing fee, the Committee 
     believes it would be irresponsible to assume the availability 
     of any funding for the Agency under this proposed rule, as 
     the budget request does. Furthermore, the Committee believes 
     that making such an assumption would leave the Agency without 
     sufficient funding to run its pesticides programs, which 
     would ultimately result in reductions to other important core 
     environmental activities to pay the approximately 200 FTE in 
     the pesticides programs. Therefore, to ensure that that 
     Agency has sufficient funding to run its pesticide programs, 
     the Committee has also included provisions to extend the 
     pesticide maintenance fee for an additional year, including 
     the collection of up to $23,200,000 for operation of the 
     registration, re-registration, and tolerance assessment 
     programs. The Committee notes that these provisions are 
     similar to provisions included in the fiscal year 2002 VA-HUD 
     conference agreement. Furthermore, the Committee stresses 
     that it recommends these actions for one additional year only 
     in order to allow for the development of a consensus proposal 
     for all pesticide fees, and notes that it has directed the 
     Agency to issue a final pesticide tolerance processing fee 
     rule, exclusive of retroactivity, no later than September 3, 
     2003. The Committee expects these issues to be resolved for 
     the fiscal year 2004 budget cycle, and does not intend to 
     include this or any similar stop-gap measure as part of the 
     fiscal year 2004 bill.

                   Executive Office of the President


                Office of Science and Technology Policy

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$5,267,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................5,368,000
Committee recommendation......................................5,368,000

                          program description

       The Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP] was 
     created by the National Science and Technology Policy, 
     Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-238) 
     and coordinates science and technology policy for the White 
     House. OSTP provides authoritative scientific and 
     technological information, analysis, and advice for the 
     President, for the executive branch, and for Congress; 
     participates in formulation, coordination, and implementation 
     of national and international policies and programs that 
     involve science and technology; maintains and promotes the 
     health and vitality of the U.S. science and technology 
     infrastructure; and coordinates research and development 
     efforts of the Federal Government to maximize the return on 
     the public's investment in science and technology and to 
     ensure Federal resources are used efficiently and 
     appropriately.
       OSTP provides support for the National Science and 
     Technology Council [NSTC].


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends the budget request of $5,368,000 
     for the Office of Science

[[Page 1056]]

     and Technology Policy. This represents an increase of 
     $101,000 or 1.9 percent over the fiscal year 2002 level.
       The Committee supports the administration's interagency 
     initiatives in nanoscience and engineering and information 
     technology research. These are cutting-edge interagency 
     programs that are important for the long term health of the 
     Nation. In the area of nanotechnology, the National Academy 
     of Sciences has made a number of recommendations that would 
     strengthen the interagency National Nanotechnology Initiative 
     (NNI). The Committee urges OSTP to give serious consideration 
     to the Academy's recommendations. The Committee is 
     particularly supportive of the recommendation for an 
     independent advisory council, modeled after the one used for 
     the information technology initiative. The Committee views 
     such outside advice as vital to help focus the interagency 
     program on critically important challenges. The Committee 
     also supports the recommendation calling for increased 
     interagency investments in areas related to nanotechnology 
     and the life sciences. It is already apparent that 
     applications of nanotechnology can have significant impacts 
     in disease diagnosis and treatment. Accordingly, the 
     Committee calls on OSTP to ensure the active participation of 
     the National Institutes of Health in this interagency 
     research initiative.
       The Committee is concerned with recent changes made in the 
     administration's interagency global change research program. 
     It is vital this interagency program be based on a broad, 
     well-balanced research agenda, focused on both short-term and 
     long-term needs and questions, and implemented using an open 
     peer review process to ensure scientific excellence. The 
     Committee believes that the Science Advisor must play the 
     lead role in the Federal Government's global environmental 
     research program to ensure scientific excellence is 
     maintained. OSTP is requested to provide the Committee with a 
     progress report on this matter by February 3, 2003.
       The Committee believes that the deployment of next-
     generation broadband networking infrastructure will stimulate 
     cutting edge research activities, create jobs, increase 
     productivity, and improve our quality of life. With 
     appropriate support from the Federal Government, the research 
     community can develop innovative last-mile technologies, 
     cutting-edge, high-bandwidth applications such as 
     telepresence, and advances in wide-area networking 
     technologies. The Committee urges OSTP to expeditiously re-
     establish the Presidential Information Technology Advisory 
     Committee (PITAC), and as part of their work, request PITAC 
     to develop a proposal to support research into applications 
     that will stimulate and promote ubiquitous broadband 
     deployment.
       The Committee remains concerned about the balance among 
     fields in the Federal research portfolio, particularly as it 
     relates to the physical sciences and engineering. Advances in 
     the biomedical area are dependent on progress in such areas 
     as physics, chemistry, electrical engineering, and chemical 
     engineering. However, progress in these fields is being 
     hindered by funding shortfalls. Therefore, the Committee 
     directs the Science Advisor, in conjunction with the 
     Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology 
     (PCAST), to develop an action plan to address this issue as a 
     part of the fiscal year 2004 budget proposal.
       The Committee is concerned that too few U.S. students are 
     pursuing undergraduate and advanced degrees in science and 
     engineering to meet the Nation's workforce needs. The 
     Committee recognizes that for advanced education to be 
     effective, it must be pursued at colleges and universities 
     with active research programs. The NSF, NASA, and other 
     agencies are in a unique position to help ensure that our 
     universities are well positioned to meet the Nation's needs. 
     The Committee believes that an overarching Federal strategy 
     should be developed. OSTP, in cooperation with the National 
     Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and the Nation's 
     colleges and universities, is urged to develop a 
     comprehensive strategy to increase the number of students 
     pursuing degrees in science and engineering. The plan should 
     include means to increase the number of university research 
     and educational groups, to increase the number of new, young 
     faculty; to build cooperative relationships between 
     universities and the various Federal agencies; and means for 
     attracting and supporting undergraduate and graduate 
     students. The plan should be submitted to the Committee by 
     March 15, 2003.
       The Committee is concerned about the health of the 
     infrastructure needed for a 21st century oceans research 
     program, including ships, observatories and related data 
     processing and communication capabilities. In December 2001 
     the Federal Oceanographic Facilities Committee reported to 
     the National Ocean Research Leadership Council on a long 
     range plan for the renewal of the academic research fleet. In 
     addition, last year this Committee asked OSTP, on behalf of 
     the administration, to develop an interagency plan for an 
     ocean observing system. The administration's plans for fleet 
     renewal and ocean observatories have not yet been submitted 
     to the Committee. Nevertheless, the Committee believes OSTP 
     should coordinate with the NORLC to exert leadership among 
     the agencies with research responsibilities related to the 
     oceans. Moving ahead with the modernization of the Nation's 
     oceanographic infrastructure should be a critical priority 
     for the administration. Therefore, the Committee directs OSTP 
     to submit a report with recommendations and management 
     options on the establishment of an oceans infrastructure 
     modernization fund. Such a fund could be established in one 
     or more agencies to be used to address issues related to 
     modernizing the ocean research fleet, establishing an 
     integrated ocean observation system, acquiring related 
     instrumentation and equipment, and for other related 
     purposes. This report should be submitted to the Committee on 
     Appropriations by April 7, 2003.
       The Committee is concerned about the long term health of 
     this country's semi-conductor manufacturing capabilities. 
     Other nations are moving aggressively to build up their own 
     capabilities and this has clear implications for U.S. 
     national and economic security. The Committee directs OSTP to 
     assemble an interagency committee involving the defense, 
     intelligence and civilian science and technology agencies to 
     assess the current state and the public policy implications 
     of future directions in semi-conductor manufacturing 
     capabilities. This report should make recommendations to the 
     Congress on the options available to retain a substantial 
     manufacturing capability in the United States. In addition, 
     the report should also include measures to ensure the 
     domestic retention of a world class semi-conductor R&D and 
     design capability. This report should be submitted to the 
     Committee by June 30, 2003.

  Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental Quality

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$2,974,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................3,031,000
Committee recommendation......................................3,031,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Council on Environmental Quality/Office of 
     Environmental Quality was established by the National 
     Environmental Policy Act and the Environmental Quality 
     Improvement Act of 1970. The Council serves as a source of 
     environmental expertise and policy analysis for the White 
     House, Executive Office of the President agencies, and other 
     Federal agencies. CEQ promulgates regulations binding on all 
     Federal agencies to implement the procedural provisions of 
     the National Environmental Policy Act and resolves 
     interagency environmental disputes informally and through 
     issuance of findings and recommendations.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee has provided $3,031,000 for the Council on 
     Environmental Quality, an increase of $57,000 above the 
     fiscal year 2002 enacted level and equal to the budget 
     request. The Committee directs CEQ to provide quarterly 
     reports on all ongoing activities, including use of detailees 
     and agency representatives.

                 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation


                      Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 2002........................................$33,660,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................30,848,000
Committee recommendation.....................................30,848,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       Prior to 1998, the FDIC inspector general's budgets have 
     been approved by the FDIC's Board of Directors from deposit 
     insurance funds as part of FDIC's annual operating budget 
     that is proposed by the FDIC Chairman. A separate 
     appropriation more effectively ensures the independence of 
     the OIG.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $30,848,000 for the FDIC inspector 
     general, $2,812,000 less than the 2002 enacted level and the 
     same as the budget request. Funds are to be derived by 
     transfer from the bank insurance fund, the savings 
     association insurance fund, and the FSLIC resolution fund.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$7,555,546,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................6,441,846,000
Committee recommendation..................................3,203,117,000

                          general description

       FEMA is responsible for coordinating Federal efforts to 
     reduce the loss of life and property through a comprehensive 
     risk-based, all hazards emergency management program of 
     mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $3,203,117,000 for the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency. This appropriation provides 
     funding for disaster relief, emergency management planning, 
     emergency food and shelter and the Inspector General.

                            disaster relief


                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$6,520,871,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................1,842,843,000
Committee recommendation....................................842,843,000

                          program description

       Through the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF), FEMA provides a 
     significant portion of the

[[Page 1057]]

     total Federal response to victims in Presidentially declared 
     major disasters and emergencies. Major disasters are declared 
     when a State requests Federal assistance and has proven that 
     a given disaster is beyond the State's capacity to respond. 
     Under the DRF, FEMA provides three main types of assistance: 
     individual and family assistance; public assistance, which 
     includes the repair and reconstruction of State, local and 
     non-profit infrastructure; and hazard mitigation.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee has provided $842,843,000 for FEMA disaster 
     relief, which is $1,000,000,000 below the budget request. 
     These are adequate funds to meet all current needs. If there 
     are additional needs, these will be addressed when the 
     Committee considers supplemental appropriations.

            disaster assistance direct loan program account


                      (limitation on direct loans)

                            STATE SHARE LOAN

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002....................        $405,000        $543,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................  ..............         557,000
Committee recommendation................  ..............         557,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       Disaster assistance loans authorized by the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act 42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq. are loans to States for the non-Federal 
     portion of cost sharing funds and community disaster loans to 
     local governments incurring substantial loss of tax and other 
     revenues as a result of a major disaster. The funds requested 
     for this program include direct loans and a subsidy based on 
     criteria including loan amount and interest charged.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       For the State Share Loan Program, the Committee has 
     provided $25,000,000 in loan authority and $557,000 in 
     administrative expenses.


                 NATIONAL PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION FUND

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003......................................$300,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................25,000,000

                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

       This account supports the new grant program for pre-
     disaster mitigation. Grants are available through a 
     competitive process to eligible States and local 
     jurisdictions to reduce the risk of future damage in hazard 
     areas and to ultimately reduce the future needs for Federal 
     disaster assistance by encouraging the building of an 
     environment increasingly resistant to the effects of natural 
     hazards.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for pre-disaster 
     mitigation. This is $275,000,000 below the budget request and 
     $25,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$266,114,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................239,690,000
Committee recommendation....................................239,690,000

                          program description

       This account provides the necessary resources to administer 
     the Agency's various programs at headquarters and in the 
     regions; and the general management and administration of the 
     Agency in legal, congressional, intergovernmental, 
     international, and media affairs, and financial and personnel 
     management, as well as the management of the Agency's 
     facilities.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $239,690,000 for FEMA salaries and 
     expenses. This is equal to the request and a decrease of 
     $26,424,000 from the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                      office of inspector general

Appropriations, 2002........................................$10,303,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................11,549,000
Committee recommendation.....................................17,754,000

                          program description

       This appropriation provides agency-wide audit and 
     investigative functions to identify and correct management 
     and administrative deficiencies, which create conditions for 
     existing or potential instances of fraud, waste, and 
     mismanagement. The audit function provides internal audit, 
     contract audit, and inspection services. Contract audits 
     provide professional advice to agency contracting officials 
     on accounting and financial matters relative to the 
     negotiation, award, administration, repricing, and settlement 
     of contracts. Internal audits review and evaluate all facets 
     of agency operations.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $17,754,000 for the Office of the 
     Inspector General, an increase of $7,451,000 above the fiscal 
     year 2002 enacted level.
       Bill language has been retained which authorizes the FEMA 
     Inspector General to serve also as the IG for the Chemical 
     Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.
       The Committee has included funding for FEMA to continue to 
     undertake new initiatives to enhance State and local 
     terrorism preparedness and to improve disaster prevention 
     strategies as a response to the terrorist attacks of 
     September 11, 2001. Consequently, additional funds have been 
     recommended to enable the OIG to acquire the necessary 
     staffing and contract support services for the audit, 
     investigation, and inspection of these new initiatives.
        The Committee directs the FEMA Inspector General to review 
     the Assistance to Firefighters Grants program to assess the 
     extent to which FEMA is implementing the ``maintenance of 
     needs'' requirements under to this program. A report is due 
     no later than August 15, 2003.

              emergency management planning and assistance


                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$617,310,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,747,214,000
Committee recommendation..................................1,615,214,000

                          program description

       The emergency management planning and assistance 
     appropriation provides resources for the following 
     activities: readiness, response, and recovery; information 
     technology services; fire prevention and training; national 
     preparedness; policy and regional operations; mitigation 
     programs; and executive direction.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $1,615,214,000 for emergency 
     management planning and assistance. This is an increase of 
     $997,904,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level and 
     $2,132,000,000 below the request. Of this amount, 
     $900,000,000 is for the fire grant program; $114,000,000 is 
     for interoperable communications equipment for firefighters 
     and EMS personnel; $75,000,000 is for Urban Search and Rescue 
     Teams; $75,000,000 is for State and local emergency planning 
     grants; $114,000,000 is for emergency operations centers; 
     $15,000,000 is for mutual aid; $60,000,000 is for emergency 
     responder training; $15,000,000 is for the CERT program; and 
     $1,100,000 is for security clearances for State and local 
     emergency management personnel.
       Fire Grants.--The Committee has provided $900,000,000 for 
     the fire grant program, the fully authorized level. This 
     amount is $540,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
     level. The Committee has provided the fully authorized level 
     of funding for the fire grant program to provide the maximum 
     level of funding directly to the Nation's firefighters. The 
     Committee notes that FEMA has done an exemplary job in 
     administering the program by obligating almost all of the 
     funds within 1 year. Nevertheless, to ensure the continued 
     effective use of these funds, the Committee has made the 
     fiscal year 2003 funding for fire grants available for 2 
     years instead of 1 year.
       Interoperable Communications Equipment.--The Committee has 
     provided $114,000,000 for grants to firefighters and related 
     emergency medical services for interoperable communications 
     equipment. The Committee urges that grants under this program 
     be used to purchase cost effective solutions which allow 
     entities to make existing communications interoperable such 
     as cross band repeaters, frequency band patching and other 
     network level solutions. In addition, equipment provided 
     under these programs should be compatible with public safety 
     analog ANSI/TIA-603 and/or digital radio ANSI/TIA-102 
     Standards.
       Emergency Operations Centers.--The Committee has included 
     $114,000,000 for grants to State emergency operations 
     centers. The Committee is aware that many State and local 
     emergency operation centers are in need of physical and 
     technical improvements to enable them to provide an effective 
     command and control structure in response to large 
     catastrophic disasters as well as acts of terrorism.
       Search and Rescue Teams.--The Committee has included 
     $75,000,000 to upgrade all 28 existing search and rescue 
     teams to ensure that each team has the necessary equipment to 
     respond to any disaster including weapons of mass 
     destruction.
       State and Local Planning Grants.--The Committee has 
     provided $75,000,000 for grants to States to upgrade their 
     State and local emergency operations plans. This funding is 
     provided to ensure that State and local emergency operations 
     plans cover all hazards including natural disasters and 
     weapons of mass destruction. The Committee urges FEMA to work 
     with the Office of Domestic Preparedness to ensure 
     coordination at the State and local level.
       Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT).--The Committee 
     has included the budget request of $15,000,000 for CERT.
       Emergency Responder Training.--The Committee has provided 
     $60,000,000 for emergency responder training. FEMA offers 
     training to local first responders through the U.S. Fire 
     Administration and other institutions to provide first 
     responders with new and improved training procedures and 
     management expertise.
       Mutual Aid.--The Committee has included $15,000,000 to help 
     initiate mutual aid agreements among State and local 
     governments to maximize local resources in the event of a 
     natural disaster or an act of terrorism.
       First Responder Training.--The Committee commends the 
     Nation's first responders for

[[Page 1058]]

     their dedicated service to their communities in times of 
     natural or man-made disasters. In 1996, Congress first 
     recognized the potential for terrorist attacks using weapons 
     of mass destruction with the creation of the Nunn-Lugar-
     Domenici program to train first responders in 120 major U.S. 
     cities. Department of Justice programs continue to prepare 
     first responders for potential terrorist attacks. In 
     addition, FEMA has longstanding experience in consequence 
     management as the primary Federal agency with responsibility 
     for responding to natural and man-made disasters. As FEMA 
     becomes incorporated in the new Department of Homeland 
     Security, the Committee urges that priority be given to 
     maintaining comprehensive and coordinated training programs 
     to best serve our first responders and all America.
       In addition, the Committee has included transfer authority 
     of up to 5 percent of the amounts made available for both the 
     fire grant program and for the urban search and rescue task 
     force assistance program (USAR program) for salaries and 
     expenses for the administrative costs associated with these 
     programs. Each program is to be independently administered at 
     the Fire Academy in Emmittsburg, Maryland. In addition, FEMA 
     is directed to administer the new USAR program as a 
     competitive grants program designed to fund fully all 
     training and equipment needs of the existing 28 USAR task 
     forces as well as the administrative costs of these teams. 
     FEMA is expected to issue interim regulations for the USAR 
     program that are published in the Federal Register no later 
     than March 15, 2003.


                RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND

       The Radiological Emergency Preparedness [REP] Program 
     assists State and local governments in the development of 
     offsite radiological emergency preparedness plans within the 
     emergency planning zones of commercial nuclear power 
     facilities licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
     [NRC].
       The fund is financed from fees assessed and collected from 
     the NRC licensees to recover the amounts anticipated by FEMA 
     to be obligated in the next fiscal year for expenses related 
     to REP program activities. Estimated collections for fiscal 
     year 2003 are $347,000.


                        CERRO GRANDE FIRE GRANTS

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
 Budget estimate, 2003.................................................
Committee recommendation.................................. $100,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Cerro Grande Fire grants program is Federal response to 
     the failure of the National Park Service to maintain control 
     of a ``controlled'' burn in New Mexico on May 5, 2000. Under 
     this program, FEMA is tasked to assess the damage from this 
     fire and make reparations.


                       COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends $100,000,000 to close out this 
     program. This will be adequate to meet all claims by private 
     citizens, at a minimum. While FEMA recently increased the 
     estimate on the costs needed to close out this program to 
     $155,000,000, the Committee is concerned that this estimate 
     currently is unsubstantiated since neither the FEMA Inspector 
     General nor GAO have finished their audits of the awards. The 
     Committee will consider additional funds after the audits 
     have been completed and may require an additional audit by a 
     private auditor. The Committee also is concerned that the 
     Administration has not submitted a budget amendment nor 
     proposed funding for this program.

                   emergency food and shelter program

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$140,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................\1\153,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................153,000,000

\1\The fiscal year 2003 budget request proposed to transfer this 
program to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

                          program description

       The Emergency Food and Shelter Program originated as a one-
     time emergency appropriation to combat the effects of high 
     unemployment in the emergency jobs bill (Public Law 98-8) 
     which was enacted in March 1983. It was authorized under 
     title III of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act 
     of 1987, Public Law 100-177.
       The program has been administered by a national board and 
     the majority of the funding has been spent for providing 
     temporary food and shelter for the homeless, participating 
     organizations being restricted by legislation from spending 
     more than 3.5 percent of the funding received for 
     administrative costs.

                        committee recommendation

       The fiscal year 2003 budget request proposed the transfer 
     of Emergency Food and Shelter program to the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development. The Committee did not agree 
     with this proposal and has decided to retain the program 
     within FEMA. The Committee recommends $153,000,000 for the 
     Emergency Food and Shelter Program, the same as the budget 
     request.


                      Flood Map Modernization Fund

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003......................................$300,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................300,000,000

                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

       This program provides funds to modernize and digitize 
     FEMA's inventory of over 100,000 flood maps. These flood maps 
     are used to determine appropriate risk-based premium rates 
     for the National Flood Insurance Program, complete hazard 
     determinations required for the Nation's lending 
     institutions, and to develop appropriate disaster response 
     plans for Federal, State, and local emergency management 
     personnel.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee has provided $100,000,000 for a new 
     floodplain map modernization program, instead of the budget 
     request of $300,000,000.
       Floodplain mapping, including both new mapping as well as 
     updates of existing floodplain maps, is critical to 
     successful community planning for purposes of mitigation and 
     risk of loss associated with flooding. Unfortunately, much of 
     the floodplain mapping throughout the Nation is out of date 
     and in many cases obsolete. This new program will allow FEMA 
     to move forward in meeting these floodplain mapping needs.

                     national flood insurance fund


                     (including transfer of funds)

                          program description

       The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 
     authorizes the Federal Government to provide flood insurance 
     on a national basis. Flood insurance may be sold or continued 
     in force only in communities which enact and enforce 
     appropriate flood plain management measures. Communities must 
     participate in the program within 1 year of the time they are 
     identified as flood-prone in order to be eligible for flood 
     insurance and some forms of Federal financial assistance for 
     acquisition or construction purposes. In 2003, the budget 
     assumes collection of all the administrative and program 
     costs associated with flood insurance activities from 
     policyholders.
       Under the Emergency Program, structures in identified 
     flood-prone areas are eligible for limited amounts of 
     coverage at subsidized insurance rates. Under the regular 
     program, studies must be made of different flood risks in 
     flood-prone areas to establish actuarial premium rates. These 
     rates are charged for insurance on new construction.
       The Committee remains very concerned that FEMA has not 
     taken the necessary steps to ensure the success of the 
     National Flood Insurance program. In particular, 
     participation in the National Flood Insurance is very low in 
     many areas of the country vulnerable to flooding, including 
     areas which have been damaged in the recent past by extreme 
     flooding. In addition, without increased participation, the 
     flood insurance program will continue to suffer large 
     financial losses that cannot be sustained by premiums and are 
     covered instead by borrowing from the United States Treasury. 
     The Committee believes that much of the problem of low 
     participation is the result of inattention to the National 
     Flood Insurance program by FEMA, including decisions that are 
     inconsistent with program requirements and good policy. In 
     particular, the Committee expects FEMA to require all 
     homeowners to obtain flood insurance if they have received 
     assistance in replacing, repairing or restoring property 
     damaged by flooding. Consistent with section 532 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, FEMA is expected 
     to deny flood disaster assistance, including buyout 
     assistance, to any homeowner that has failed to obtain or 
     maintain flood insurance as required by this section.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee has included bill language, providing up to 
     $32,393,000 for administrative costs from the Flood Insurance 
     Program for salaries and expenses. The Committee has also 
     included bill language providing up to $77,666,000 for flood 
     mitigation activities including up to $20,000,000 for 
     expenses under section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance 
     Act.
       The bill includes retroactive authority to extend certain 
     authorities under the National Flood Insurance program, 
     including the authority to issue and renew flood insurance 
     policies. These authorities lapsed on January 1, 2003 and 
     these provisions are designed to ensure that FEMA has the 
     authority to maintain the program throughout any lapsed 
     period of time. Without retroactive authority, some 400,000 
     homeowners risk flood damage without needed financial 
     protection against flooding. It is expected that lenders will 
     continue to process flood insurance polices and collect flood 
     insurance premiums during the lapse.


                     NATIONAL FLOOD MITIGATION FUND

                     (including transfer of funds)

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       Through fee-generated funds transferred from the National 
     Flood Insurance Fund, this fund supports activities to 
     eliminate pre-existing, at-risk structures that are 
     repetitively flooded, and provides flood mitigation 
     assistance planning support to States.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       Through fee-generated funds totaling $20,000,000 
     transferred from the National

[[Page 1059]]

     Flood Insurance Fund, the National Flood Mitigation Fund will 
     provide a mechanism to reduce the financial burden of pre-
     existing, at-risk structures that are repetitively flooded by 
     removing or elevating these structures out of flood hazard 
     areas, as well as provide flood mitigation assistance 
     planning support to States and communities.

                    General Services Administration

                federal consumer information center fund

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,276,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................12,541,000
Committee recommendation.....................................12,541,000

                          program description

       The Consumer Information Center [CIC] was established 
     within the General Services Administration [GSA] by Executive 
     Order on October 26, 1970, to help Federal departments and 
     agencies promote and distribute consumer information 
     collected as a byproduct of the Government's program 
     activities.
       On January 28, 2000, the Consumer Information Center 
     assumed responsibility for the operations of the Federal 
     Information Center [FIC] program with the resulting 
     organization being officially named the Federal Consumer 
     Information Center [FCIC]. The FIC program was established 
     within the General Services Administration in 1966, and was 
     formalized by Public Law 95-491 in 1980. The program's 
     purpose is to provide the public with direct information 
     about all aspects of Federal programs, regulations, and 
     services. To accomplish this mission, contractual services 
     are used to respond to public inquiries via a nationwide 
     toll-free telephone call center. The FIC was previously 
     funded by the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
     Act.
       The Federal Consumer Information Center combines the 
     nationwide toll-free telephone assistance program and the 
     database of the FIC with the CIC website and publications 
     distribution programs. The FCIC is a one-stop source for 
     citizens to get information about government programs and 
     everyday consumer issues.
       During fiscal year 2002, FCIC became a critical part of 
     GSA's newly established Office of Citizen Services and 
     Communications which brings together all of GSA's citizen-
     centered programs. The new Office will serve as a central 
     Federal gateway for citizens, businesses, other governments, 
     and the media to easily obtain information and services from 
     the government. Under this new organization, FCIC remains 
     committed to its consumer information outreach mission 
     mandate but adds additional channels to broaden its scope to 
     provide all citizens with access to the information and 
     services available from government. FCIC assumed operational 
     control of the FirstGov.gov website and plans to begin 
     accepting e-mail and fax inquiries from the public in fiscal 
     year 2003.
       Public Law 98-63, enacted July 30, 1983, established a 
     revolving fund for the CIC. Under this fund, FCIC activities 
     are financed from the following: annual appropriations from 
     the general funds of the Treasury, reimbursements from 
     agencies for distribution of publications, user fees 
     collected from the public, and any other income incident to 
     FCIC activities. All are available as authorized in 
     appropriation acts without regard to fiscal year limitations.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $12,541,000 for the Federal 
     Consumer Information Center, an increase of $5,265,000 above 
     the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. This increase is provided 
     to enable FCIC to begin accepting and responding to e-mail 
     and fax inquires from the public in fiscal year 2003.
       The appropriation will be augmented by a projected $556,000 
     reimbursements from Federal agencies for distribution of 
     consumer publications, user fees from the public, and other 
     income. FCIC's anticipated resources for fiscal year 2003 
     will total approximately $13,097,000.

             National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Appropriations, 2002....................................$14,901,600,000
Budget estimate, 2003....................................15,000,000,000
Committee recommendation.................................15,125,500,000


                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

       The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 
     was established by the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 
     1958 to conduct space and aeronautical research, development, 
     and flight activities for peaceful purposes designed to 
     maintain U.S. preeminence in aeronautics and space. NASA's 
     unique mission of exploration, discovery, and innovation is 
     intended to preserve the United States' role as both a leader 
     in world aviation and as the pre-eminent space-faring nation. 
     It is NASA's mission to: advance human exploration, use and 
     development of space; advance and communicate scientific 
     knowledge and understanding of the Earth, the Solar System 
     and the Universe; and research, develop, verify and transfer 
     advanced aeronautics and space technologies.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $15,125,500,000 for the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration for fiscal year 2003, an 
     increase of $125,500,000 above the budget request and 
     $300,400,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       The Committee remains sensitive to continuing risks 
     regarding the illegal transfer and theft of sensitive 
     technologies that can be used in the development of weapons 
     by governments, entities and persons who may be hostile to 
     the United States. The Committee commends both NASA and the 
     NASA Inspector General (IG) for their efforts to protect 
     sensitive NASA-related technologies. Nevertheless, this will 
     remain an area of great sensitivity and concern as the 
     development of technological advances likely will continue to 
     accelerate. The Committee directs NASA and the NASA IG to 
     report annually on these issues, including an assessment of 
     risk.


                           HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$6,830,100,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................6,130,900,000
Committee recommendation..................................6,095,900,000


                          general description

       NASA's ``Human Space Flight'' account provides for human 
     space flight activities, and for safety, mission assurance 
     and engineering activities supporting the Agency. The HSF 
     activities are centered around the operation of the Space 
     Shuttle as well as high priority investments to improve the 
     safety of the Space Shuttle and required construction 
     projects in direct support of the Space Station and Space 
     Shuttle programs. This appropriation also provides for: 
     salaries and related expenses (including travel); design, 
     repair, rehabilitation, and modification of facilities and 
     construction of new facilities; maintenance and operation of 
     facilities; and other operations activities supporting human 
     space flight programs; and space operations, safety, mission 
     assurance and engineering activities that support the Agency.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee has provided $6,095,900,000 for the Human 
     Space Flight account. This amount is $35,000,000 below the 
     President's request for these activities in fiscal year 2003.
       Space Station.--The Committee has provided $1,457,100,000 
     for the International Space Station (ISS). This amount is 
     $35,000,000 below the President's request. This funding level 
     will continue assembly missions through U.S. Core Complete 
     (Flight 10A), and support early research commensurate with 
     the build-up of on-orbit utilization capabilities.
       In previous years, the Committee has criticized NASA's 
     management of the ISS program. The lack of credible budget 
     estimates, program mismanagement and the absence of any 
     credible oversight forced the Committee to cut funding and 
     impose cost caps on the program. Despite these actions by 
     Congress, NASA was unable to correct the underlying problems 
     associated with the program. In 2001, NASA announced that the 
     ISS would require an additional $4,800,000,000 over previous 
     estimates to complete the ISS, as planned.
       As a result of these cost overruns, NASA and the Office of 
     Management and Budget (OMB) eliminated certain program 
     elements to reduce cost and provide additional time to re-
     scope the ISS with the international partners. In addition, 
     NASA created an independent assessment team known as the ISS 
     Management and Cost Evaluation (IMCE) Task Force to evaluate 
     program management. The Committee supports the 
     recommendations of the (IMCE) Task Force and the development 
     of a Cost Analysis Requirements Document (CARD) to support 
     cost estimates of the U.S. Core Complete baseline. 
     Furthermore, the Committee notes the agency's intention to 
     develop an integrated management action plan based on 
     recommendations of the IMCE Task Force. The Committee fully 
     supports this approach in order to provide the Congress with 
     reliable cost estimates for the U.S. Core Complete and 
     beyond.
       In addition, the Committee supports the recommendations of 
     the Research Maximization and Prioritization Task Force 
     (REMAP) as it pertains to ISS research. The Committee views 
     the Task Force report as the foundation upon which the OBPR 
     sets ISS research priorities and its organizational 
     structure. The Committee notes that a final report on the 
     REMAP recommendations is to be provided by the NASA Advisory 
     Council during the third quarter of calendar year 2002. Given 
     the importance of the REMAP report to the future of the ISS 
     and the agency's overall research agenda, the Committee 
     directs the Administrator to report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations by December 1, 2001 on the implementation of 
     the REMAP recommendations in relation to the ISS as well as 
     the overall structure of the OBPR.
       The Committee remains concerned about Russia's continued 
     policy of selling time on the ISS for tourists, especially 
     since the guiding purpose for the construction of the ISS was 
     to have a world class microgravity research platform, a goal 
     which is still far away. The Committee urges NASA to strictly 
     enforce the protocols developed in cooperation with the 
     international partners to ensure that any space tourist is 
     fully trained and physically capable of participating as a 
     crew member on the ISS.
       Space Shuttle.--The Committee has provided $3,208,000,000 
     for the Space Shuttle program, the same as the budget 
     request. In fiscal year 2003, five Space Shuttle flights are

[[Page 1060]]

     planned in support of ISS. The proposed budget also supports 
     key Space Shuttle safety investments as part of the 
     Integrated Space Transportation Plan.
       The Committee believes their is no higher priority than 
     improving the safety of the Shuttle orbiters. The Committee 
     directs NASA to proceed with implementation of the Cockpit 
     Avionics Upgrade, the Advanced Heath Management System and 
     the External Tank Friction stir weld project.
       In March 2002, NASA's Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel 
     issued its Annual Report. The Committee commends the Panel 
     for its thorough assessment of the Human Space Flight Program 
     and its recommendations to improve ISS and Space Shuttle 
     safety. The Committee recognizes that NASA has made safety 
     its top priority and applauds the agency for the steps it has 
     taken to date to reduce risks and improve the safety and 
     reliability of all programs within the HEDS Enterprise 
     including operation of the Space Shuttle.
       However, the Panel stated that current budget projections 
     for the Space Shuttle are insufficient to accommodate 
     significant safety upgrades, infrastructure upgrades and 
     maintenance of critical workforce skills over the long term. 
     The Committee concurs with this assessment. While the 
     Committee recognizes that NASA is studying the overall space 
     transportation architecture, including second and third 
     generation re-usable launch vehicles to eventually replace 
     the Shuttle, it is clear that the Space Shuttle will continue 
     to operate for at least the next decade, and possibly as long 
     as two decades, as NASA's main heavy lift vehicle for human 
     space flight. Therefore, the Committee directs the 
     Administrator to include, as part of the fiscal year 2004 
     budget, a thorough assessment of flight systems, logistics, 
     infrastructure and workforce readiness costs that would be 
     needed to maintain and improve Space Shuttle safety over the 
     expected operational life of the Shuttle.
       The Committee remains concerned about the overall state of 
     the infrastructure of the Space Shuttle program. While the 
     committee is aware that NASA has conducted an assessment of 
     some of its infrastructure, there has been no official 
     comprehensive study of Shuttle infrastructure needs with 
     reliable cost estimates. Therefore, the Committee directs the 
     Administrator to report the Committees on Appropriations by 
     May 1, 2003, on the critical infrastructure needs for the 
     Space Shuttle program ranked by order of priority including 
     cost estimates for each project identified.
       Payload and Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) Support.--The 
     Committee recommends $87,500,000 for payload and ELV support, 
     the same as the budget request. This account provides 
     technical expertise, facilities, flight carrier hardware and 
     capabilities necessary to provide servicing of multiple 
     payloads to be flown aboard the Space Shuttle. In 2002 and 
     2003, over 20 major and secondary payloads will be flown on 
     the Shuttle.
       In addition, this account provides funds for technical and 
     management insight of commercial launch services, including 
     advanced mission design/analysis and leading-edge integration 
     services which are provided for the full range of NASA 
     missions under consideration for launch on ELVs. In 2003, 
     support for 10 ELV launches, including 1 secondary, is 
     planned.
       Investments and Support.--The Committee recommends 
     $1,178,200,000 for investments and support, the same as the 
     budget request. Funding in the account provides institutional 
     support to the Human Exploration and Development of Space 
     (HEDS) Enterprise through research and program management, 
     construction of facilities, rocket propulsion testing and 
     engineering and technical support to maintain ``core'' 
     technical skills and capability at the NASA centers involved 
     in human space flight.
       Space Communications and Data Systems.--The Committee has 
     provided $117,500,000 for space communications and data 
     systems, the same as the budget request. Funding in this 
     account provides space communications services for all NASA 
     Enterprises not otherwise covered by each Enterprise.
       Safety, Mission Assurance and Engineering.--The Committee 
     recommends $47,600,000 for safety, mission assurance and 
     engineering, the same as the budget request. This account 
     provides funding for agencywide safety and engineering 
     programs to ensure uniform safety programs, practices and 
     procedures are implemented throughout all NASA Enterprises.


                  SCIENCE, AERONAUTICS, and TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 2002.....................................$8,047,800,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................8,844,500,000
Committee recommendation..................................9,003,000,000


                          Program Description

       NASA's ``Science, aeronautics and technology'' account 
     provides funding for science, aeronautics and technology 
     activities supporting the Agency. These activities include 
     space science, biological and physical research, Earth 
     science, aerospace technology and academic programs. This 
     appropriation also provides for salaries and related expenses 
     (including travel); design, repair, rehabilitation, and 
     modification of facilities and construction of new 
     facilities; maintenance and operation of facilities; and 
     other operations activities supporting science, aeronautics, 
     and technology programs.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends $9,003,000,000 for the Science, 
     Aeronautics and Technology account, an increase of 
     $158,500,000 above the President's request and $955,200,000 
     above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       Space Science.--The activities of NASA's Space Science 
     Enterprise seek to chart the evolution of the universe, from 
     origins to destiny, and understand its galaxies, stars, 
     planetary bodies, and life. The Enterprise asks basic 
     questions that have eternally perplexed human beings, such as 
     how the universe began and evolved and whether there is other 
     intelligent life in the universe. The Space Science 
     Enterprise develops space observatories and directs robotic 
     spacecraft into the solar system and beyond to investigate 
     the nature of the universe.
       The quest for this information, and the answers themselves, 
     is intended to maintain scientific leadership, excite and 
     inspire our society, strengthen education and scientific 
     literacy, develop and transfer technologies to promote U.S. 
     competitiveness, foster international cooperation to enhance 
     programs and share their benefits, and set the stage for 
     future space ventures.
       The Committee has made the following adjustments to the 
     budget request:
       An increase of $105,000,000 for the New Horizons Program 
     for the Pluto-Kuiper Belt (PKB) mission to be used for the 
     spacecraft, instruments, project management, the radioisotope 
     thermoelectric generator and the launch vehicle. The 
     Committee has added funding to continue development work on 
     the Pluto-Kuiper Belt mission as the first mission in the New 
     Horizons Program. The Committee notes that the PKB mission 
     meets all of the criteria for the New Horizons Program and 
     expects the agency to include funding for PKB in subsequent 
     budget submissions in order to launch the mission by 2006.
       The following increases to the budget request are reduced 
     by 10 percent:
       An increase of $2,000,000 for a center on life in extreme 
     thermal environments at Montana State University.
       An increase of $500,000 to the University of Alaska, 
     Anchorage, for broadband riverine research in Alaska.
       A decrease of $16,500,000 from the flight projects building 
     at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The Committee makes this 
     reduction without prejudice in light of the Agency's decision 
     to postpone construction in fiscal year 2002.
       A decrease of $9,000,000 from the proposed Nuclear Power 
     Program and a decrease of $4,000,000 from the proposed 
     Nuclear Electric Propulsion program. The Committee supports 
     both new programs, but believes that the necessary technology 
     will be slow to ramp up. Moreover, the Committee is concerned 
     about out year budget costs of these programs, the Space 
     Launch Initiative and Shuttle upgrades, all program that will 
     need to complement each other.
       Mars Program.--The Committee has provided the full budget 
     request for the Mars Program.
       Hubble Space Telescope.--The Committee has provided the 
     full budget request for the Hubble Space Telescope and the 
     Next Generation Space Telescope. The Committee has provided 
     an additional $23,400,000 to the Office of Space Science for 
     costs associated with the SM-4 servicing mission of the 
     Hubble Space Telescope. The Committee is concerned with 
     additional costs that will result from further delays in the 
     scheduling of the mission. Accordingly, the Committee has 
     provided additional funds to offset the increase in costs. 
     The Committee commends the Agency for the continued success 
     of the Hubble Space Telescope and the extraordinary 
     contributions it has made to the advancement of science.
       Solar Probe.--The Committee fully expects NASA to provide 
     sufficient funds in the fiscal year 2003 budget for the solar 
     probe mission to retire technical risk on the program in 
     anticipation of a decision about the mission's future 
     thereafter.
       Living With A Star.--The Committee remains strongly 
     supportive of the Living With A Star program because of the 
     critical role its missions will play in understanding the 
     effect of the Sun on our solar system particularly its impact 
     on space weather which can have a profound impact on the 
     Earth. Therefore, the Committee has provided the full budget 
     request for technology development requested for the 
     magnetospheric multiscale mission (MMS), the Solar Dynamics 
     Observatory (SDO) and the Geospace Missions. Should the 
     Agency wish to reallocate funds within these missions, the 
     Committee will entertain a re-programming request in the 
     operating plan provided that any re-programming preserves the 
     LWS objective of maintaining contemporaneous science.
       Earth Science.--The activities of NASA's Earth Science 
     Enterprise seek to understand the total Earth system and the 
     effects of humans on the global environment. This pioneering 
     program of studying global climate change is developing many 
     of the capabilities that will be needed for long-term 
     environment and climate monitoring and prediction. 
     Governments around the world need

[[Page 1061]]

     information based on the strongest possible scientific 
     understanding. The unique vantage-point of space provides 
     information about the Earth's land, atmosphere, ice, oceans, 
     and biota as a global system, which is available in no other 
     way. In concert with the global research community, the Earth 
     Science Enterprise is developing the understanding needed to 
     support the complex environmental policy decisions that lie 
     ahead.
       However, the Committee is concerned about the potential for 
     the administration to diminish NASA's pre-eminent role in 
     earth science and earth science applications. As the 
     Committee noted during its fiscal year 2003 hearings, the 
     Agency's development and launch of a series of major earth 
     science missions combined with a successful ground system 
     that is processing and distributing the largest volumes of 
     data ever received by civilian users from space are among 
     NASA highest technological and scientific achievements. The 
     Committee wishes to affirm its unequivocal support for 
     expanding NASA's role in earth science and earth science 
     applications.
       Within the applications program, the Committee believes 
     that the Agency's approach needs more refinement and 
     integration of emerging programs, like Synergy, the Regional 
     Earth Science Applications Centers (RESACs), the Earth 
     Science Information Partnerships (ESIPS) and the considerable 
     in-house scientific capability at the NASA Centers. Such 
     integration should not disrupt the existing program structure 
     in 2003, but should plan for an evolutionary approach in 
     fiscal year 2004. The Committee is pleased with efforts to 
     integrate key Federal agency requirements as objectives of 
     the applications program and expects a progress report on 
     these efforts in the operating plan.
       The Committee strongly supports the development of remote 
     sensing research and technology as a collaboration and 
     partnership between NASA, universities and the private 
     sector. The Committee commends both SSC and Goddard for their 
     investment and commitment to the commercial aspects of remote 
     sensing research and technology. There already have been 
     significant advances made with regard to remote sensing 
     applications in agriculture, flood mapping, environmental 
     protection, urban planning, firefighting and land use issues. 
     The Committee urges both Goddard and SSC to work together to 
     continue to develop those remote sensing research and 
     technology projects that have the strongest potential for 
     commercial applications.
       The following increases to the budget request are reduced 
     by 10 percent:
       An increase of $25,000,000 for EOSDIS for the Synergy 
     Program at the Goddard Space Flight Center.
       An increase of $20,000,000 for pre-formulation studies. The 
     additional funding provided for this program is to be used to 
     continue pre-formulation studies for solar irradiance, total 
     column ozone and ocean vector winds.
       An increase of $2,500,000 to the University of Washington, 
     Pacific Northwest Regional Collaboratory to develop 
     applications and end-uses for earth science data in the 
     Northwest.
       An increase of $750,000 for Utah State University for 
     landscape analysis, planning and monitoring at the 
     Intermountain Region Digital Image Archive and Processing 
     Center.
       An increase of $1,000,000 for the University of Montana for 
     an International Earth Observing System Natural Resource 
     Training and Data Center.
       An increase of $2,000,000 for joint weather and ocean 
     research at the University of Massachusetts and the 
     University of Alaska.
       An increase of $1,500,000 for the University of Louisville 
     for the Bio-MEMS Microtechnology Center in Louisville, 
     Kentucky.
       An increase of $2,000,000 for the University of New Mexico 
     for the development of the Center for Rapid Environmental 
     Assessment and Terrain Evaluation (Create) which would 
     provide for the rapid acquisition, processing and 
     dissemination of environmental data.
       An increase of $1,500,000 for George Mason University in 
     Fairfax, Virginia for the Mid-Atlantic Geospatial Information 
     Consortium.
       A decrease of $3,400,000 from the flight projects building 
     at JPL. The Committee makes this reduction without prejudice 
     in light of the Agency's decision to postpone construction in 
     fiscal year 2002.
       Biological and Physical Research.--NASA's Biological and 
     Physical Research (BPR) Enterprise recognizes the essential 
     role biology will play in the 21st century and pursues the 
     core of biological and physical sciences research needed to 
     support NASA's strategic objectives. BPR fosters and enhances 
     rigorous interdisciplinary research, closely linking 
     fundamental biological and physical sciences in order to 
     develop leading-edge, world-class research programs. BPR uses 
     the unique characteristics of the space environment to 
     understand biological, physical, and chemical processes, 
     conducting science and technology research required to enable 
     humans to safely and effectively live and work in space, and 
     transferring knowledge and technologies for Earth benefits. 
     BPR also fosters commercial space research by the private 
     sector toward new or improved products and/or services on 
     Earth, in support of the commercial use of space.
       The following increases to the budget request are reduced 
     by 10 percent:
       An increase of $7,500,000 for the National Space Biomedical 
     Research Institute.
       An increase of $600,000 to North Carolina State University, 
     Raleigh, North Carolina for gravitational and space biology.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to the University of Connecticut 
     Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut for bone and muscle 
     loss studies.
       An increase of $1,500,000 for interactive biological 
     crystallization technology development.
       Aero-Space Technology.--NASA's Aerospace Technology 
     Enterprise works to maintain U.S. preeminence in aerospace 
     research and technology. The Enterprise aims to radically 
     improve air travel, making it safer, faster, and quieter as 
     well as more affordable, accessible, and environmentally 
     sound. The Enterprise is also working to develop more 
     affordable, reliable, and safe access to space; improve the 
     way in which air and space vehicles are designed and built; 
     and ensure new aerospace technologies are available to 
     benefit the public.
       The Committee is concerned about the status of aerospace 
     technology within NASA's budget and emphasizes the important 
     role that NASA plays in developing new aerospace technologies 
     that are key to the continued development of such aircraft 
     needs as long range aircraft, supersonic transports, global 
     reach transports as well as cost-effective access to space. 
     The Committee especially is interested in the viability of 
     ``intelligent'' engine systems such as ``Propulsion 21'' 
     which could build on current investments in the Ultra 
     Efficient Engine Technology (UEET) and Quiet Aircraft 
     Technology (QAT) because of the potential benefits to the 
     U.S. aerospace industry.
       However, the Committee recognizes that the budget will not 
     permit the funding of all proposals or promising 
     technologies. The Committee also believes that the 
     development of aerospace technologies must be based in 
     public/private partnerships guided by cost-sharing 
     principles. Therefore, the Committee directs NASA to submit a 
     report by August 30, 2003 on NASA's 5-year investment plan 
     for aerospace technology including a list of technology goals 
     and priorities, funding needs of these goals and priorities, 
     the criteria used for selecting these priorities and goals, 
     and the nature of the public-private partnership in reaching 
     these priorities and goals.
       The following increases to the budget request are reduced 
     by 10 percent:
       An increase of $3,000,000 for the Chesapeake Information 
     Based Aeronautics Consortium based in partnership at Morgan 
     State University, Baltimore, Maryland, Bowie State University 
     and the University of Maryland, Eastern Shore.
       An increase of $3,000,000 for the Stennis Space Center for 
     the development of a visitors center.
       An increase of $1,000,000 for the Educational Training 
     Center at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, 
     Alabama.
       An increase of $3,000,000 for the Alabama Science Center 
     Alliance (Sci Quest) for the acquisition of addition 
     ``immersive reality laboratories'' and networking capacity.
       An increase of $2,000,000 for the University of Alabama in 
     Huntsville to augment the UAH Propulsion Test Facility.
       An increase of $750,000 for the National Institute for 
     Aviation Research for icing aviation safety research in 
     Kansas;
       An increase of $1,500,000 for the Glenn Research Center for 
     the Glennan Microsystems Initiative.
       An increase of $1,000,000 for the Glenn Research Center for 
     the Garrett Morgan Commercialization Initiative.
       An increase of $7,000,000 to build on investments in the 
     Ultra Efficient Engine Technology and Quiet Aircraft 
     Technology by demonstrating related engine technology 
     including low noise, active control of engine air flows and 
     combustion processes, emissions and fuel reduction concepts 
     and a ``virtual engine simulation'' capability.
       An increase of $4,500,000 to for propulsion test complex 
     upgrades and other basic infrastructure upgrades at the 
     Stennis Space Center. An increase of $2,000,000 for the 
     National Technology Transfer Center at Wheeling Jesuit 
     University.
       Aviation.--The Committee has provided $541,400,000 for 
     aviation programs, the same as the budget request. This 
     includes funding for aviation safety, vehicle systems and 
     airspace systems programs.
       Advanced Space Transportation.--The Committee recommends 
     $800,000,000 for advanced space transportation. On November 
     13, 2002, the Committee received a budget amendment regarding 
     proposed changes to the Strategic Launch Initiative for 
     fiscal year 2003. The Committee agrees with the proposed 
     change to the program at modified funding levels. 
     Accordingly, the Committee recommends $800,000,000 for 
     advanced space transportation of which $115,000,000 shall be 
     for the Orbital Space Plane. Furthermore, the Committee 
     concurs with the request to transfer $120,000,000 from the 
     Third Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle to the Strategic 
     Launch Initiative. The Committee will conduct a thorough 
     review of the Orbital

[[Page 1062]]

     Space Plane and other changes to the SLI in the context of 
     the fiscal year 2003 appropriations bill.
       The Committee recognizes the Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) 
     as a launch and recovery site for small commercial and 
     scientific payloads. The Committee directs the Marshall Space 
     Flight Center (MSFC) to utilize the WFF as a site for testing 
     and demonstration of new launch vehicle technologies that are 
     appropriate for the facility. The Committee directs NASA to 
     report to Congress by May 1, 2003 on how the MSFC will 
     utilize Wallops as a testing and launch facility.
       Revolutionary Technology.--The Committee has provided 
     $274,900,000 for revolutionary technology development, the 
     same as the budget request. Funding in this initiative 
     includes computing, information and communications 
     technology, engineering for complex systems and enabling 
     concepts and technologies.
       Commercial Technology.--The Committee recommends 
     $146,900,000 for commercial technology development including 
     commercial technology transfer and the Small Business 
     Innovation Research Programs. This is the same amount as the 
     budget request.
       Aerospace Institutional Support.--The Committee recommends 
     $973,200,000 for aerospace institutional support, the same as 
     the budget request.
       Academic Programs.--The objective of NASA's academic 
     programs is to promote excellence in America's education 
     system through enhancing and expanding scientific and 
     technological competence. Activities conducted within 
     academic programs capture the interest of students in science 
     and technology, develop talented students at the 
     undergraduate and graduate levels, provide research 
     opportunities for students and faculty members at NASA 
     centers, and strengthen and enhance the research capabilities 
     of the Nation's colleges and universities. NASA's education 
     programs span from the elementary through graduate levels, 
     and are directed at students and faculty. Academic programs 
     includes the Minority University Research Program, which 
     expands opportunities for talented students from 
     underrepresented groups who are pursuing degrees in science 
     and engineering, and to strengthen the research capabilities 
     of minority universities and colleges.
       The Committee recommendation has included $10,000,000 for 
     the NASA EPSCoR Program, $5,400,000 above the budget request 
     and the same as the fiscal year 2002 level. The Committee 
     expects NASA EPSCoR to support a broad range of research 
     areas in each EPSCoR State, drawn from Earth science, space 
     science, aeronautics and space transportation technology, and 
     human exploration and development of space, and to distribute 
     the awards, competitively, to the largest number of eligible 
     States possible.
       The Committee has provided $82,100,000 for NASA's minority 
     university research and education activities. This is the 
     same as the budget request. Furthermore, the Committee 
     supports the continuation of a stand-alone Minority 
     University Research and Education Division.
       The following increases to the budget request are reduced 
     by 10 percent:
       An increase of $1,000,000 to the Delaware Aerospace 
     Education Foundation, Kent County, Delaware.
       An increase of $750,000 to the Chabot Space and Science 
     Center, Oakland, California.
       An increase of $2,500,000 to Marshall University, 
     Bridgeport, West Virginia, for the Hubble Telescope Project.
       An increase of $1,500,000 to the University of Missouri-
     Columbia for the Life Sciences Center.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to Wesleyan College, Macon, 
     Georgia for the Monroe Science Center.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to Morehouse College, Atlanta, 
     Georgia, for the Center of Excellence in Telecommunication 
     and Space.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to the Montefiore Medical Center, 
     Bronx, New York for the Discovery Center.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to Rutgers University, 
     Piscataway, New Jersey for the Biomedical Engineering 
     Facility.
       An increase of $3,000,000 to the University of North Dakota 
     Upper Midwest Aerospace Consortium, Grand Forks, North 
     Dakota, for earth science education and remote sensing 
     activities.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to the Museum of Science and 
     Industry, Chicago, Illinois, for the Henry Crown Space 
     Center.
       An increase of $2,500,000 to Iowa State University, Ames, 
     Iowa for non-destructive evaluation studies.
       An increase of $750,000 to the City of Des Moines, Iowa, 
     for the Des Moines Science Center.
       An increase of $750,000 for the California Science Center.
       An increase of $2,000,000 to the South Carolina Association 
     of School Administrators, Columbia, South Carolina for the 
     Blue Ribbon School Reform Project and Interactive Library.
       An increase of $2,000,000 to the College of Charleston, 
     Charleston, South Carolina, for the School of Science and 
     Mathematics.
       An increase of $4,000,000 to the University of Hawaii, 
     Hilo, for the Mauna Kea Astronomy Education Center.
       An increase of $2,000,000 to the University of Wisconsin, 
     Green Bay, for the Wisconsin Initiative for Math, Science and 
     Technology Education.
       An increase of $4,000,000 to develop advanced metallic 
     joining technologies for aerospace applications at Michoud 
     Space Center.
       An increase of $250,000 for the University of Vermont for 
     muscle, bone blood studies related to human space flight.
       An increase of $3,000,000 to the Mitchell Foundation, 
     Portland, Maine for an endowment for science and engineering 
     education.
       An increase of $1,500,000 to the Maryland Science Center, 
     Baltimore, Maryland for expansion of the earth science hall.
       An increase of $750,000 to the University of Arkansas, 
     Little Rock, for minority recruitment in science and 
     engineering.
       An increase of $2,500,000 to Brown University, Providence, 
     Rhode Island for the Life Sciences Building.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to the State University of New 
     York, Buffalo, for the Center of Excellence in 
     Bioinformatics.
       An increase of $1,000,000 to Lane County, Oregon for the 
     Planetarium Learning Center.
       An increase of $500,000 for Virginia Commonwealth 
     University for advance research in batteries and fuel cells.
       An increase of $2,000,000 for the Gulf of Maine Aquarium 
     Foundation for the construction of a Gulf of Maine 
     Laboratory.
       An increase of $1,000,000 for the University of North 
     Carolina-Chapel Hill for the Destiny Mobile Science 
     Laboratory.
       An increase of $500,000 for Widener University in 
     Pennsylvania for the development of a rooftop observatory.
       An increase of $1,500,000 for the University of Missouri's 
     Center for Gender Physiology for infrastructure and research 
     needs.
       An increase of $3,500,000 for the University of Missouri-
     Rolla for a Center of Excellence for Aerospace Propulsion 
     Particulate Emissions Reduction.
       An increase of $1,500,000 for Montana State University in 
     Bozeman, Montana for space science and engineering 
     laboratory.
       An increase of $2,000,000 for the University of Montana in 
     Missoula, Montana for the Northern Rockies Center for space 
     privatization of microgravity research.


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2002........................................$23,700,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................24,600,000
Committee recommendation.....................................26,600,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Office of Inspector General was established by the 
     Inspector General Act of 1978. The Office is responsible for 
     providing agencywide audit and investigative functions to 
     identify and correct management and administrative 
     deficiencies which create conditions for existing or 
     potential instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $26,600,000 for fiscal year 2003, 
     $2,000,000 above the President's budget request. The 
     Committee commends the NASA IG's diligence in addressing 
     issues of fraud and abuse.


                       Administrative Provisions

       The Committee recommendation includes a series of 
     provisions, proposed by the administration, which are largely 
     technical in nature, concerning the availability of funds. 
     These provisions have been carried largely, in prior-year 
     appropriation acts.

                  National Credit Union Administration

                       central liquidity facility

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Direct loan       Administrative
                                        limitation          expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002..............     $1,500,000,000           $309,000
Budget estimate, 2003.............      1,500,000,000            309,000
Committee recommendation..........      1,500,000,000            309,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

       The National Credit Union Administration [NCUA] Central 
     Liquidity Facility [CLF] was created by the National Credit 
     Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (Public Law 95-630). The 
     CLF is a mixed-ownership Government corporation managed by 
     the National Credit Union Administration Board and owned by 
     its member credit unions.
       The purpose of the facility is to improve the general 
     financial stability of credit unions by meeting their 
     seasonal and emergency liquidity needs and thereby encourage 
     savings, support consumer and mortgage lending, and provide 
     basic financial resources to all segments of the economy. To 
     become eligible for facility services, credit unions invest 
     in the capital stock of the CLF, and the facility uses the 
     proceeds of such investments and the proceeds of borrowed 
     funds to meet the liquidity needs of credit unions. The 
     primary sources of funds for the CLF are stock subscriptions 
     from credit unions and borrowings.
       The CLF may borrow funds from any source, with the amount 
     of borrowing limited to 12 times the amount of subscribed 
     capital stock and surplus.
       Loans are available to meet short-term requirements for 
     funds attributable to emergency outflows from managerial 
     difficulties or local economic downturns. Seasonal credit is 
     also provided to accommodate fluctuations caused by cyclical 
     changes in such areas as agriculture, education, and retail

[[Page 1063]]

     business. Loans can also be made to offset protracted credit 
     problems caused by factors such as regional economic decline.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends the budget request of limiting 
     administrative expenses for the Central Liquidity Fund [CLF] 
     to $309,000 in fiscal year 2003. The Committee recommends a 
     limitation of $1,500,000 for the principal amount of new 
     direct loans to member credit unions. These amounts are the 
     same as the budget request. Funds provided for administrative 
     expenses are the same as the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
       The Committee directs the National Credit Union 
     Administration (NCUA) to continue to provide reports on the 
     lending activities under CLF. This information should be 
     provided to the Committee on a quarterly basis through 
     September 2003.


               COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$1,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................1,000,000
Committee recommendation......................................1,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program 
     (CDRLF) was established in 1979 to assist officially 
     designated ``low-income'' credit unions in providing basic 
     financial services to low-income communities. Low-interest 
     loans and deposits are made available to assist these credit 
     unions. Loans or deposits are normally repaid in 5 years, 
     although shorter repayment periods may be considered. 
     Technical assistance grants are also available to low-income 
     credit unions. Until fiscal year 2001, only earnings 
     generated from the CDRLF were available to fund technical 
     assistance grants. Grants are available for improving 
     operations as well as addressing safety and soundness issues.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee provides $1,000,000 for loans and technical 
     assistance to community development credit unions. These 
     amounts are equal to the budget request and the fiscal year 
     2001 enacted level.
       The Committee's recommendation includes $700,000 for loans 
     to community development credit unions and $300,000 for 
     technical assistance to low-income and community development 
     credit unions.

                      National Science Foundation

Appropriations, 2002..................................\1\$4,789,240,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................5,028,220,000
Committee recommendation..................................5,268,980,000

\1\Includes $300,000 in fiscal year 2002 emergency supplemental 
funding.


                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

       The National Science Foundation was established as an 
     independent agency by the National Science Foundation Act of 
     1950 (Public Law 81-507) and is authorized to support 
     research and education programs that promote the progress of 
     science and engineering in the United States. The Foundation 
     supports research and education in all major scientific and 
     engineering disciplines, through grants, contracts, and other 
     forms of assistance awarded to more than 2,000 colleges and 
     universities, nonprofit organizations, small businesses, and 
     other organizations in all parts of the United States. The 
     Foundation also supports international programs and unique, 
     large scale, national user research facilities.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,268,980,000 
     for the National Science Foundation in fiscal year 2003. This 
     represents an increase of $460,440,000 over the fiscal year 
     2002 level and $240,770,000 more than the budget request. The 
     Committee was guided in its allocation of resources for the 
     Foundation by two central considerations.
       First, productivity growth, powered by new knowledge and 
     technological innovation, makes the economic benefits of a 
     comprehensive fundamental research and education enterprise 
     abundantly clear. New products, processes, entire new 
     industries, and the employment opportunities that result, 
     depend upon rapid advances in research and their equally 
     rapid movement into the marketplace. In today's global 
     economy, continued progress in science and engineering and 
     the transfer of the knowledge developed is vital if the 
     United States is to maintain its competitiveness.
       In addition, the events of September 11 and subsequent 
     anthrax attacks demonstrate that a nation strong in science 
     and technology can respond rapidly and effectively to crises 
     and changing national circumstances. Fundamental research 
     across the full spectrum of science and engineering 
     disciplines in an appropriately balanced manner, together 
     with the highly skilled workforce that makes research and 
     innovation possible, provides the intellectual capital for 
     the nation to draw upon in times of need. A growing stock of 
     knowledge focused on the frontiers of research increases the 
     options available for response. A diverse, internationally 
     competitive, and globally engaged science and engineering 
     workforce accelerates the development of new technologies to 
     meet unexpected needs.
       The Committee reiterates its long standing requirement for 
     reprogramming, initiation of new programs or activities, and 
     reorganizations. The Committee directs the Foundation to 
     notify the chairman and ranking minority member prior to each 
     reprogramming of funds in excess of $250,000 between 
     programs, activities, or elements unless an alternate amount 
     is specified elsewhere by the Committee. The Committee 
     expects to be notified of reprogramming actions which involve 
     less than the above-mentioned amount if such actions would 
     have the effect of changing the agency's funding requirements 
     in future years or if programs or projects specifically cited 
     in the Committee's reports are affected. Finally, the 
     Committee wishes to be consulted regarding reorganizations of 
     offices, programs, and activities prior to the planned 
     implementation of such reorganizations.


                    RESEARCH AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2002..................................\1\$3,598,640,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................3,783,210,000
Committee recommendation..................................4,081,650,000

\1\Includes $300,000 in fiscal year 2002 emergency supplemental 
funding.


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The research and related activities appropriation addresses 
     the Foundation's three strategic outcomes: people--developing 
     a diverse, internationally competitive and globally-engaged 
     workforce of scientists, engineers, and well-prepared 
     citizens; ideas--enabling discovery across the frontiers of 
     science and engineering, connected to learning, innovation, 
     and service to society; and tools--providing broadly 
     accessible, state-of-the-art information bases and shared 
     research and education tools. Research activities will 
     contribute to the achievement of these outcomes through 
     expansion of the knowledge base; integration of research and 
     education; stimulation of knowledge transfer among academia 
     and the public and private sectors; and bring the 
     perspectives of many disciplines to bear on complex problems 
     important to the Nation. The Foundation's discipline-oriented 
     research programs are: biological sciences; computer and 
     information science and engineering; engineering; 
     geosciences; mathematical and physical sciences; and social, 
     behavioral and economic sciences. Also included are U.S. 
     polar research programs and related logistical support and 
     integrative activities.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $4,081,650,000 for research and 
     related activities. This amount is $483,010,000 or 13.4 
     percent more than the fiscal year 2002 level and $298,440,000 
     more than the budget request. This funding level is 
     consistent with proposals to double the NSF research budget 
     over 5 years.
       The Committee is concerned that the size and number of 
     awards made by the Foundation are far below what is needed to 
     enable our research scientists and engineers to meet the 
     challenges presented by our global competitors. The Committee 
     urges the Foundation, to the maximum extent possible, to use 
     the growth in resources being provided to make a marked and 
     substantial increase in the average award, as well as 
     increase the number of awards being made with special efforts 
     made to include those individuals and institutions not well 
     represented in the Nation's research enterprise.
       The Committee's recommendation includes a total of 
     $604,000,000 for computer and information science and 
     engineering. This is $77,060,000 more than the request of 
     which $67,000,000 is for information technology research and 
     $10,000,000 is for the terascale computing systems. Within 
     the additional funds provided for information technology 
     research, the Committee directs NSF to provide $25,000,000 
     for cyber security research for individual investigators and 
     multidisciplinary research centers and $15,000,000 is for 
     advanced broadband research.
       The Nation has become vulnerable to cyber-attacks, in part, 
     because critical aspects of daily life rely on computer 
     systems, networks, and the internet (e.g., water systems and 
     electricity grids). Currently available technologies provide 
     inadequate protection, yet relatively little research is 
     being conducted to develop new approaches to protecting 
     computer systems and networks. The private sector has had 
     little incentive to invest in cyber security because the 
     market emphasizes only speed and convenience. The Federal 
     Government has not filled the gap, but instead has 
     chronically underinvested in cyber security. As a result, 
     what little research has been done on cyber security has been 
     incremental, leaving the basic approaches to cyber security 
     unchanged for decades. As a field with relatively modest 
     support, few researchers, and minimal attention, cyber 
     security fails to attract the interest of students, 
     perpetuating the problems of a lack of trained personnel. 
     Therefore, the Committee is providing $25,000,000 to be used 
     to strengthen support for research in computer and network 
     security. The Committee expects these funds will be used to 
     support both individual investigators and a number of 
     interdisciplinary research centers in computer and network 
     security research.
       The universal availability of broadband in the United 
     States will increase productivity, create high-wage jobs, and 
     expand access to healthcare and life-long learning. The 
     Committee believes that the NSF and research community can 
     and should do more to support this national imperative along 
     the lines

[[Page 1064]]

     suggested in the recent National Academy of Sciences report, 
     Broadband: Bringing Home the Bits. In particular, R&D on 
     innovative ``last mile'' technologies (both wired and 
     wireless) could significantly reduce the cost of national 
     broadband deployment, particularly in remote and rural areas. 
     NSF should use the additional $15,000,000 being provided to 
     support research and education activities in this area.
       The Committee is aware of the recent report by the NSF's 
     Blue-Ribbon Advisory Committee on Cyber-infrastructure. This 
     advisory Committee called for a significant expansion in 
     high-performance computing, optical networking, software 
     applications for ``e-science,'' and large-scale digital 
     libraries. Such an initiative, if focused around a number of 
     critically important challenges, could accelerate the pace of 
     discovery in all science and engineering disciplines, and 
     serve as a ``multiplier'' for the Government's substantial 
     investment in R&D. The Committee urges NSF to give this 
     careful consideration in developing the fiscal year 2004 
     proposal.
       The Committee's recommendation provides $556,400,000 for 
     engineering. This is $68,000,000 more than the request. These 
     additional funds are to strengthen the nanoscience and 
     engineering initiative in the engineering directorate.
       The Committee is providing $1,056,570,000 for the 
     mathematical and physical sciences. The Committee has 
     increased the fiscal year 2003 request for the physics, 
     chemistry, astronomy, materials research and 
     multidisciplinary research subactivities by a total of 
     $135,000,000. The Committee remains concerned that support 
     for the physical sciences has not kept pace with the growth 
     in other disciplines. Yet it is the sustained investment in 
     these disciplines that has enabled the development of today's 
     advanced weapon systems, state-of-the-art medical diagnostic 
     equipment, and improved communications systems. The 
     Committee's recommendation will strengthen the core research 
     and instrumentation programs in these subactivities as well 
     as adequately support the national astronomy centers in West 
     Virginia, New Mexico, and elsewhere, and other NSF physical 
     science facilities. The Committee also directs NSF to provide 
     adequate support for preparatory work for the Giant Segmented 
     Mirror Telescope (GSMT). The GSMT was one of the highest 
     priorities recommended in the National Academy of Sciences 
     Astronomy and Astrophysics Committee's decadal survey.
       The Committee also encourages NASA and NSF to work together 
     on the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST). The 
     LSST was highly recommended in the recent National Academy of 
     Sciences decadal survey and is designed to survey the visible 
     sky to a much fainter level than that reached by existing 
     surveys. It is expected to catalog 90 percent of the near-
     Earth objects larger than 300 meters and assess the threat 
     they pose to life on Earth. Its ability to find and catalog 
     primitive objects in the Kuiper Belt is expected to 
     significantly aid in the success of NASA's Pluto-Kuiper Belt 
     Explorer mission.
       From the additional funds provided for the mathematical and 
     physical sciences directorate, the Committee is adjusting the 
     request by providing an additional $7,300,000 for the 
     national radio astronomy observatories, $4,200,000 for the 
     national optical astronomy observatories, and $14,500,000 for 
     the National Nano-fabrication Users Network, the National 
     High Magnetic Field Laboratory, the Wisconsin Synchrotron 
     Radiation Center, and other facilities. The Committee's 
     recommendation also includes the $4,000,000 requested for the 
     continuation of the Telescope System Instrumentation Program 
     which was initiated by the Committee in fiscal year 2002.
       The Committee is recommending that the mathematical 
     sciences be funded at $162,000,000, an increase of 
     $10,000,000 over the fiscal year 2002 level. With this 
     appropriation, the mathematical sciences will have grown by 
     over 50 percent since fiscal year 2000. Consistent with the 
     NSF budget request, nearly $13,000,000 in additional support 
     for interdisciplinary mathematics is available in the other 
     research and education directorates within the Foundation. 
     The Committee directs NSF to provide a report documenting 
     what has been accomplished as a result of this growth in 
     mathematics research. The report should be submitted to the 
     Committee by March 31, 2003.
       The Committee recommends $535,000,000 for the biological 
     sciences activity, of which $85,000,000 is to support ongoing 
     research on the genomics of plants of major economic 
     importance. With this support, researchers will be able to 
     focus on functional genomics, large-scale sequencing, and 
     developing tools and resources for plant genomics studies. 
     Also within the biological sciences activity, the Committee 
     is providing $26,000,000 for biocomplexity research; this 
     represents a 53 percent increase over the comparable fiscal 
     year 2002 level.
       The Committee encourages the NSF to continue its 
     participation in the interagency microbial genomics 
     sequencing program, especially as it relates to sequencing of 
     plant pathogens, and to support comparable interagency 
     efforts on sequencing the genomes of domesticated animals. In 
     terms of the plant genome program, the Committee continues to 
     be interested in the sequencing of economically important 
     crops, such as corn, wheat, and barley. Accordingly, the 
     Committee directs the NSF to fund the sequencing of one or 
     more of the crops that are the most economically important to 
     the United States and expects the NSF to complete the 
     sequencing of at least one of the crops by 2004. To 
     accomplish this objective, the Committee expects the 
     Foundation to work with the large-scale sequencing centers 
     involved in sequencing the human genome, the Department of 
     Energy Joint Genome Institute, the Department of Agriculture, 
     and other large-scale sequencing centers to ensure that the 
     funding is utilized in the most cost-effective and timely 
     manner. Finally, the Committee is interested in developing 
     research partnerships supporting plant biotechnology targeted 
     to the needs of the developing world and encourages NSF to 
     work with the U.S. Agency for International Development in 
     creating opportunities for U.S. research institutions to 
     partner with research institutions in a developing country.
       The Committee's recommendation provides $680,000,000 for 
     geosciences research. This is $70,530,000 more than the 
     fiscal year 2002 level. The Committee has rejected the 
     Administration's proposal to transfer programs from NOAA, EPA 
     and the USGS. In lieu of the transfer, the Committee is 
     directing that the funds provided be used to augment high 
     priority research activities in the earth, atmospheric, and 
     ocean sciences. The Committee supports the efforts being made 
     to develop multi-year strategic plans in the atmospheric 
     sciences and in ocean drilling. As a result, the Committee 
     expects NSF will use $15,000,000 of the increase to augment 
     support for the national user facilities in this directorate 
     and move forward on the integrated ocean drilling program.
       The Committee supports the important research being 
     performed at the International Arctic Research Center (IARC). 
     The Committee understands that the cooperative agreement 
     between the Foundation and the International Arctic Research 
     Center (IARC) will expire on April 30, 2003. Accordingly, the 
     Committee urges NSF to work with the Center and the 
     University of Alaska to renew the cooperative agreement.
       The Committee provided funds in fiscal year 2001 to begin 
     the design and model testing of a vessel to replace the R/V 
     Alpha Helix. While NSF has made some progress in the design 
     and model testing stages, the Committee is concerned that it 
     may not be developed adequately for its consideration in the 
     fiscal year 2004 budget. The Committee, therefore, urges the 
     Foundation to expedite the completion of the design of the 
     vessel and submit the proposal to the Board for its 
     consideration so that the next phase of construction can go 
     forward in fiscal year 2004.
       The Committee has also increased the request for U.S. polar 
     research programs by $10,260,000 to support priority research 
     and infrastructure needs.
       As a key part of the Administration's climate change 
     research initiative, the Committee recognizes the Nation 
     needs substantially better information on the current and 
     future state of the ocean and its role in environmental 
     change. Adequate predictive capability is a prerequisite to 
     the development of sound policies at the national and 
     regional level, policies ranging from maritime commerce to 
     public health, from fisheries to safety of life and property, 
     from climate change to national security. The Committee urges 
     NSF to move ahead to support an ocean observatories 
     initiative that is tightly integrated with the 
     Administration's interagency climate change science program.
       The Committee supports the social, behavioral and economic 
     sciences. Within the $190,000,000 the Committee is 
     recommending, a total of $6,000,000 should be made available 
     for the children's research initiative.
       The Committee is providing an additional $30,000,000 to 
     augment the request for the major research instrumentation 
     program. The Committee reiterates its long-standing concern 
     about the infrastructure needs of developing institutions, 
     historically black colleges and universities; and other 
     minority-serving colleges and universities. The Committee 
     directs NSF to use these additional funds to support the 
     merit-based instrumentation and infrastructure needs of these 
     institutions.
       The Committee's recommendation includes an additional 
     $5,000,000 for the innovation partnership program. With these 
     funds, NSF is to support competitive, merit-based 
     partnerships, consisting of States, local and regional 
     entities, industry, academic institutions, and other related 
     organizations for innovation-focused local and regional 
     technology development strategies.


          MAJOR RESEARCH EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$138,800,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................126,280,000
Committee recommendation.....................................59,280,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The major research equipment and facilities construction 
     appropriation supports the acquisition, procurement, 
     construction, and commissioning of unique national research 
     platforms, research resources and major research equipment. 
     Projects supported by this

[[Page 1065]]

     appropriation will push the boundaries of technology and will 
     offer significant expansion of opportunities, often in new 
     directions, for the science and engineering community. 
     Preliminary design and development activities, and on-going 
     operations and maintenance costs of the facilities are 
     provided through the research and related activities 
     appropriation account.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $59,280,000 for major research 
     equipment and facilities construction. Support for the 
     terascale computing systems has been provided in the Research 
     and Related Activities Appropriations Account. Within this 
     account, the Committee's recommendation includes funding for 
     the following projects:
       $30,000,000 for the Atacama Large Millimeter Array 
     telescope; $9,720,000 for the Large Hadron Collider; 
     $13,560,000 for the Network for Earthquake Engineering 
     Simulation; and $6,000,000 for South Pole Station.
       The Committee remains concerned about the Foundation's 
     management of large scale construction projects and the 
     priority setting process used to select projects to be 
     funded. The Committee received a report from NSF required by 
     Public Law 107-73 which addressed a number of issues of 
     concern to the Committee. However neither the report nor the 
     budget justifications addressed the way in which criteria are 
     used by the agency and the National Science Board in setting 
     priorities among new and potential new starts. A recent audit 
     by the Inspector General identified a number of issues in 
     both the financial management and project management of 
     previously funded projects. In addition, since 2001 NSF has 
     been recruiting for a Deputy Director for Large Facility 
     Projects. However, this position has not yet been filled on a 
     permanent basis. Finally the National Academy of Sciences has 
     been asked by the Committee and NSF's authorizing committees 
     to assist in the development of a process for prioritizing 
     projects to be funded out of this account. The Committee 
     directs NSF to provide up to $750,000 to support the 
     Academy's work on this matter. These funds should be made 
     available from resources used for Planning and Evaluation. As 
     a result of all of these continuing concerns, the Committee 
     has deferred support for the two ``new starts'' proposed by 
     the administration--Earthscope and the National Ecological 
     Observatory Network.
       The Committee also supports provisions under consideration 
     by the authorizing committees to establish a more transparent 
     process for the establishment of priorities with respect to 
     the funding of major research equipment and facilities 
     construction. The Committee believes a more open and 
     understandable process, which includes National Science Board 
     and NSB Committee meetings, are important aspects of such a 
     priority setting process.
       In addition, despite repeated concerns expressed by the 
     Congress and the Inspector General, NSF has not addressed 
     adequately the management and funding problems associated 
     with large research facilities funded through the major 
     research equipment and facilities construction account 
     (formerly named the major research equipment or MRE account). 
     The Inspector General's May 1, 2002 report found that the 
     lack of adequate guidance ``have allowed NSF to use multiple 
     appropriation accounts to fund the acquisition and 
     construction costs of major research equipment and 
     facilities, and led to inconsistencies in the types of costs 
     funded through the MRE account.'' This practice has led to 
     the use of funds from the research and related activities 
     account to pay for cost overruns and scope increases of large 
     facility projects without adequate notification and 
     consultation with the Committee. Accordingly, the Committee 
     directs NSF to include in its fiscal year 2003 operating plan 
     to the Committee a report that details approved budgeted and 
     actual expenditure information on each individual large 
     research facility projects approved by the Congress. The 
     report should include information on the amount of funds 
     approved by the Congress from its inception by year, the 
     amount of actual funds spent on the project by year, and a 
     breakdown of the budgeted and actual expenditures by 
     appropriation account. In addition, the Committee notes the 
     findings and recommendations contained in the OIG report 
     pertaining to NSF's cost accounting system. As a result, the 
     Committee also directs NSF to address the deficiencies in its 
     cost accounting system to ensure that the system is capable 
     of readily and reliably providing the Foundation and the 
     Committee with information on the actual cost of NSF programs 
     and activities.
       The Committee urges NSF to continue moving forward with the 
     IceCube Neutrino Detector Observatory. The technology 
     developed by IceCube's precursor project has proven 
     successful at detecting high-energy atmospheric neutrinos. 
     Continued development is expected to lead to a new era in 
     astronomy in which researchers will have unique opportunities 
     to analyze some of the most distant and significant events in 
     the formulation and evolution of the universe.


                     EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$875,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................908,080,000
Committee recommendation....................................932,730,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The education and human resources appropriation supports a 
     comprehensive set of programs across all levels of education 
     in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). 
     The appropriation supports activities that unite school 
     districts with institutions of higher learning to improve 
     precollege education. Other precollege activities include 
     development of the next generation of precollege STEM 
     education leaders; instructional materials; and the stem 
     instructional workforce. Undergraduate activities support 
     curriculum, laboratory, and instructional improvement; expand 
     the STEM talent pool through scholarships and attracting STEM 
     participants to teaching; augment advanced technological 
     education at 2-year colleges; and develop dissemination 
     tools. Graduate support is directed to research and teaching 
     fellowships and traineeships, and linking precollege systems 
     with higher education to improve the instructional workforce. 
     Programs also seek to broaden the participation of groups 
     underrepresented in the STEM enterprise; build State and 
     regional capacity to compete successfully for research 
     funding; and promote informal science education. Ongoing 
     evaluation efforts and research on learning strengthen the 
     base for these programs. In addition to this appropriation, 
     the Foundation supports private-public K-12 partnerships and 
     undergraduate scholarships in high-need fields through H-1B 
     Nonimmigrant Petitioner Fees provided through Public Law 105-
     277, as amended.


                        committee recommendation

       The Committee has recommended $932,730,000 for this 
     account. This amount is $57,730,000 more than the fiscal year 
     2002.
       The Committee provided $160,000,000 last year to start the 
     new Math and Science Partnership program. NSF was unable to 
     obligate all of these funds in fiscal year 2002. As a result, 
     the Committee is providing $105,000,000 in new funds for 
     fiscal year 2003. NSF should augment this funding with the 
     funds carried over from fiscal year 2002.
       To support additional K-12 math and science education 
     efforts, the Committee is also providing a total of 
     $223,550,000 for elementary, secondary, and informal science 
     education, of which $37,460,000 is from the H-1B nonimmigrant 
     petitioner fees.
       The Committee is aware of the unique and important 
     relationship between historically black colleges and 
     universities (HBCUs) and their surrounding communities, 
     especially with schools located in some of the nation's most 
     underserved, economically disadvantaged, and isolated areas, 
     and recognizes that there is a natural linkage between school 
     districts with high minority enrollments and HBCUs. The 
     Committee expects the National Science Foundation will take 
     explicit actions to include HBCUs among the set of 
     institutions of higher education participating in its efforts 
     to increase this nation's supply of math and science 
     teachers.
       Recent data suggest a number of important trends regarding 
     the development of the Nation's high-tech workforce. Student 
     interest has shifted markedly from the physical sciences and 
     mathematics to the life sciences and computer science. This 
     trend seems to parallel Federal funding trends for research 
     support. In addition, in a number of fields, the percentage 
     of degrees awarded to foreign students has been steadily 
     increasing. At the same time, the demand for jobs requiring 
     technical expertise is growing. Given the demands of our 
     knowledge-based economy, the United States needs to increase 
     the number and diversity of our scientific and technical 
     workforce and facilitate an understanding of basic scientific 
     principles among non-scientists. For this reason, the 
     Committee has focused on a set of NSF programs that relate to 
     education and training at all levels of math and science 
     education.
       The Committee has increased the budget request for NSF's 
     graduate and professional education programs by $25,000,000. 
     These additional funds are to be used to increase graduate 
     student stipends in the fellowship programs and the 
     traineeship program to a level of $30,000 per year. The 
     Committee recognizes that graduate stipends in science and 
     engineering need to be made more attractive to students to 
     compensate for the cost of education and mounting student 
     debt, and to offset opportunities for higher salaries offered 
     by employers to science and engineering baccalaureate degree 
     holders.
       The Informal Science Education program, which provides 
     support to museums and science centers, is funded at 
     $70,000,000. This represents the first increase in this 
     program in 3 years.
       The undergraduate ``tech talent'' expansion program is 
     increased by $20,000,000. The Committee is informed that 
     nearly $70,000,000 was requested by the proposals submitted 
     for the fiscal year 2002 competition in which only $5,000,000 
     was available. The Committee is also providing an additional 
     $5,000,000 to increase the Advanced Technological Education 
     program. This important NSF program supports undergraduate 
     science education activities at the Nation's community 
     colleges. The Committee strongly encourages NSF to develop a 
     robust and comprehensive plan for undergraduate science and 
     engineering education

[[Page 1066]]

     that builds on the ``tech talent'' program and other NSF 
     undergraduate activities.
       The Committee is recommending an increase for the HBCU-
     Research University Science & Technology (THRUST) initiative 
     within the Centers of Research Excellence in Science and 
     Technology (CREST) program of $10,000,000. Eligibility for 
     THRUST should not exclude CREST recipients, but funds 
     provided in fiscal year 2003 should be used to first fully-
     fund multi-year awards to recipients of THRUST awards in the 
     program's first year.
       The Committee does not agree with the budget request to 
     reduce funding for the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority 
     Participation program (LSAMP) or the Historically Black 
     Colleges and Universities--Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP). 
     Both of these programs play important roles in attracting and 
     retaining minorities into science and engineering. In lieu of 
     the reductions proposed by the Administration, the Committee 
     is adding $5,000,000 to LSAMP and $5,000,000 to HBCU-UP.
       The Committee has included $110,000,000 for the States 
     currently participating in the Experimental Program to 
     Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR). These funds will 
     allow full implementation of the infrastructure awards as 
     well as continuation of other activities. The Committee's 
     recommendation is $35,000,000 more than the budget request 
     and reverses the Administration's proposed $10,000,000 
     reduction from the fiscal year 2002 level. In addition, the 
     Committee notes that at least $30,000,000 will be available 
     for EPSCoR activities from the research programs through 
     their share of co-funding.


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$170,040,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................202,950,000
Committee recommendation....................................182,160,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The salaries and expenses appropriation provides funds for 
     staff salaries, benefits, travel, training, rent, advisory 
     and assistance services, communications and utilities 
     expenses, supplies, equipment, and other operating expenses 
     necessary for management of the agency's research and 
     education activities.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee is providing $182,160,000 for salaries and 
     expenses. This represents an increase of 7 percent over the 
     fiscal year 2002 level. In light of the Committee's rejection 
     of the transfer of programs from NOAA, EPA, and the U.S. 
     Geological Survey, the Committee has not provided the 
     resources requested for the 17 full-time equivalents that had 
     been proposed in connection with the program transfers. The 
     balance of the adjustment to the request should be taken at 
     the Foundation's discretion.


                  Office of the National Science Board

Appropriations, 2002...................................................
Budget estimate, 2003..................................................
Committee recommendation.....................................$3,500,000

                          Program Description

       The National Science Board is the governing body of the 
     National Science Foundation. The Board is composed of 24 
     members, appointed by the President and confirmed by the 
     Senate. The Board is charged with serving as adviser to the 
     President and Congress on policy matters related to science 
     and engineering. By law, the Board establishes the policies 
     of the National Science Foundation, providing oversight of 
     its programs and activities, and approval of its strategic 
     directions and budgets. The Board reviews and approves NSF 
     awards, at levels above its delegation of authority to the 
     NSF Director.


                        Committee Recommendation

       The Committee has established a separate appropriation 
     account with $3,500,000 for the Office of National Science 
     Board. The Committee directs that these funds be used for 
     salaries and compensation for the staff the Office of the 
     National Science Board as well as the Members of the Board. 
     The funding in this account should also be used for travel, 
     training, general operating expenses, Board operating 
     expenses, representational expenses, honorary awards, NSB 
     reports and contracts. Support for the Science and 
     Engineering Indicators report, including the staff support 
     provided by the Division of Science Resources Studies for 
     this NSB report should continue to be provided by the 
     Foundation on a non-reimbursable basis. Further, the NSF 
     shall continue to provide, on a non-reimbursable basis, 
     budget development and execution assistance, personnel 
     assistance, space, NSB Committee staff support and other 
     assistance in the same manner has it did in fiscal year 2002.
       The Committee strongly urges the authorizing committees to 
     consider the merits of having the selection of the Chairman 
     of the Board subject to Senate confirmation to further ensure 
     the independence of the Chairman and the Board. The Committee 
     also urges the authorizing committees to consider enacting 
     legislation that would give the executive committee of the 
     National Science Board the authority to elect its chairman.
       The Committee supports the Board's new authority to hire 
     its own professional staff. The Committee directs the 
     Foundation to support fully the Board's efforts to meet its 
     staffing needs.


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2002.........................................$7,040,000
Budget estimate, 2003.........................................7,700,000
Committee recommendation......................................9,060,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Office of Inspector General appropriation provides 
     audit and investigation functions to identify and correct 
     deficiencies which could create potential instances of fraud, 
     waste, or mismanagement.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee is providing $9,060,000 for the Office of 
     Inspector General to support the increasing audit and 
     oversight activities of this office driven by the substantial 
     growth in the size and complexity of NSF research and 
     education programs.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation


          payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation

Appropriations, 2002.......................................$105,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.......................................105,000,000
Committee recommendation....................................110,000,000


                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

       The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was created by 
     the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act (title VI of 
     the Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, 
     Public Law 95-557, October 31, 1978). Neighborhood 
     Reinvestment helps local communities establish working 
     partnerships between residents and representatives of the 
     public and private sectors. These partnership-based 
     organizations are independent, tax-exempt, nonprofit entities 
     and are often known as Neighborhood Housing Services [NHS] or 
     mutual housing associations. Collectively, these 
     organizations are known as the NeighborWorks network.
       Nationally, over 225 NeighborWorks organizations serve 
     over 2,100 urban, suburban and rural communities in 49 
     States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. In fiscal 
     year 2001, the NeighborWorks network assisted nearly 64,000 
     families obtain and maintain safe and affordable rental and 
     homeownership housing, where 71 percent of the people served 
     are in the very low and low-income brackets.
       The NeighborWorks network improves the quality of life in 
     distressed neighborhoods for current residents, increases 
     homeownership through targeted lending efforts, exerts a 
     long-term, stabilizing influence on the neighborhood business 
     environment, and reverses neighborhood decline. 
     NeighborWorks organizations have been positively impacting 
     urban communities for nearly 25 years, and more recent 
     experience is demonstrating the success of this approach in 
     rural communities when adequate resources are available.
       Neighborhood Reinvestment will continue to provide grants 
     to Neighborhood Housing Services of America [NHSA], the 
     NeighborWorks network's national secondary market. The 
     mission of NHSA is to utilize private sector support to 
     replenish local NeighborWorks organizations' revolving loan 
     funds. These loans are used to back securities that are 
     placed with private sector social investors.


                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

       The Committee recommends $110,000,000 for the Neighborhood 
     Reinvestment Corporation, $5,000,000 above the budget request 
     and $5,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
     Committee has also included a set-aside of $5,000,000 for the 
     section 8 homeownership program. The administration requested 
     $10,000,000 for this program.
       The Committee is including $5,000,000 above the budget 
     request to continue the Corporation's multi-family rental 
     housing initiative. The Corporation has demonstrated success 
     with this program; in fiscal year 2002, 110 extremely low-
     income people benefited from the production of new multi-
     family housing units.
       The Committee continues to support the work being done by 
     NeighborWorks members to combat predatory lending practices. 
     The Committee recognizes the importance that financial 
     literacy and homeownership counseling have in preventing 
     people from becoming victims of predatory schemes. The 
     Committee also recognizes that NeighborWorks members have 
     successfully counseled 50,000 people who went on to become 
     homeowners and encourages the Neighborhood Reinvestment 
     Corporation and its network to expand its education and 
     counseling programs.

                        Selective Service System


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2002........................................$25,003,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................26,480,000
Committee recommendation.....................................26,480,000


                          Program Description

       The Selective Service System [SSS] was reestablished by the 
     Selective Service Act of 1948. The basic mission of the 
     System is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed 
     Forces adequate to ensure the security of the United States 
     during a time of national

[[Page 1067]]

     emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have relied on 
     volunteers to fill military manpower requirements. However, 
     the Selective Service System remains the primary vehicle by 
     which men will be brought into the military if Congress and 
     the President should authorize a return to the draft.
       In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law 
     (Public Law 100-180, sec. 715) to develop plans for a 
     postmobilization health care personnel delivery system 
     capable of providing the necessary critically skilled health 
     care personnel to the Armed Forces in time of emergency. An 
     automated system capable of handling mass registration and 
     inductions is now complete, together with necessary draft 
     legislation, a draft Presidential proclamation, prototype 
     forms and letters, et cetera. These products will be 
     available should the need arise. The development of 
     supplemental standby products, such as a compliance system 
     for health care personnel, continues using very limited 
     existing resources.

                        committee recommendation

       The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,480,000 
     for the Selective Service System. This amount is the same as 
     the budget request for fiscal year 2003 and an increase of 
     $1,477,000 over the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       The Committee recommends inclusion of 19 general provisions 
     previously enacted. There are three new provisions that are 
     noncontroversial. They are largely standard limitations which 
     have been carried in the VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies 
     appropriations bill in the past.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 7 of Rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
     general appropriations bills identify each Committee 
     amendment to the House bill ``which proposes an item of 
     appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions 
     of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or 
     resolution previously passed by the Senate during that 
     session.''

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

       Housing certificate fund: $16,928,697,228.
       Fair housing activities: $45,899,000.
       HOME Investment Partnerships Program: $1,950,000,000.
       Homeless assistance grants: $1,215,025,000.
       Community development block grants: $5,000,000,000.
       Rural housing and economic development: $25,000,000.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

       Community Development Financial Institutions Fund: 
     $73,000,000.

                   CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

       Salaries and expenses: $56,767,000.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

       Environmental programs and management: $2,136,569,000.
       Science and technology: $793,371,000.
       State and tribal assistance grants: $3,920,639,000.
       Superfund: $1,272,888,000.

                  FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

       Salaries and expenses: $239,690,000.
       Emergency management planning and assistance: 
     $1,547,214,000.
       Emergency food and shelter: $153,000,000.

                    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

       Federal Consumer Information Center: $15,000,000.

                      NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

       Research and related activities: $4,131,630,000.
       Major research equipment and facilities management: 
     $79,280,000.
       Education and human resources: $947,730,000.
       Salaries and expenses: $182,160,000.
       National Science Board: $3,500,000.
       Office of Inspector General: $9,660,000.

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

       Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
     on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any 
     statute or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the 
     statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and 
     (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint 
     resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part 
     thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through 
     type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate 
     typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 
     would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in 
     the form recommended by the committee.''
       With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
     Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
     requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+
                                                                                                                                 or -)
                Item                        2002            Budget       House allowance     Committee    ---------------------------------------------------
                                       appropriation   estimate        deg.        recommendation        2002            Budget            House
                                                                                                            appropriation   estimate  allowance
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
 
               TITLE I
 
   DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
 
  Veterans Benefits Administration
 
Compensation and pensions...........      24,944,288        28,949,000       28,949,000       +4,004,712   ...............
    2002 Supplemental (Public Law          1,100,000   ................  ...............      -1,100,000   ...............
     107-206).......................
Readjustment benefits...............       2,135,000         2,264,808        2,264,808         +129,808   ...............
Veterans insurance and indemnities..          26,200            27,530           27,530           +1,330   ...............
Veterans housing benefit program             203,278           437,522          339,000         +135,722          -98,522
 fund program account (indefinite)..
    (Limitation on direct loans)....            (300)  ................  ...............           (-300)  ...............
    Credit subsidy..................  ...............          -98,000   ...............  ...............         +98,000
    Administrative expenses.........         164,497           168,207          168,207           +3,710   ...............
Education loan fund program account.               1                 1                1   ...............  ...............
    (Limitation on direct loans)....              (3)               (3)              (3)  ...............  ...............
    Administrative expenses.........              64                70               70               +6   ...............
Vocational rehabilitation loans                   72                55               55              -17   ...............
 program account....................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....          (3,301)           (3,626)          (3,626)           (+325)  ...............
    Administrative expenses.........             274               289              289              +15   ...............
Native American Veteran Housing Loan             544               558              558              +14   ...............
 Program Account....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Veterans Benefits            28,574,218        31,750,040       31,749,518       +3,175,300             -522
       Administration...............
 
   Veterans Health Administration
 
Medical care........................      20,656,164        22,243,761       23,389,304       +2,733,140       +1,145,543
    2002 Supplemental (Public Law            142,000   ................  ...............        -142,000   ...............
     107-206).......................
    Delayed equipment obligation....         675,000           500,000          500,000         -175,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................      21,473,164        22,743,761       23,889,304       +2,416,140       +1,145,543
 
Medical care cost recovery
 collections:
    Offsetting receipts.............        -691,000          -752,000       -1,386,000         -695,000         -634,000
    Appropriations (indefinite).....         691,000           752,000        1,386,000         +695,000         +634,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total available (excludes           22,164,164        23,495,761       25,275,304       +3,111,140       +1,779,543
       offsetting receipts).........
 
Medical and prosthetic research.....         371,000           394,373          400,000          +29,000           +5,627
Medical administration and                    66,731            69,716           69,716           +2,985   ...............
 miscellaneous operating expenses...
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Veterans Health              21,910,895        23,207,850       24,359,020       +2,448,125       +1,151,170
       Administration...............
 
     Departmental Administration
 
General operating expenses..........       1,195,728         1,256,418        1,256,418          +60,690   ...............
    Offsetting receipts.............  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 1068]]

 
      Total, Program Level..........      (1,195,728)       (1,256,418)      (1,256,418)        (+60,690)  ...............
 
    Emergency supplemental..........           2,000   ................  ...............          -2,000   ...............
National Cemetery Administration....         121,169           133,149          133,149          +11,980   ...............
Office of Inspector General.........          52,308            55,000           55,000           +2,692
    (Transfer to general operating    ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
     expenses)......................
Construction, major projects........         183,180           193,740          144,740          -38,440          -49,000
Facility rehabilitation fund........  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
Construction, minor projects........         210,900           210,700          210,700             -200   ...............
    (Transfer to Parking Revolving    ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
     Fund)..........................
Grants for construction of State             100,000           100,000          100,000   ...............  ...............
 extended care facilities...........
Parking Revolving Fund..............           4,000   ................  ...............          -4,000   ...............
Grants for the construction of State          25,000            32,000           32,000           +7,000   ...............
 veterans cemeteries................
(Transfer from Parking Revolving      ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
 Fund)..............................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental                  1,894,285         1,981,007        1,932,007          +37,722          -49,000
       Administration...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of       52,379,398        56,938,897       58,040,545       +5,661,147       +1,101,648
       Veterans Affairs.............
          (By transfer).............  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
          (Limitation on direct               (3,604)           (3,629)          (3,629)            (+25)  ...............
           loans)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Consisting of:
          Mandatory.................     (28,408,766)      (31,580,860)     (31,580,338)     (+3,171,572)           (-522)
          Discretionary.............     (23,970,632)      (25,358,037)     (26,460,207)     (+2,489,575)     (+1,102,170)
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
              TITLE II
 
   DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
             DEVELOPMENT
 
      Public and Indian Housing
 
Housing Certificate Fund:
    Direct appropriation............      11,440,975        13,326,559       12,728,697       +1,287,722         -597,862
    Advance appropriations provided        4,200,000         4,200,000        4,200,000   ...............  ...............
     in previous acts...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, discretionary.......      15,640,975        17,526,559       16,928,697       +1,287,722         -597,862
 
    (Advance appropriation).........      (4,200,000)       (4,200,000)      (4,200,000)  ...............  ...............
Rescission of unobligated balances:
    Rescission of unobligated             -1,200,000        -1,100,000       -1,400,000         -200,000         -300,000
     balances.......................
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).        -388,500   ................  ...............        +388,500   ...............
    Public housing capital fund.....       2,843,400         2,425,900        2,683,400         -160,000         +257,500
    Public housing operating fund...       3,494,868         3,530,000        3,530,000          +35,132   ...............
    Operation Safe Home (rescission)         -11,000   ................  ...............         +11,000   ...............
    Revitalization of severely               573,735           574,000          574,000             +265   ...............
     distressed public housing......
    Native American housing block            648,570           646,594          648,570   ...............          +1,976
     grants.........................
    Indian housing loan guarantee              5,987             5,200            5,000             -987             -200
     fund program account...........
        (Limitation on guaranteed           (234,283)         (197,243)        (197,243)        (-37,040)  ...............
         loans).....................
    Native Hawiian housing block      ...............           10,000   ...............  ...............         -10,000
     grant..........................
    Native Hawaiian housing loan               1,000             1,035            1,000   ...............             -35
     guarantee fund.................
        (Limitation on guaranteed            (40,000)          (39,712)         (39,712)           (-288)  ...............
         loans).....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Public and Indian            22,008,535        23,619,288       22,970,667         +962,132         -648,621
       Housing......................
 
 Community Planning and Development
 
Housing opportunities for persons            277,432           292,000          292,000          +14,568   ...............
 with AIDS..........................
Rural housing and economic                    25,000   ................          25,000   ...............         +25,000
 development........................
Empowerment zones/enterprise                  45,000   ................          30,000          -15,000          +30,000
 communities........................
Community development block grants..       5,000,000         4,715,500        5,000,000   ...............        +284,500
Community development fund                 2,000,000   ................  ...............      -2,000,000   ...............
 (emergency supplemental)...........
    Emergency supplemental (Public           783,000   ................  ...............        -783,000   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Section 108 loan guarantees:........
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)        (608,696)         (275,000)        (608,696)  ...............       (+333,696)
    Credit subsidy..................          14,000             6,325           14,000   ...............          +7,675
    Administrative expenses.........           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
Brownfields redevelopment...........          25,000            25,000           25,000   ...............  ...............
HOME investment partnerships program       1,846,040         2,084,100        1,950,000         +103,960         -134,100
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).         -50,000   ................  ...............         +50,000   ...............
Homeless assistance grants..........       1,122,525         1,129,500        1,215,025          +92,500          +85,525
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Community planning and        8,355,997         8,253,425        8,552,025         +196,028         +298,600
       development..................
 
          Housing Programs
 
Housing for special populations.....       1,024,151         1,024,151        1,033,801           +9,650           +9,650
    Housing for the elderly.........        (783,286)         (773,636)        (783,286)  ...............         (+9,650)
    Housing for the disabled........        (240,865)         (250,515)        (250,515)         (+9,650)  ...............
Housing counseling assistance.......  ...............           35,000   ...............  ...............         -35,000
Rental Housing assistance...........  ...............  ................         100,000         +100,000         +100,000
    Rescission......................  ...............         -100,000         -100,000         -100,000
    Rescission (Public Law 107-206).        -300,000   ................  ...............        +300,000   ...............
Manufactured housing fees trust fund          13,566            13,000           13,000             -566   ...............
    Offsetting collections..........         -13,566           -13,000          -13,000             +566   ...............
        Savings from canceling                -8,000   ................  ...............          +8,000   ...............
         S.1029.....................
 
   Federal Housing Administration
 
FHA--Mutual mortgage insurance
 program account:
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)    (160,000,000)     (160,000,000)    (160,000,000)  ...............  ...............
    (Limitation on direct loans)....        (250,000)          (50,000)        (250,000)  ...............       (+200,000)
    Administrative expenses.........         336,700           347,829          347,829          +11,129   ...............
    Negative subsidy................      -2,323,000        -2,753,000       -2,753,000         -430,000   ...............
    Administrative contract expenses         160,000            85,720           85,720          -74,280   ...............
    Additional contract expenses....           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
 
FHA--General and special risk
 program account:
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)     (21,000,000)      (21,000,000)     (21,000,000)  ...............  ...............
    (Limitation on direct loans)....         (50,000)          (50,000)         (50,000)  ...............  ...............
    Administrative expenses.........         216,100           223,716          223,716           +7,616   ...............
    Negative subsidy................        -225,000          -225,000         -225,000   ...............  ...............
    Subsidy.........................          15,000            15,000           15,000   ...............  ...............
    Non-overhead administrative              144,000            93,780           93,780          -50,220   ...............
     expenses.......................

[[Page 1069]]

 
    Additional contract expenses....           4,000             4,000            4,000   ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Housing              -1,671,200        -2,206,955       -2,206,955         -535,755   ...............
       Administration...............
 
    Government National Mortgage
         Association (GNMA)
 
Guarantees of mortgage-backed
 securities loan guarantee program
 account:
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)    (200,000,000)     (200,000,000)    (200,000,000)  ...............  ...............
    Administrative expenses.........           9,383            10,343           10,343             +960   ...............
    Offsetting receipts.............        -382,000          -358,000         -358,000          +24,000   ...............
 
   Policy Development and Research
 
Research and technology.............          50,250            47,000           47,000           -3,250   ...............
 
 Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
 
Fair housing activities.............          45,899            45,899           45,899   ...............  ...............
 
    Office of Lead Hazard Control
 
Lead hazard reduction...............         109,758           126,000          201,000          +91,242          +75,000
 
    Management and Administration
 
Salaries and expenses...............         556,067           510,299          510,299          -45,768   ...............
    Transfer from:
        Limitation on FHA corporate         (530,457)         (548,202)        (548,202)        (+17,745)  ...............
         funds......................
        GNMA........................          (9,383)          (10,343)         (10,343)           (+960)  ...............
        Community Development Loan            (1,000)           (1,000)          (1,000)  ...............  ...............
         Guarantees Program.........
        Native American Housing                 (150)             (150)            (150)  ...............  ...............
         Block Grants...............
        Indian Housing Loan                     (200)             (200)            (200)  ...............  ...............
         Guarantee Fund Program.....
        Native Hawaiian Housing Loan             (35)              (35)             (35)  ...............  ...............
         Guarantees.................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total, Salaries and             (1,097,292)       (1,070,229)      (1,070,229)        (-27,063)  ...............
           expenses.................
 
Working capital fund................  ...............          276,300          276,737         +276,737             +437
Office of Inspector General.........          66,555            74,341           74,341           +7,786   ...............
    (By transfer, limitation on FHA          (22,343)          (23,343)         (23,343)         (+1,000)  ...............
     corporate funds)...............
    (By transfer from Public Housing          (5,000)  ................  ...............         (-5,000)  ...............
     Oper Subsidy)..................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Inspector             (93,898)          (97,684)         (97,684)         (+3,786)  ...............
       General......................
 
    Emergency supplemental..........           1,000   ................  ...............          -1,000   ...............
 
Consolidated fee fund (rescission)..          -6,700            -8,000           -8,000           -1,300   ...............
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise          27,000            30,000           30,000           +3,000   ...............
 Oversight..........................
    Offsetting receipts.............         -27,000           -30,000          -30,000           -3,000   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, title II, Department of      30,147,695        31,449,091       31,249,157       +1,101,462         -199,934
       Housing and Urban Development
 
        2002 Emergency Supplementals       2,045,500          -100,000         -100,000       -2,145,500   ...............
         and Recissions.............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department of      32,193,195        31,349,091       31,149,157       -1,044,038         -199,934
       Housing and Urban Development
       (net)........................
              Appropriations........     (27,165,395)      (28,357,091)     (28,457,157)     (+1,291,762)       (+100,066)
              Rescissions...........     (-1,956,200)      (-1,208,000)     (-1,508,000)       (+448,200)       (-300,000)
              Emergency                   (2,784,000)  ................  ...............     (-2,784,000)  ...............
               appropriations.......
              Advance provided in         (4,200,000)       (4,200,000)      (4,200,000)  ...............  ...............
               previous acts........
          (Limitation on direct             (300,000)         (100,000)        (300,000)  ...............       (+200,000)
           loans)...................
          (Limitation on guaranteed     (381,882,979)     (381,511,955)    (381,845,651)        (-37,328)       (+333,696)
           loans)...................
          (Limitation on corporate          (563,568)         (583,273)        (583,273)        (+19,705)  ...............
           funds)...................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
 
              TITLE III
 
        INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
 
American Battle Monuments Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............          35,466            30,400           30,400           -5,066   ...............
 
     Chemical Safety and Hazard
         Investigation Board
 
Salaries and expenses...............           7,850             7,850            7,850   ...............  ...............
 
     Department of the Treasury
 
   Community Development Financial
            Institutions
 
Community development financial               80,000            68,000           73,000           -7,000           +5,000
 institutions fund program account..
 
 Interagency Council on the Homeless
 
Operating expenses..................  ...............  ................           1,500           +1,500           +1,500
 
 Consumer Product Safety Commission
 
Salaries and expenses...............          55,200            56,767           56,767           +1,567   ...............
 
    Corporation for National and
          Community Service
 
National and community service               401,980           631,342          405,842           +3,862         -225,500
 programs operating expenses........
Office of Inspector General.........           5,000             5,000            6,900           +1,900           +1,900
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................         406,980           636,342          412,742           +5,762         -223,600
 
 U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans
               Claims
 
Salaries and expenses...............          13,221            14,994           14,612           +1,391             -382
 
    Department of Defense--Civil
 
      Cemeterial Expenses, Army
 
Salaries and expenses...............          22,537            24,445           24,445           +1,908   ...............
 
   Department of Health and Human
              Services
 
    National Institute of Health
 
National Institute of Environmental           70,228            74,471           76,074           +5,846           +1,603
 Health Sciences....................
    Emergency supplemental..........          10,500   ................  ...............         -10,500   ...............
 

[[Page 1070]]

 
   Centers for Disease Control and
             Prevention
 
   Agency for Toxic Substances and
          Disease Registry
 
Toxic substances and environmental            78,235            77,388           81,000           +2,765           +3,612
 public health......................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Department of Health            158,963           151,859          157,074           -1,889           +5,215
       and Human Services...........
 
   Environmental Protection Agency
 
Science and Technology..............         698,089           670,008          707,203           +9,114          +37,195
    Transfer from Hazardous                   36,891           111,168           86,168          +49,277          -25,000
     Substance Superfund............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Science and                  734,980           781,176          793,371          +58,391          +12,195
       Technology...................
 
    Emergency supplemental..........          90,308   ................  ...............         -90,308   ...............
 
Environmental Programs and                 2,054,511         2,047,704        2,136,569          +82,058          +88,865
 Management.........................
    Emergency supplemental..........          39,000   ................  ...............         -39,000   ...............
 
Office of Inspector General.........          34,019            35,325           37,325           +3,306           +2,000
    Transfer from Hazardous                   11,867            12,742           12,742             +875   ...............
     Substance Superfund............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, OIG.................          45,886            48,067           50,067           +4,181           +2,000
 
Buildings and facilities............          25,318            42,918           42,918          +17,600   ...............
 
Hazardous Substance Superfund.......       1,170,000         1,272,888        1,272,888         +102,888   ...............
    Delay of obligation.............         100,000   ................  ...............        -100,000   ...............
    Transfer to Office of Inspector          -11,867           -12,742          -12,742             -875   ...............
     General........................
    Transfer to Science and                  -36,891          -111,168          -86,168          -49,277          +25,000
     Technology.....................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Hazardous Substance        1,221,242         1,148,978        1,173,978          -47,264          +25,000
       Superfund....................
 
    Emergency supplemental..........          41,292   ................  ...............         -41,292   ...............
 
Leaking Underground Storage Tank              73,000            72,313           72,313             -687   ...............
 Program............................
Oil spill response..................          15,000            15,581           15,581             +581   ...............
 
State and Tribal Assistance Grants..       2,658,900         2,305,500        2,796,804         +137,904         +491,304
    Categorical grants..............       1,074,376         1,158,276        1,123,835          +49,459          -34,441
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, STAG................       3,733,276         3,463,776        3,920,639         +187,363         +456,863
 
    Emergency supplemental..........           5,000   ................  ...............          -5,000   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, EPA....................       8,078,813         7,620,513        8,205,436         +126,623         +584,923
 
  Executive Office of the President
 
Office of Science and Technology               5,267             5,368            5,368             +101   ...............
 Policy.............................
Council on Environmental Quality and           2,974             3,031            3,031              +57   ...............
 Office of Environmental Quality....
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................           8,241             8,399            8,399             +158   ...............
 
      Federal Deposit Insurance
             Corporation
 
Office of Inspector General                  (33,660)          (31,388)         (30,848)         (-2,812)           (-540)
 (transfer).........................
 
 Federal Emergency Management Agency
 
Disaster relief.....................         664,000         1,842,843          842,843         +178,843       -1,000,000
    (Transfer to EMPA)..............         (-2,900)          (-2,900)         (-2,900)  ...............  ...............
    (Transfer to OIG)...............  ...............         (-21,577)        (-21,577)        (-21,577)  ...............
    Contingent emergency                   1,500,000   ................  ...............      -1,500,000   ...............
     appropriations.................
    Emergency supplemental..........       4,356,871   ................  ...............      -4,356,871   ...............
    Emergency supplemental (Public         2,650,700   ................  ...............      -2,650,700   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................       9,171,571         1,842,843          842,843       -8,328,728       -1,000,000
 
National pre-disaster mitigation      ...............          300,000           25,000          +25,000         -275,000
 fund...............................
Disaster assistance direct loan
 program account:
    State share loan................             405   ................  ...............            -405   ...............
        (Limitation on direct loans)         (25,000)          (25,000)         (25,000)  ...............  ...............
    Administrative expenses.........             543               557              557              +14   ...............
Salaries and expenses...............         203,801           209,163          209,163           +5,362   ...............
    Defense function................          30,000            30,527           30,527             +527   ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................         233,801           239,690          239,690           +5,889   ...............
    Emergency supplemental..........          25,000   ................  ...............         -25,000   ...............
 
Office of Inspector General.........          10,303            11,549           17,754           +7,451           +6,205
    (Transfer from Disaster relief).  ...............          (21,577)         (21,577)        (+21,577)  ...............
 
Emergency management planning and            384,623         3,727,914          696,214         +311,591       -3,031,700
 assistance.........................
    Defense function................          20,000            19,300           19,000           -1,000             -300
Fire Act............................  ...............  ................         900,000         +900,000         +900,000
National Preparedness...............  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................         404,623         3,747,214        1,615,214       +1,210,591       -2,132,000
 
      (Transfer from Disaster                 (2,900)           (2,900)          (2,900)  ...............  ...............
       relief)......................
 
    Emergency supplemental..........         220,000   ................  ...............        -220,000   ...............
    Emergency supplemental (Public           225,400   ................  ...............        -225,400   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
 
Radiological emergency preparedness           -1,000            -1,000           -1,000   ...............  ...............
 fund...............................
Cerro Grande Fire Claims............  ...............  ................         100,000         +100,000         +100,000
Emergency food and shelter program..         140,000           153,000          153,000          +13,000   ...............
Flood map modernization fund........  ...............          300,000          100,000         +100,000         -200,000
 
National Flood Insurance Fund:
    (Limitation on administrative
     expenses):
        Salaries and expenses.......          28,798            32,393           32,393           +3,595   ...............
        Flood mitigation............          76,381            77,666           77,666           +1,285   ...............
        (Transfer out)..............        (-20,000)         (-20,000)        (-20,000)  ...............  ...............
National Flood Migration Fund (by            (20,000)          (20,000)         (20,000)  ...............  ...............
 transfer)..........................
                                     ===================================================================================================================

[[Page 1071]]

 
      Total, Federal Emergency            10,535,825         6,703,912        3,203,117       -7,332,708       -3,500,795
       Management Agency............
          Appropriations............      (1,557,854)       (6,703,912)      (3,203,117)     (+1,645,263)     (-3,500,795)
      (By transfer).................         (22,900)          (44,477)         (44,477)        (+21,577)  ...............
          Emergency appropriations..      (8,977,971)  ................  ...............     (-8,977,971)  ...............
 
   General Services Administration
 
Federal Consumer Information Center            7,276            12,541           12,541           +5,265   ...............
 Fund...............................
 
   National Aeronautics and Space
           Administration
 
Human space flight..................       6,912,400         6,130,900        6,095,900         -816,500          -35,000
    Emergency supplemental..........          76,000   ................  ...............         -76,000   ...............
Science, aeronautics and technology.       7,857,100         8,844,500        9,003,000       +1,145,900         +158,500
    Emergency supplemental..........          32,500   ................  ...............         -32,500   ...............
Office of Inspector General.........          23,700            24,600           26,600           +2,900           +2,000
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NASA...................      14,901,700        15,000,000       15,125,500         +223,800         +125,500
 
National Credit Union Administration
 
Central liquidity facility:
    (Limitation on direct loans)....      (1,500,000)       (1,500,000)      (1,500,000)  ...............  ...............
    (Limitation on administrative               (309)             (309)            (309)  ...............  ...............
     expenses, corporate funds).....
Community Development Revolving Loan           1,000             1,000            1,000   ...............  ...............
 Fund...............................
 
     National Science Foundation
 
Research and related activities.....       3,530,270         3,715,200        4,013,580         +483,310         +298,380
    Defense function................          68,070            68,000           68,070   ...............             +70
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................       3,598,340         3,783,200        4,081,650         +483,310         +298,450
 
    Emergency supplemental..........             300   ................  ...............            -300   ...............
 
Major research equipment and                 138,800           126,280           59,280          -79,520          -67,000
 facilities construction............
Education and human resources.......         875,000           908,080          932,730          +57,730          +24,650
    Emergency supplemental (Public            19,300   ................  ...............         -19,300   ...............
     Law 107-206)...................
Salaries and expenses...............         170,040           202,950          182,160          +12,120          -20,790
National Science Board..............  ...............  ................           3,500           +3,500           +3,500
Office of Inspector General.........           6,760             7,700            9,660           +2,900           +1,960
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NSF....................       4,808,540         5,028,210        5,268,980         +460,440         +240,770
 
      Neighborhood Reinvestment
             Corporation
 
Payment to the Neighborhood                  105,000           105,000          110,000           +5,000           +5,000
 Reinvestment Corporation...........
 
      Selective Service System
 
Salaries and expenses...............          25,003            26,480           26,480           +1,477   ...............
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Total, title III, Independent       39,251,615        35,496,712       32,739,843       -6,511,772       -2,756,869
       agencies.....................
          Appropriations............     (29,959,444)      (35,496,712)     (32,739,843)     (+2,780,399)     (-2,756,869)
          Rescissions...............  ...............  ................  ...............  ...............  ...............
          (Transfer out)............        (-22,900)         (-44,477)        (-44,477)        (-21,577)  ...............
          (By transfer).............         (56,560)          (75,865)         (75,325)        (+18,765)           (-540)
          (Limitation on direct           (1,525,000)       (1,525,000)      (1,525,000)  ...............  ...............
           loans)...................
          (Limitation on corporate              (309)             (309)            (309)  ...............  ...............
           funds)...................
                                     ===================================================================================================================
      Grand total (net).............     123,824,208       123,784,700      121,929,545       -1,894,663       -1,855,155
              Appropriations........    (109,502,237)     (120,792,700)    (119,237,545)     (+9,735,308)     (-1,555,155)
              Rescissions...........     (-1,956,200)      (-1,208,000)     (-1,508,000)       (+448,200)       (-300,000)
              Emergency                  (12,078,171)  ................  ...............    (-12,078,171)  ...............
               appropriations.......
              Advance provided in         (4,200,000)       (4,200,000)      (4,200,000)  ...............  ...............
               previous acts........
          (By transfer).............         (61,560)          (75,865)         (75,325)        (+13,765)           (-540)
          (Transfer out)............        (-22,900)         (-44,477)        (-44,477)        (-21,577)  ...............
          (Limitation on direct           (1,828,604)       (1,628,629)      (1,828,629)            (+25)       (+200,000)
           loans)...................
          (Limitation on guaranteed     (381,882,979)     (381,511,955)    (381,845,651)        (-37,328)       (+333,696)
           loans)...................
          (Limitation on corporate          (563,877)         (583,582)        (583,582)        (+19,705)  ...............
           funds)...................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          DIVISION L--HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002 AMENDMENTS

       The Committee recommends the following general provisions 
     that modify the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 
     107-296):
       Sec. 101. Modifies sections 308 and 835 of Public Law 107-
     296 as follows--
       Conduct of research, development, demonstration, testing, 
     and evaluation.--Amends section 308 by granting discretion to 
     the Homeland Secretary in his application of the listed 
     criteria when designating one (or more) of the Nation's 
     colleges or universities as a college- or university-based 
     center for homeland security that shall conduct extramural 
     research, development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation 
     programs.
       Prohibition on contracts with corporate expatriates.--
     Amends subsection 835(d) to limit the authority of the 
     Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to waive the 
     prohibition on entering into contracts with a foreign 
     incorporated entity which is treated as an inverted domestic 
     corporation; the amendment would restrict the waiver 
     authority only to contracts for which the Secretary 
     determines that the waiver is required in the interest of 
     homeland security.
       Sec. 102. Clarification of definition of manufacturer; 
     Clarification of definition of vaccine-related injury or 
     death; Clarification of definition of vaccine; Effective 
     date.--Repeals sections 1714 through 1717 as if such sections 
     never were effective and replaces these sections with 
     alternative language regarding the application of the Public 
     Health Service Act. No legal inference regarding existing law 
     prior to or after the enactment and repeal of these sections 
     shall be drawn by the courts from the enactment and 
     subsequent repeal of these provisions. The repeal leaves 
     unaffected pre-existing case law, such as Leroy v. Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services, Office of Special Master, N. 
     02-392V (October 11, 2002).
       The alternative language also states the Sense of the 
     Senate that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
     Pensions should report legislation within six months to 
     protect the public health and the Nation's ability to produce 
     existing vaccines, as well as to develop new and more 
     effective vaccines, particularly in these critical times. 
     This legislation should ensure that patients injured by 
     vaccines have the opportunity to seek fair and timely redress 
     and should provide vaccine manufacturers, manufacturers of 
     components or ingredients of vaccines, and physicians and 
     other administrators of vaccines with adequate protection. 
     Such legislation should be based upon expert recommendations, 
     including those of the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services' Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines.
       Sec. 103. Modifies subsections 232(f), 234(b), 873(b), and 
     1511(e)(2) and adds a new section at the end of the Act as 
     follows--
       Mission of office; Duties; Transfer of funds/Abolishment of 
     Office of Science and Technology of National Institute of 
     Justice; Transfer of functions; Transfer of personnel and 
     assets.--

[[Page 1072]]

     Amends subsections 232(f) and 234(b) to ensure that transfers 
     of funds, personnel, and assets within and from the 
     Department of Justice are governed by the procedures 
     established in section 605 of the Departments of Commerce, 
     Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2002 (Public Law 107-77).
       Use of appropriated funds; Gifts.--Amends subsection 873(b) 
     to permit the Coast Guard to use pre-existing authority to 
     accept gifts and donations of services.
       Transitional authorities; Prohibition on use of 
     transportation trust funds.--Amends subsection 1511(e)(2) to 
     permit the Coast Guard to continue to receive funds from the 
     Aquatic Resources Trust Fund of the Highway Trust Fund for 
     boating safety programs.
       Reports and notifications to, and consultations with, the 
     Committees on Appropriations.--Recommends a new section at 
     the end of Public Law 107-296 that requires that any report 
     or notification to, or consultation with, the Congress or any 
     Congressional committee required by the Act, and addressing 
     directly or indirectly the use of appropriated funds, also be 
     submitted to or held with the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives.

                Oversight and Use of Appropriated Funds

       The Committee is aware of many sections of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 that directly or indirectly address the 
     oversight and use of appropriated funds--matters that fall 
     within the jurisdiction and purview of the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives. In order to ensure the expeditious 
     consideration and passage of the final version of the 
     Homeland Security Act, the Committee did not raise these 
     issues during the necessarily foreshortened period between 
     the time that the final version became available for review 
     and the vote on final passage.
       The Committee intends to review these provisions in depth. 
     The Committee's preliminary review of the Homeland Security 
     Act indicates that, at a minimum, these provisions include:
           (1) subsection 201(f)(4) regarding the non-reimbursable 
         status of personnel detailed from other agencies to the 
         Directorate for Information Analysis and Infrastructure 
         Protection;
           (2) section 305 regarding federally funded research and 
         development centers (FFRDCs);
           (3) section 307 regarding the Homeland Security 
         Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Acceleration 
         Fund for Research and Development of Homeland Security 
         Technologies;
           (4) section 312 regarding establishment of a Homeland 
         Security Institute FFRDC;
           (5) section 413 regarding the transfer of funds from 
         the U.S. Customs Service or of funds collected under 
         certain provisions of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget 
         Reconciliation Act of 1985;
           (6) section 419 regarding Customs User Fees;
           (7) subsections 421(e) and (f) regarding the transfer 
         of functions and funds by the Secretary of Agriculture to 
         the Department of Homeland Security;
           (8) subsection 422(b)(2) regarding the use of funds 
         transferred by the Administrator of the General Services 
         Administration;
           (9) section 456 regarding the transition and transfer 
         and allocation of appropriations and personnel to the 
         Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services;
           (10) subsection 462(f)(3) regarding the transfer and 
         allocation of appropriations and personnel to be 
         transferred to the Office of Refugee Resettlement of the 
         Department of Health and Human Services;
           (11) section 476 regarding separation of funding for 
         the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services and 
         the Bureau of Border Security, especially with respect to 
         the deposit and transfer of fees;
           (12) subsection 502(2)(C) regarding the provision of 
         funds to the Department of Energy and the Environmental 
         Protection Agency;
           (13) section 507 regarding the role of the Federal 
         Emergency Management Agency with respect to all hazards;
           (14) section 831 regarding research and development 
         projects;
           (15) section 833 regarding special streamlined 
         acquisition authorities;
           (16) section 855 regarding the application of certain 
         commercial items authorities to certain procurements;
           (17) section 872 regarding the reorganization authority 
         of the Secretary;
           (18) subsection 1114(c)(2) regarding the availability 
         of funds for an Explosives Training and Research 
         Facility;
           (19) section 1502 regarding a departmental 
         reorganization plan;
           (20) section 1511 regarding transitional authorities; 
         and
           (21) section 1516 regarding incidental transfer and 
         dispositions of personnel, assets, and liabilities.

                       DIVISION M--OTHER MATTERS

             TITLE I--DEFENSE RELATED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS

       The Committee has included several technical corrections to 
     enacted fiscal year 2003 appropriations acts. These correct 
     errors or omissions made in either the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2003 (Public Law 107-248) or the Military 
     Construction Appropriation Act, 2003 (Public Law 107-249).
       Section 101 specifies a sum available to settle disputes 
     related to a land taking at the Army Tooele Depot.
       Section 102 provides authority to allow for the scrapping 
     of ships.
       Section 103 clarifies the cost cap related to Partnership 
     for Peace activities.
       Section 104 makes funds available to the Air Force's 
     reserve component instead of the Air Force's active 
     component.
       Section 105 clarifies the purpose of funds available for 
     land acquisition at Nellis Air Force Base.
       Section 106 revises the expense/investment threshold for 
     items purchased with Operation and maintenance funds.
       Section 107 transfers $104,000,000 based upon an urgent 
     reprogramming request (fiscal year 2003-02 PA) received from 
     the Department of Defense. The $13,900,000 transferred from 
     Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense-Wide, 2003/
     2004, is to be sourced only from sea-based mid-course defense 
     X-band radar. The $10,100,000 transferred from Procurement of 
     Ammunition, Army, 2002/2004, is to be sourced only from 
     Budget Activity 1 for close-out liability and items less than 
     $5,000,000.
       Section 108 provides authority for a grant to aid in the 
     Quecreek Mine disaster rescue and recovery efforts.
       Section 109 provides additional appropriations for the 
     Department of Defense. The purposes for which these funds are 
     appropriated are described in the classified annex.


                       reprogramming limitations

       The Committee recognizes that current thresholds below 
     which the Department of Defense may reprogram funds without 
     requiring the prior approval of the congressional defense 
     committees were established in 1961. These limitations have 
     not been significantly modified over the past twenty years 
     nor kept pace with inflation.
       The Committee recommends increasing these below threshold 
     reprogramming ceilings. The Department shall submit a Prior 
     Approval reprogramming request, DD Form 1415-1, in those 
     instances when reprogramming of funds exceed the following 
     thresholds:
       --An increase of $20,000,000 or more in any budget activity 
         in Military Personnel.
       --An increase of $20,000,000 or more in any budget activity 
         in Operation and Maintenance.
       --An increase of $20,000,000 for any program year for a 
         Procurement line item.
       --An increase of $10,000,000 for any program year for a 
         Research, Development, Test and Evaluation program 
         element.
       Each of the reprogramming ceilings described above reflects 
     aggregate levels of reprogramming activity within Military 
     Personnel or Operation and Maintenance budget activities, 
     Procurement line items, and Research, Development, test and 
     Evaluation program elements.
       The reprogramming of funds below these ceilings shall not 
     increase lines specifically reduced by congressional action 
     or decrease congressional interest items. No below threshold 
     decrease may exceed twenty percent of congressional levels 
     for each budget activity, procurement line, or program 
     element. Below threshold reprogramming may restore non-
     specific reductions to the original level of the budget 
     request or the level determined in account tables, whichever 
     is less.

                TITLE II--PRICE ANDERSON ACT AMENDMENTS

       The Committee recommendation includes the Price-Anderson 
     Amendments Act of 2002 which provides an extension of 
     indemnification authority to certain Nuclear Regulatory 
     Commission licensees, Department of Energy contractors, and 
     nonprofit educational institutions.

                DIVISION N--EMERGENCY RELIEF AND OFFSETS

                        TITLE I--ELECTION REFORM

       Section 101 establishes a grant program to improve the 
     administration of Federal elections.

            TITLE III--WILDLAND FIRE EMERGENCY APPROPRIATION

       The Committee has provided a total of $825,000,000, as 
     requested by the President, to repay funds which were 
     advanced from various Forest Service and Department of the 
     Interior accounts during wildfire suppression emergencies in 
     fiscal year 2002. Specifically, this title provides funds to 
     repay $636,000,000 of the total amount borrowed by the Forest 
     Service and would repay $189,000,000 of the total amount 
     borrowed by the Department of the Interior.

                           TITLE VI--OFFSETS

       The Committee recommends an across-the-board rescission of 
     __ percent to the eleven appropriations bills contained in 
     divisions A through K of this joint resolution. This 
     rescission offsets the budget authority added in this 
     division.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we previously entered into a unanimous 
consent request concerning H.J. Res. 2. I have been asked and do offer 
an

[[Page 1073]]

amendment to that. I ask unanimous consent the consent agreement for 
H.J. Res. 2 be modified to provide for a motion to instruct the 
conferees to be made by Senator Stabenow or her designee, and there be 
a 20-minute time limitation for debate, equally divided in the usual 
form, with no amendments in order to the motion.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. It is my understanding this has been cleared by both 
sides. But it provides that the Senator may offer a motion to instruct 
the conferees, which she had a right to do. But that request, 
unfortunately, was not presented by those who were working up the 
consent agreement. I appreciate the Chair allowing me to modify it at 
the request of Senator Stabenow.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________