[Senate Report 104-253]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 367
104th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

 2d Session                                                     104-253
_______________________________________________________________________


 
TRINITY RIVER BASIN FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 
                                  1995

                                _______


                 April 16, 1996.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


    Mr. Chafee, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 2243]

    The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was 
referred the bill (H.R. 2243), to amend the Trinity River Basin 
Fish and Wildife Management Act of 1984, to extend for three 
years the availability of moneys for the restoration of fish 
and wildlife in the Trinity River, and for other purposes, 
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                           General Statement

    The primary purposes of the bill are to amend Public Law 
98-541, an Act to provide for the restoration of fish and 
wildlife in the Trinity River Basin, to extend the availability 
of moneys for restoration programs for 3 more years, and to 
increase the task force by five members.

                               Background

    The Trinity River is located in northwest California and 
joins the Klamath River which continues to the Pacific Ocean 
just south of the Oregon border. Historically, the Trinity 
River Basin has produced major chinook and coho salmon and 
steelhead trout populations.
    In 1963, the Bureau of Reclamation completed construction 
on the Trinity River and Lewiston Dams and began to divert up 
to 90 percent of the river's flow at Lewiston to the Central 
Valley of California for agricultural, municipal and industrial 
uses and hydropower production. The legislation authorizing dam 
construction required the Secretary of the Interior to take 
appropriate actions to ensure the preservation and propagation 
of fish and wildlife. Despite construction of a fish hatchery 
and establishment of a minimum flow on the lower Trinity River, 
salmon and trout populations decreased to record lows, and 
riparian habitat continued to degrade, causing cultural and 
economic hardship to tribal groups and commercial and 
recreational fishermen.
    In the early 1970s, Federal and State agencies formed the 
Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force (Task Force) 
to develop an action plan for restoring fish and wildlife 
habitat on the lower Trinity River. The Task Force identified a 
tributary watershed to the Trinity River, Grass Valley Creek, 
as responsible for the bulk of the sediment that was destroying 
habitat in the most productive stretches of the lower river. In 
response, Congress authorized $3.5 million in 1980 for the 
construction of the debris dam and several sediment collection 
pools on Grass Valley Creek to control sedimentation in the 
lower river.
    In 1981, the Secretary of the Interior authorized an 
incremental increase in flows in the Trinity River from 120,000 
acre-feet to 340,000 acre-feet annually. This amount was to be 
reduced to 220,000 acre-feet in dry years and to 140,000 acre-
feet in critically-dry years. In addition, the Secretary 
directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct a 12-
year study to ascertain the effectiveness of the increased 
flows and other restoration programs. This evaluation began in 
1985 and is expected to be completed in 1996. During the first 
6 years of the Trinity River Flow Evaluation, a major drought 
occurred in California, resulting in flows of less than 340,000 
acre-feet for four of the 6 years. In May 1991, the Secretary 
of the Interior amended the flow levels so that at least 
340,000 acre-feet would be released to the Trinity River 
annually, even in critically-dry years, if at all possible. A 
minimum flow requirement of 340,000 acre-feet remains in effect 
today.
    In March 1982, the Task Force completed the Trinity River 
Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Program which identified 
eleven actions for restoring fish and wildlife habitat. The 
1984 Act (Public Law 98-541) directed the Secretary of the 
Interior to formulate and implement a fish and wildlife 
management program for the basin based on the program developed 
by the Task Force and created a 14-member Trinity River Basin 
Fish and Wildlife Task Force to assist and advise the 
Secretary. The Act authorized $33 million for design and 
construction under the management program, to remain available 
until the end of fiscal year 1995. This account was increased 
in October 1992 by $15 million for a total of $48 million 
(Public Law 102-377). In addition, the Act authorized $2.4 
million per year for operation, maintenance and monitoring 
costs, for 10 years, beginning on October 1, 1985. Federal 
funds were required to be matched by the State of California 
and the affected counties at the rate of 15 percent and by 
direct purchasers of water and power from the Trinity River 
Dams at the rate of 50 percent.
    To date, restoration efforts in the Trinity River Basin 
include the modernization of the Lewiston Hatchery, the 
construction of the Buckhorn Debris Dam and sediment collection 
pools in the Grass Valley Creek, and the purchase of 17,000 
acres of highly erodible land in the Grass Valley Watershed. 
Other habitat restoration efforts are underway to encourage 
natural fish spawning and rearing, including replacement of 
spawning gravel below the Lewiston Dam, reestablishment of 
meander channels, dredging of pools in the Trinity River, and 
feather-tapering the river's edges.
    Reauthorization of Public Law 98-514 will continue the 
restoration of the Grass Valley Creek Watershed, control 
sediment on tributary watersheds, restore the South Forks 
Trinity River fish habitat, and implement a wildlife management 
program. These efforts will contribute to rebuilding the 
populations of salmon and trout which are important to 
commercial, recreational, and Tribal fishing interests.

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 2243 was referred to the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works on December 13, 1995. The 
committee held no hearings on H.R. 2243, and on March 28, 1996, 
reported the bill favorably by voice vote.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

                         Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides the short title for the bill as the 
``Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management 
Reauthorization Act of 1995.''

                  Section 2. Clarification of findings

    Section 2 finds that restoration is to be measured not only 
by the number of returning adult fish but by the ability of 
dependent Tribal, commercial, and sport fisheries to 
participate fully in the benefits of restoration. The long-term 
goals of the management program are to restore fish and 
wildlife populations in the Trinity River Basin. Section 2 also 
states that, to the extent restored fish populations in the 
Trinity River Basin will contribute to ocean populations, the 
management program will aid the resumption of commercial, 
including ocean harvest, and recreational fishing activities.

                Section 3. Changes to management program

    Section 3 states that to the extent restored populations 
contribute to ocean populations, the management program is 
intended to aid in the resumption of commercial, including 
ocean harvests, and recreational fishing activities. In 
formulating and implementing a management plan, the Secretary 
of the Interior shall consult with the Secretary of Commerce, 
where appropriate. This section authorizes restoration activity 
in the Klamath River below its confluence with the Trinity 
River and clarifies that the purpose of the Trinity River Fish 
Hatchery is mitigation of fish habitat loss above the Lewiston 
Dam, while not impairing efforts to restore and maintain 
naturally reproducing anadramous fish stocks within the Basin.

                   Section 4. Additions to task force

    Section 4 adds five members to the Trinity River Basin Fish 
and Wildlife Task Force, including representatives of the Yurok 
and Karuk Tribes, commercial and recreational fishing 
interests, and the timber industry. It directs that Task Force 
actions on the Klamath River from Weitchpec (at the confluence 
of the Klamath and Trinity Rivers) downstream to the Pacific 
Ocean be coordinated with the Klamath Fishery Management 
Council and the Klamath River Basin Fisheries Task Force. In 
addition, it authorizes certain appointees to be reimbursed for 
expenses incurred in connection with Task Force service.

                       Section 5. Appropriations

    Section 5 extends the authorization of appropriations for 3 
years. It authorizes the Secretary to accept in-kind services 
as payment for obligations incurred under the Act and limits 
overhead and indirect costs to 20 percent of amounts 
appropriated. This section also requires the Secretary to 
prepare annual financial reports and to periodically audit in-
river fishery monitoring and enforcement programs. The bill 
also authorizes the Secretary to seek annual appropriations for 
future monitoring, maintenance and evaluation after the 
restoration effort is completed.

                     Section 6. No rights affected

    Section 6 states that nothing in this bill shall be 
construed as establishing or affecting any past, present, or 
future rights of any Indian or Indian tribe, or any other 
individual or entity.

                   Section 7. Short title of 1984 Act

    Section 7 designates Public Law 98-541 as the ``Trinity 
River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1984.''

                             Rollcall Votes

    Section 7(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate and the rules of the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works require that any rollcall votes taken during 
consideration of legislation be noted in the report on that 
legislation.
    At the business meeting of the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works on March 28, 1996, the bill H.R. 2243 was ordered 
to be reported favorably by voice vote. No rollcall vote was 
taken.

                           Regulatory Impact

    In compliance with Section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the committee makes the following 
evaluation of the regulatory impact of the bill.
    The bill does not create any additional regulatory burdens.

                          Cost of Legislation

    Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the 
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be 
included in the report. That statement follows:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 15, 1996.
Hon. John H. Chafee,
Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate, 
        Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2243, the Trinity 
River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Reauthorization Act of 
1995.
    Enacting H.R. 2243 would affect direct spending. Therefore, 
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply to the bill.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them.
            Sincerely,
                                                   June E. O'Neill.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    1. Bill number: H.R. 2243.
    2. Bill title: Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife 
Management Reauthorization Act of 1995.
    3. Bill status: As ordered reported by the Senate Committee 
on Environment and Public Works on March 28, 1996.
    4. Bill purpose: H.R. 2243 would amend the 1984 Trinity 
River Basin, California, Fish and Wildlife Act (Public Law 98-
541), as amended, to extend the authorization of appropriations 
for the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management 
Program through fiscal year 1998. The original authorization 
expired at the end of fiscal year 1995. The bill also would 
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to accept in-kind 
services as payment for obligations incurred by certain non-
Federal entities under the Act.
    5. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: CBO estimates 
that enacting H.R. 2243 would result in new discretionary 
spending of about $15 million between 1997 and 1999, assuming 
appropriation of the authorized amounts. We also estimate that 
the bill would affect direct spending but that the changes 
would be less than $500,000 per year over in 1997 and 1998. 
There would be no impact on direct spending in 1999 or 2000. 
The following table summarizes the estimated budgetary impact 
of the bill.

                                                                        
                [by fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   1996    1997    1998    1999    2000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       SPENDING SUBJECT TO                                              
      APPROPRIATIONS ACTION                                             
Spending Under Current Law:                                             
    Budget authority \1\........       7       0       0       0       0
    Estimated outlays...........       7       1       0       0       0
Proposed changes:                                                       
    Estimated Authorization                                             
     Level......................       0       7       7       0       0
    Estimated Outlays...........       0       6       7       1       0
Spending under H.R. 2243:                                               
    Estimated Authorization                                             
     Level \1\..................       7       7       7       0       0
    Estimated Outlays...........       7       7       7       1       0
Additional direct spending:                                             
    Estimated Budget Authority..       0   (\2\)   (\2\)       0       0
    Estimated Outlays...........       0   (\2\)   (\2\)       0       0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1995 and 1996 levels are the amounts appropriated for those     
  years.                                                                
\2\ Less than $500,000.                                                 

    The costs of this bill fall within budget function 300.
    6. Basis of estimate:

Spending subject to appropriation

    Assuming appropriation of the amounts authorized, CBO 
estimates that enactment of the bill would result in new 
discretionary spending totaling slightly less than $15 million 
over the 1997-1999 period. Roughly $10 million of this total 
would be for design and construction activities and about $5 
million would be for operations and maintenance.
    Authorization for Design and Construction.--H.R. 2243 would 
extend the period over which funds authorized under the 1984 
act for design and construction could be expended through 
fiscal year 1998. The original authority expired in fiscal year 
1995 and was extended to 1996 by the fiscal year 1996 
appropriations for energy and water (Public Law 104-46). Based 
on information provided by the Bureau of Reclamation, and 
accounting for expected inflation over the next few years, CBO 
estimates that extending the authorization for design and 
construction activities through 1998 would cost about $10 
million, assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts. That 
total reflects the balance of previously authorized but 
unappropriated amounts from the ceiling on design and 
construction spending, as established in Public Law 98-541, as 
amended. (Public Law 98-541, as amended, establishes a ceiling 
of $48 million, but allows for increases to account for 
inflation. To date, $61 million has been appropriated. CBO 
estimates that the total authorization, after accounting for 
inflation over the 1996-1998 period, is about $71 million.)
    The Bureau of Reclamation has indicated that the amounts 
authorized under the 1984 Act, as amended, are not sufficient 
to complete the design and construction of the management 
program. The Bureau estimates that $26 million (in 1995 
dollars) would be required to complete the program in addition 
to the $10 million discussed above. H.R. 2243 does not change 
the current spending ceiling, however, and these potential 
costs are therefore not included in this estimate.
    Authorization for Operations and Maintenance.--H.R. 2243 
also would authorize appropriations of $2.4 million per year 
for operation and maintenance of the management program through 
fiscal year 1998. The original authority of $2.4 million per 
year expired in fiscal year 1995 and was extended to fiscal 
year 1996 by this year's appropriation bill (Public Law 104-
46).

Direct spending

    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2243 would result in 
direct spending of less than $500,000 per year in 1997 and 
1998. This amount is CBO's estimate of the receipts that would 
be lost by allowing the Secretary of the Interior to accept in-
kind contributions instead of cash from certain nonFederal 
entities that are required by the 1984 Act to share project 
costs. CBO assumes that the bill would be enacted too late in 
the current fiscal year to affect the 1996 payments.
    CBO estimates that the provision would affect roughly $1 
million of the annual payments due from cost-sharing partners. 
Payments by contributors that would qualify for this provision, 
however, have been less than $500,000 per year in recent years. 
Based on this recent payment history, CBO estimates that the 
provision would result in a loss of offsetting receipts of less 
than $500,000 per year. Based on information provided by the 
Bureau of Reclamation and the State of California (the primary 
cost-sharing partner that would qualify for the provision), CBO 
assumes that in-kind payments could not be made against unpaid 
cost-sharing obligations incurred prior to 1996, which total 
slightly more than $3 million.
    7. Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets 
up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct 
spending or receipts through 1998. CBO estimates that enactment 
of H.R. 2243 would affect direct spending by allowing the 
Secretary of the Interior to accept in-kind contributions 
instead of financial payments from nonFederal entities that are 
required by the 1984 Act to share project costs. A loss of 
offsetting receipts would increase direct spending and pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply to the bill. CBO estimates that 
the loss of offsetting receipts would be less than $500,000 per 
year.

                                                                        
                [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   1996    1997    1998 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in outlays...............................       0       0       0
Change in receipts..............................   (\1\)   (\1\)   (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not applicable.                                                     

    8. Estimated cost to State and local governments: H.R. 2243 
contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in Public Law 
104-4 and would impose no direct costs on State, local, or 
tribal governments.
    The 1984 Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Act requires 
that Federal expenditures for this project be matched by the 
State of California and the counties of Humboldt and Trinity, 
California, and by purchasers of water and power from the 
Trinity River division of the Central Valley Project. These 
purchasers include public utilities and water districts. The 
combined State and county match is 15 percent of Federal 
spending and the required match by purchasers is 50 percent. 
Given CBO's estimate that Federal expenditures under the bill 
would be $7 million per year in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, the 
required State and county contribution would be about $1 
million in each year, and the required contribution from water 
and power purchasers would be about $3.5 million annually. 
These expenditures would be voluntary, however, and not the 
result of an enforceable duty imposed by the Federal 
Government.
    H.R. 2243 would benefit the state of California and the 
counties of Humboldt and Trinity, California, by amending the 
1984 act to allow these contributions to take the form of in-
kind services. Based on information provided by State 
officials, we estimate that the State and counties combined 
would save less than $500,000 per year in the next 3 years as a 
result of this change. Total spending would decline because 
amounts that would have been spent in any case on state and 
county programs would be counted as part of the match, allowing 
the state and counties to forgo additional payments to the 
Federal Government.
    9. Estimate impact on the private sector: This bill would 
impose no new private sector mandates, as defined in Public Law 
104-4.
    10. Previous CBO estimate: On December 8, 1995, CBO 
provided an estimate for H.R. 2243, the Trinity River Basin 
Fish and Wildlife Management Reauthorization Act of 1995, as 
ordered reported by the House Committee on Resources. That 
version of the bill is identical to the version for which the 
estimate is provided here. However, CBO now assumes a later 
enactment date. As a result, we estimate that enacting the bill 
would have no effect on spending in the current fiscal year.
    11. Estimate prepared by: Federal cost estimate: Gary 
Brown; State and local cost estimate: Marjorie Miller; private 
sector impact: Amy Downs.
    12. Estimate approved by: Robert R. Sunshine (for Paul N. 
Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis).

                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill 
as reported are shown as follows: existing law as proposed to 
be omitted is printed inside of [bold brackets]; new matter 
proposed to be added to existing law is printed in italic; and 
existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.

                        ACT OF OCTOBER 24, 1984

 AN ACT To provide for the restoration of the fish and wildlife in the 
        Trinity River Basin, California, and for other purposes

                                findings

    Section 1. The Congress finds that--
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (5) Trinity Basin fisheries restoration is to be 
        measured not only by returning adult anadromous fish 
        spawners, but by the ability of dependent tribal, 
        commercial, and sport fisheries to participate fully, 
        through enhanced in-river and ocean harvest 
        opportunities, in the benefits of restoration;
          [(5)] (6) a fish and wildlife management program has 
        been developed by an existing interagency advisory 
        group called the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife 
        Task Force; and
          [(6) the Secretary requires additional authority to 
        implement a basin-wide fish and wildlife management 
        program in order to achieve the long-term goal of 
        restoring fish and wildlife populations in the Trinity 
        River Basin to a level approximately that which existed 
        immediately before the start of the construction of the 
        Trinity River division.]
          (7) the Secretary requires additional authority to 
        implement a management program, in conjunction with 
        other appropriate agencies, to achieve the long-term 
        goals of restoring fish and wildlife populations in the 
        Trinity River Basin, and, to the extent these restored 
        populations will contribute to ocean populations of 
        adult salmon, steelhead, and other anadromous fish, 
        such management program will aid in the resumption of 
        commercial, including ocean harvest, and recreational 
        fishing activities.

          trinity river basin and wildlife management program

    Sec. 2. (a) Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Commerce where appropriate, 
shall formulate and implement a fish and wildlife management 
program for the Trinity River Basin designed to restore the 
fish and wildlife populations in such basin to the levels 
approximating those which existed immediately before the start 
of the construction referred to in section 1(1) and to maintain 
such levels. To the extent these restored fish and wildlife 
populations will contribute to ocean populations of adult 
salmon, steelhead, and other anadromous fish, such management 
program is intended to aid in the resumption of commercial, 
including ocean harvest, and recreational fishing activities. 
The program shall include the following activities:
          (1) The design, construction, operation, and 
        maintenance of facilities to--
                  (A) rehabilitate fish habitats in the Trinity 
                River between Lewiston Dam and [Weitchpec;] 
                Weitchpec and in the Klamath River downstream 
                of the confluence with the Trinity River;
                  (B) rehabilitate fish habitats in tributaries 
                of such river below Lewiston Dam and in the 
                south fork of such river; and
                  (C) modernize and otherwise increase the 
                effectiveness of the Trinity River Fish 
                Hatchery, so that it can best serve its purpose 
                of mitigation of fish habitat loss above 
                Lewiston Dam while not impairing efforts to 
                restore and maintain naturally reproducing 
                anadromous fish stocks within the basin.
    (b)(1) The Secretary shall use the program described in 
section 1(5) of this Act as a basis for the management program 
to be formulated under subsection (a) of this section. In 
formulating and implementing such management program, the 
Secretary shall be assisted by an advisory group called the 
Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force established 
under section 3.
    (2) In order to facilitate the implementation of those 
activities under the management program over which the 
Secretary does not have jurisdiction, the Secretary shall 
undertake to enter into a memorandum of agreement with those 
Federal, State, and local agencies, and the Indian [tribe] 
tribes, represented on the Task Force established under section 
3. The memorandum of agreement should specify those management 
program activities for which the respective signatories to the 
agreement are primarily responsible and should contain such 
commitments and arrangements between and among the signatories 
as may be necessary or appropriate to ensure the coordinated 
implementation of the program.
          * * * * * * *

            trinity river basin fish and wildlife task force

    Sec. 3. (a) There is established the Trinity River Basin 
Fish and Wildlife Task Force (hereinafter in this Act referred 
to as the ``Task Force'') which shall be composed of [fourteen] 
nineteen members as follows:
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (10) One officer or employee of the [United States 
        Soil Conservation Service] Natural Resources Soil and 
        Conservation Service to be appointed by the Secretary 
        of Agriculture.
          * * * * * * *
          (15) One individual to be appointed by the Yurok 
        Tribe.
          (16) One individual to be appointed by the Karuk 
        Tribe.
          (17) One individual to represent commercial fishing 
        interests, to be appointed by the Secretary after 
        consultation with the Board of Directors of the Pacific 
        Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations.
          (18) One individual to represent sport fishing 
        interests, to be appointed by the Secretary after 
        consultation with the Board of Directors of the 
        California advisory Committee on Salmon and Steelhead 
        Trout.
          (19) One individual to be appointed by the Secretary, 
        in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to 
        represent the timber industry.
          * * * * * * *
    (c)(1) Members of the Task Force who are full-time officers 
or employees of the United States shall receive no additional 
pay, allowances, or benefits by reason of their service on the 
Task Force.
    (2) No moneys authorized to be appropriated under this Act 
may be used to pay any member of the Task Force for service on 
the Task Force or to reimburse any agency or governmental unit 
for the pay of any such member for such service. Members of the 
Task Force who are not full-time officers or employees of the 
United States, the State of California (or a political 
subdivision thereof), or an Indian tribe, may be reimbursed for 
such expenses as may be incurred by reason of their service on 
the Task Force, as consistent with applicable laws and 
regulations.
    (d) Task Force actions or management on the Klamath River 
from Weitchpec downstream to the Pacific Ocean shall be 
coordinated with, and conducted with the full knowledge of, the 
Klamath River Basin Fisheries Task Force and the Klamath 
Fishery Management Council, as established under Public Law 99-
552. The Secretary shall appoint a designated representative to 
ensure such coordination and the exchange of information 
between the Trinity River Task Force and these two entities.

                    authorization of appropriations

    Sec. 4. (a) Subject to subsection (b), there are authorized 
to be appropriated--
          (1) after fiscal year 1985, and to remain available 
        until October 1, [1995] 1998, for design and 
        construction under the management program formulated 
        under section 2(a), $33,000,000, adjusted appropriately 
        to reflect any increase or decrease in the engineering 
        cost indexes applicable to the types of construction 
        involved between (A) the month of May 1982, and (B) the 
        date of enactment of any appropriation for such 
        construction; and
          (2) for the cost of operations, maintenance, and 
        monitoring under that management program, $2,400,000 
        for each of the fiscal years in the [ten] 13-year 
        period beginning on October 1, 1985.
          * * * * * * *
    (d) The Secretary is authorized to accept in-kind services 
as payment for obligations incurred under subsection (b)(1).
    (e) Not more than 20 percent of the amounts appropriated 
under subsection (a) may be used for overhead and indirect 
costs. For the purposes of this subsection, the term ``overhead 
and indirect costs'' means costs incurred in support of 
accomplishing specific work activities and jobs. Such costs are 
primarily administrative in nature and are such that they 
cannot be practically identified and charged directly to a 
project or activity and must be distributed to all jobs on an 
equitable basis. Such costs include compensation for 
administrative staff, general staff training, rent, travel 
expenses, communications, utility charges, miscellaneous 
materials and supplies, janitorial services, depreciation and 
replacement expenses on capitalized equipment. Such costs do 
not include inspection and design of construction projects and 
environmental compliance activities, including (but not limited 
to) preparation of documents in compliance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
    (f) Not later than December 31 of each year, the Secretary 
shall prepare reports documenting and detailing all 
expenditures incurred under this Act for the fiscal year ending 
on September 30 of that same year. Such reports shall contain 
information adequate for the public to determine how such funds 
were used to carry out the purposes of this Act. Copies of such 
reports shall be submitted to the Committee on Resources of the 
House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources of the Senate.
    (g) The Secretary shall periodically conduct a programmatic 
audit of the in-river fishery monitoring and enforcement 
programs under this Act and submit a report concerning such 
audit to the Committee on Resources of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources of the Senate.
    [(d)] (h) For purposes of this section, the term ``Grass 
Valley Creek activities'' means the following activities 
authorized by the Act of September 4, 1980 (94 Stat. 1062):
          (1) The construction of the Grass Valley Creek debris 
        dam.
          (2) The construction, operation, and maintenance of 
        the sand dredging system in Grass Valley Creek.
    (i) Beginning in the fiscal year immediately following the 
year the restoration effort is completed and annually 
thereafter, the Secretary is authorized to seek appropriations 
as necessary to monitor, evaluate, and maintain program 
investments and fish and wildlife populations in the Trinity 
River Basin for the purpose of achieving long-term fish and 
wildlife restoration goals.


                         preservation of rights


    Sec. 5. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as 
establishing or affecting any past, present, or future rights 
of an Indian or Indian tribe or any other individual or entity.


                              short title


    Sec. 6. This Act may be cited as the ``Trinity River Basin 
Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1984''.

                                
