[House Report 105-484]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     105-484
_______________________________________________________________________


 
         REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT

                                _______
                                

 April 21, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1522]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 1522) to extend the authorization for the National 
Historic Preservation Fund, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment 
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
    The amendment is as follows:
    Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu 
thereof the following:

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT.

  The National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 and following; 
Public Law 89-665) is amended as follows:
          (1) In the third sentence of section 101(a)(6) (16 U.S.C. 
        470a(a)(6)) by striking ``shall review'' and inserting ``may 
        review'' and by striking ``shall determine'' and inserting 
        ``determine''.
          (2) Section 101(e)(2) (16 U.S.C. 470a(e)(2)) is amended to 
        read as follows:
  ``(2) The Secretary may administer grants to the National Trust for 
Historic Preservation in the United States, chartered by an Act of 
Congress approved October 26, 1949 (63 Stat. 947), consistent with the 
purposes of its charter and this Act.''.
          (3) Section 102 (16 U.S.C. 470b) is amended by redesignating 
        subsection (e) as subsection (f) and by redesignating 
        subsection (d), as added by section 4009(3) of Public Law 102-
        575, as subsection (e).
          (4) Section 101(b)(1) (16 U.S.C. 470a(b)(1)) is amended by 
        adding the following at the end thereof:
``For purposes of subparagraph (A), the State and Indian tribe shall be 
solely responsible for determining which professional employees, are 
necessary to carry out the duties of the State or tribe, consistent 
with standards developed by the Secretary.''.
          (5) Section 107 (16 U.S.C. 470g) is amended to read as 
        follows:
  ``Sec. 107. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to be applicable 
to the White House and its grounds, the Supreme Court building and its 
grounds, or the United States Capitol and its related buildings and 
grounds as depicted on the map entitled `Map Showing Properties Under 
the Jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol' and dated November 6, 
1996, which shall be on file in the office of the Secretary of the 
Interior.''.
          (6) Section 108 (16 U.S.C. 470h) is amended by striking 
        ``1997'' and inserting ``2004''.
          (7) Section 110(a)(1) (16 U.S.C. 470h-2(a)(1)) is amended by 
        inserting the following before the period at the end of the 
        second sentence: ``, especially those located in central 
        business areas. When locating Federal facilities, Federal 
        agencies shall give first consideration to historic properties 
        in historic districts. If no such property is suitable, then 
        Federal agencies shall consider other developed or undeveloped 
        sites within historic districts. Federal agencies shall then 
        consider historic properties outside of historic districts, if 
        no suitable site within a district exists. Any rehabilitation 
        or construction that is undertaken pursuant to this Act must be 
        architecturally compatible with the character of the 
        surrounding historic district or properties''.
          (8) The first sentence of section 110(l) (16 U.S.C. 470h-
        2(l)) is amended by striking ``with the Council'' and inserting 
        ``pursuant to regulations issued by the Council''.
          (9) The last sentence of section 212(a) (16 U.S.C. 470t(a))is 
        amended by striking ``2000'' and inserting ``2004''.
          (10) Section 205 (16 U.S.C. 470m) is amended by adding the 
        following new subsection after subsection (g):
  ``(h) Any permanent employee of the Council as of December 31, 1997, 
may be appointed to a position in another agency of the Executive 
branch without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code, 
governing appointments in the competitive service, if the agency or the 
Office of Personnel Management, as appropriate, determines that the 
employee is qualified for the position.''.

                          Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of H.R. 1522 is to extend the authorization for 
the National Historic Preservation Fund, and for other 
purposes.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    H.R. 1522 was introduced to reauthorize the National 
Historic Preservation Fund until September 30, 2004. The bill 
amends the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) 
(16 U.S.C. 470) which establishes a general policy of Federal 
support and funding for the preservation of prehistoric and 
historic resources of the nation.
    The NHPA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to expand 
and maintain the National Register of Historic Places, an 
inventory of districts, sites, buildings, and structures 
significant on a national, state or local level representing 
American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and 
culture. The NHPA encourages State and local historic 
preservation, through State Historic Preservation Officers 
(SHPO), coordinating with the Secretary. The NHPA also 
authorizes a grant program, under the Historic Preservation 
Fund, to provide States monies for historic preservation 
projects and to individuals for the preservation of properties 
listed on the National Register. These funds are derived from 
an authorization by Congress from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund. This $150 million per fiscal year 
authorization expired on September 30, 1997. Congress 
appropriated $36 million for the Historic Preservation Fund for 
fiscal year 1997.
    The NHPA also establishes the Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation. The Council reviews the policies of Federal 
agencies in implementing the NHPA, conducts training and 
educational programs, and encourages public participation in 
historic preservation. The most important, and often the most 
controversial, role of the Council is administering Section 106 
of the NHPA.
    H.R. 1522 modifies the existing Secretarial review of 
nominations to the National Historic Register as an option of 
appeal, rather than a mandatory stage in the nominating process 
as it currently exists. This legislation intends that most of 
the decision making would take place at the state and local 
level, while acknowledging the problems that do arise at that 
level which require a court of higher appeal.
    Moreover, H.R. 1522 would preserve the rights of individual 
citizens to make land-use decisions involving their private 
property. This concern has been shared by past Congresses and 
provisions for owner participation in the nomination process 
are included at least twice in the existing law. Nevertheless, 
the present requirements for owner notification are too often 
honored more in form than in spirit and individuals are too 
often notified of their property's eligibility for nomination 
by form letters so couched in legalese as to be 
incomprehensible to the average American. The National Park 
Service shall reexamine the notification letters it requires to 
be sent to the owners of properties being considered for the 
National Register of Historic Places to ensure that they are 
easy to read and understand, and clearly state the owners 
rights and responsibilities under the NHPA.
    The bill would allow the Secretary to administer grants to 
the National Trust for Historic Preservation consistent with 
the purposes of its charter and this Act. Honoring its previous 
agreement with Congress, the Trust is privately funded, 
receives no appropriated funds and seeks no return to that 
process. However, the Trust has been a useful conduit for 
managing supplemental funding in special circumstances and 
emergencies, such as the Mississippi River floods of 1994, and 
the current deterioration of the Congressional Cemetery in 
Washington, D.C.
    H.R. 1522 modifies the existing regulations for State 
Historical Preservation Offices to allow greater state and 
tribal control over the composition of their staffs. Whereas 
currently, these Offices are required to employ or contract for 
the services of an architect, an archaeologist, and an 
historian, some Offices have claimed they have no need for an 
architect. The Interior Department is currently developing 
professional standards for these positions, which will include 
expertise beyond mere academic accreditation. It is this bill's 
intent that States and tribes should have the right to tailor 
their preservation staffs to their own needs, provided they 
meet these standards.
    In the spirit of laws passed by the 104th Congress, the 
Federal Government should make every effort to cooperate with 
historic preservation officials in the District of Columbia. 
Revised Section 107 of the NHPA reiterates that the Act shall 
be inapplicable to the White House and its grounds, the Supreme 
Court building and its grounds, and the United States Capitol 
and its related buildings and grounds. However, it clarifies 
that these properties, buildings, and grounds are limited to 
those areas delineated on maps to be on file with the Secretary 
of the Interior.
    This modification is necessary because the Federal 
Government, from time to time, undertakes activities on real 
property within the District of Columbia that is located 
outside of the principal buildings and grounds. For example, 
the Architect of the Capitol recently demolished an historic 
19th century rowhouse at 321 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., in the 
District of Columbia to erect a Senate day care facility at the 
site. This action was taken without following the public review 
and consultation process set forth in the NHPA. The revision to 
Section 107 clarifies that the exemptions that the agencies 
enjoy are limited only to the principal buildings and grounds, 
thus ensuring that those agencies honor historic preservation 
laws when it performs activities outside those boundaries.
    H.R. 1522 would also extend authorization of the Historic 
Preservation Fund through 2004. This is intended to coordinate 
the budget deadlines for the Fund, the Advisory Council on 
Historic Preservation and the Balanced Budget Act.
    This legislation also codifies Executive Order No. 13006, 
locating Federal facilities in the Nation's central cities. Too 
often the Park Service, and other Federal agencies, build new 
structures or visitors centers virtually adjacent to historic 
structures. The result has been a loss of historic fabric, 
sometimes misguided spending and in the case of many cities, 
the waste of landmark structures which bind downtown areas 
together. Executive Order No. 13006 is a sensible step toward 
alleviating this practice.
    H.R. 1522 would clarify NHPA Section 106 compliance 
procedures for heads of Federal agencies, it extends 
authorization for the Council through 2004, and grants 
employees of the Advisory Council the same employment status as 
other members of the Executive Branch.

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 1522 was introduced on May 1, 1997, by Congressman 
Joel Hefley (R-CO). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on 
National Parks and Public Lands. On October 21, 1997, the 
Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 1522, where members of the 
Administration, represented by the National Park Service, and 
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation testified in 
support of reauthorization of the Historic Preservation Fund 
through 2004. They did express reservations regarding some of 
the amendments contained within H.R. 1522. On March 12, 1998, 
the Subcommittee met to mark up H.R. 1522. An amendment in the 
nature of a substitute was offered by Congressman Hefley, and 
adopted by voice vote. The amended version of H.R. 1522 
reauthorizes funding for the National Historic Preservation 
Fund until the year 2004 and attempts to balance greater State 
control over the historic programs. The bill was then ordered 
favorably reported to the Full Committee by voice vote. On 
March 25, 1998, the Full Resources Committee met to consider 
H.R. 1522. No further amendments were offered and the bill was 
then ordered favorably reported, as amended, to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote.

            Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause 
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

                  Federal Advisory Committee Statement

    The functions of the proposed advisory committee authorized 
in H.R. 1522 are not currently being nor could they be 
performed by one or more agencies, an advisory committee 
already in existence or by enlarging the mandate of an existing 
advisory committee.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8 and Article IV, section 3 of the 
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority 
to enact H.R. 1522.

                        Cost of the Legislation

    Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out 
H.R. 1522. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this 
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in 
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                     Compliance With House Rule XI

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, H.R. 
1522 does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 1522.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 
1522 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, April 7, 1998.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1522, a bill to 
extend the authorization for the National Historic Preservation 
Fund, and for other purposes.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis.
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 1522--A bill to extend the authorization for the National Historic 
        Preservation Fund, and for other purposes

    Summary: H.R. 1522 would extend through fiscal year 2004 
annual deposits of $150 million to the Historic Preservation 
Fund (HPF). Authority for such deposits, which consist of 
receipts earned from oil and gas development on the Outer 
Continental Shelf, expired at the end of fiscal year 1997. The 
National Park Service uses amounts appropriated from the HPF 
for grants to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, to 
state, local, and tribal governments, and to nonprofit and 
other organizations. The bill also would extend through fiscal 
year 2004 the authorization of $4 million a year for the 
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. This sum is 
currently authorized to be appropriated (from the general fund 
of the U.S. Treasury) through fiscal year 2000.
    Assuming appropriation of the amounts deposited into the 
HPF each year, and assuming appropriation of the authorized 
amounts for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, CBO 
estimates that enacting H.R. 1522 would result in additional 
discretionary spending of $570 million over the 1999-2003 
period. The legislation would not affect direct spending or 
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply. 
H.R. 1522 does not contain any intergovernmental or private-
sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995 (UMRA) and would have no impact on the budgets of 
state, local, or tribal governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The $150 million 
to be deposited into the HPF under H.R. 1522 is the same amount 
that was deposited to the fund annually from 1980 through 1997, 
but is significantly higher than the $30 million to $50 million 
generally appropriated (from the HPF) for each year. In recent 
years, annual appropriations for the advisory council have been 
about $3 million. Theestimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1522 is 
shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation fall within 
budget function 300 (natural resources and environment).

                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              1998     1999     2000     2001     2002     2003 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS                                       
                                                                                                                
Spending under current law:                                                                                     
    Budget authority/authorization level \1\..............       44        4        4        0        0        0
    Estimated outlays.....................................       44       26       12        2        0        0
Proposed changes:                                                                                               
    Authorization level...................................        0      150      150      154      154      154
    Estimated outlays.....................................        0       40       85      140      145      160
Spending under H.R. 1522                                                                                        
    Budget authority/authorization level..................       44      154      154      154      154      154
    Estimated outlays.....................................       44       66       97      142      145      160
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1998 level includes $41 million appropriated from the HTF and $3 million appropriated for the Advisory  
  Council on Historic Preservation. The 1999 and 2000 levels are the amounts authorized under current law for   
  appropriation to the council.                                                                                 

    Basis of estimate: For purposes of this estimate, CBO 
assumes that the entire amounts deposited into the HTF or 
authorized for the advisory council under H.R. 1522 would be 
appropriated for each fiscal year. Outlay estimates are based 
on historical spending patterns for council activities and HTF 
programs. We adjusted the observed outlay rates for the 
purposes of projecting future HTF outlays because the higher 
appropriations assumed in this estimate--relative to historical 
appropriation levels--would likely cause some delays in finding 
matching shares for certain grants. The table does not include 
any potential spending from amounts deposited to the HTF in the 
past that have not yet been appropriated. Such funds--about 
$2.3 billion--will remain available for appropriation under 
existing law even in the absence of legislation.
    Other provisions of H.R. 1522, which would amend the 
National Historic Preservation Act, would have no impact on the 
federal budget.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1522 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would have no impact on the budgets of 
state, local, or tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Deborah Reis.
    Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    H.R. 1522 contains no unfunded mandates.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                TITLE I

  Sec. 101. (a)(1)(A) The Secretary of the Interior is 
authorized to expand and maintain a National Register of 
Historic Places composed of districts, sites, buildings, 
structures, and objects significant in American history, 
architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (6) The Secretary shall promulgate regulations requiring that 
before any property or district may be included on the National 
Register or designated as a National Historic Landmark, the 
owner or owners or such property, or a majority of the owners 
of the properties within the district in the case of an 
historic district, shall be given the opportunity (including a 
reasonable period of time) to concur in, or object to, the 
nomination of the property or district for such inclusion or 
designation. If the owner or owners of any privately owned 
property, or a majority of the owners of such properties within 
the district in the case of an historic district, object to 
such inclusion or designation, such property shall not be 
included on the National Register or designated as a National 
Historic Landmark until such objection is withdrawn. The 
Secretary [shall review] may review the nomination of the 
property or district where any such objection has been made and 
[shall determine] determine whether or not the property or 
district is eligible for such inclusion or designation, and if 
the Secretary determines that such property or district is 
eligible for such inclusion or designation, he shall inform the 
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the appropriate 
State Historic Preservation Officer, the appropriate chief 
elected local official and the owner or owners of such 
property, of his determination. The regulations under this 
paragraph shall include provisions to carry out the purposes of 
this paragraph in the case of multiple ownership of a single 
property.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (b)(1) The Secretary, in consultation with the National 
Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers and the 
National Trust for Historic Preservation, shall promulgate or 
revise regulations for State Historic Preservation Programs. 
Such regulations shall provide that a State program submitted 
to the Secretary under this section shall be approved by the 
Secretary if he determines that the program--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

For purposes of subparagraph (A), the State and Indian tribe 
shall be solely responsible for determining which professional 
employees, are necessary to carry out the duties of the State 
or tribe, consistent with standards developed by the Secretary.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e)(1) The Secretary shall administer a program of matching 
grants to the States for the purposes of carrying out this Act.
  [(2) The Secretary shall administer a program of matching 
grant-in-aid to the National Trust for Historic Preservation in 
the United States, chartered by Act of Congress approved 
October 26, 1949 (63 Stat. 927), for the purposes of carrying 
out the responsibilities of the National Trust.]
  (2) The Secretary may administer grants to the National Trust 
for Historic Preservation in the United States, chartered by an 
Act of Congress approved October 26, 1949 (63 Stat. 947), 
consistent with the purposes of its charter and this Act.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  Sec. 102. (a) No grant may be made under this Act--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) No State shall be permitted to utilize the value of real 
property obtained before the date of approval of this Act in 
meeting the remaining cost of a project for which a grant is 
made under this Act.
  [(d)] (e) The Secretary shall make funding available to 
individual States and the National Trust for Historic 
Preservation as soon as practicable after execution of a grant 
agreement. For purposes of administration, grants to individual 
States and the National Trust each shall be considered to be 
one grant and shall be administered by the National Park 
Service as such.
  [(e)] (f) The total administrative costs, direct and 
indirect, charged for carrying out State projects and programs 
may not exceed 25 percent of the aggregate costs except in the 
case of grants under section 101(e)(6).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [Sec. 107. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to be 
applicable to the White House and its grounds, the Supreme 
Court building and its grounds, or the United States Capitol 
and its related buildings and grounds.]
  Sec. 107. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to be 
applicable to the White House and its grounds, the Supreme 
Court building and its grounds, or the United States Capitol 
and its related buildings and grounds as depicted on the map 
entitled ``Map Showing Properties Under the Jurisdiction of the 
Architect of the Capitol'' and dated November 6, 1996, which 
shall be on file in the office of the Secretary of the 
Interior.
  Sec. 108. To carry out the provisions of this Act, there is 
hereby established the Historic Preservation Fund (hereafter 
referred to as the ``fund'') in the Treasury of the United 
States.
  There shall be covered into such fund $24,400,000 for fiscal 
year 1977, $100,000,000 for fiscal year 1978, $100,000,000 for 
fiscal year 1979, $150,000,000 for fiscal year 1980, and 
$150,000,000 for fiscal year 1981 and $150,000,000 for each of 
fiscal years 1982 through [1997] 2004, from revenues due and 
payable to the United States under the Outer Continental Shelf 
Lands Act (67 Stat. 462, 469), as amended (43 U.S.C. 338), and/
or under the Act of June 4, 1920 (41 Stat. 813), as amended (30 
U.S.C. 191), notwithstanding any provision of law that such 
proceeds shall be credited to miscellaneous receipts of the 
Treasury. Such moneys shall be used only to carry out the 
purposes of this Act and shall be available for expenditure 
only when appropriated by the Congress. Any moneys not 
appropriated shall remain available in the fund until 
appropriated for said purposes: Provided, That appropriations 
made pursuant to this paragraph may be made without fiscal year 
limitation.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  Sec. 110. (a)(1) The heads of all Federal agencies shall 
assume responsibility for the preservation of historic 
properties which are owned or controlled by such agency. Prior 
to acquiring, constructing, or leasing buildings for purposes 
of carrying out agency responsibilities, each Federal agency 
shall use, to the maximum extent feasible, historic properties 
available to the agency, especially those located in central 
business areas. When locating Federal facilities, Federal 
agencies shall give first consideration to historic properties 
in historic districts. If no such property is suitable, then 
Federal agencies shall consider other developed or undeveloped 
sites within historic districts. Federal agencies shall then 
consider historic properties outside of historic districts, if 
no suitable site within a district exists. Any rehabilitation 
or construction that is undertaken pursuant to this Act must be 
architecturally compatible with the character of the 
surrounding historic district or properties. Each agency shall 
undertake, consistent with the preservation of such properties 
and the mission of the agency and the professional standards 
established pursuant to section 101(g), any preservation, as 
may be necessary to carry out this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (l) With respect to any undertaking subject to section 106 
which adversely affects any property included in or eligible 
for inclusion in the National Register, and for which a Federal 
agency has not entered into an agreement [with the Council] 
pursuant to regulations issued by the Council, the head of such 
agency shall document any decision made pursuant to section 
106. The head of such agency may not delegate his or her 
responsibilities pursuant to such section. Where a section 106 
memorandum of agreement has been executed with respect to an 
undertaking, such memorandum shall govern the undertaking and 
all of its parts.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE II

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  Sec. 205. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h) Any permanent employee of the Council as of December 31, 
1997, may be appointed to a position in another agency of the 
Executive branch without regard to the provisions of title 5, 
United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive 
service, if the agency or the Office of Personnel Management, 
as appropriate, determines that the employee is qualified for 
the position.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  Sec. 212. (a) The Council shall submit its budget annually as 
a related agency of the Department of the Interior. There are 
authorized to be appropriated for the purposes of this title 
not to exceed $4,000,000 in each fiscal year 1997 through 
[2000] 2004.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                
