[Senate Report 105-53]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 118
105th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

 1st Session                                                     105-53
_______________________________________________________________________


 
DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1998

                                _______
                                

                 July 17, 1997.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


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

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1034]

    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1034) 
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, 1998, 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.................... $90,901,535,000
Amount of appropriations to date, 1997..................  82,063,403,442
Amount of budget estimates, 1998........................  90,972,438,000
    Under estimates for 1998............................      70,903,000
    Above appropriations for 1997.......................   8,917,820,560



                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Title I--Department of Veterans Affairs..........................     6
Title II--Department of Housing and Urban Development............    27
Title III--Independent agencies:
    American Battle Monuments Commission.........................    47
    Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board...............    47
    Department of the Treasury: Community development financial 
      institutions...............................................    48
    Consumer Product Safety Commission...........................    48
    Corporation for National and Community Service...............    49
    U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals...............................    50
    Department of Defense--Civil: Cemeterial expenses, Army......    51
    Environmental Protection Agency..............................    51
    Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and 
      Technology Policy..........................................    71
    Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental 
      Quality....................................................    72
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of Inspector 
      General....................................................    72
    Federal Emergency Management Agency..........................    73
    General Services Administration: Consumer Information Center.    80
    Department of Health and Human Services: U.S. Office of 
      Consumer Affairs...........................................    80
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration................    81
    National Credit Union Administration.........................    88
    National Science Foundation..................................    89
    Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation........................    95
    Selective Service System.....................................    96
Title IV--General provisions.....................................    98

                              INTRODUCTION

    The Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
Development and Independent Agencies appropriations bill for 
fiscal year 1998.
    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, within the constraints imposed by a very tight 
budget allocation, including constraints dictated by the budget 
agreement designed to result in a unified Federal budget in 
fiscal year 2002.
    The Committee recommendation provides $18,766,266,000 in 
discretionary funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
including an increase in funding for VA medical care, research, 
and the State home program. The Committee's recommendation for 
VA represents an increase of $92,920,000 above the President's 
request. Despite a proposed reduction of almost $300,000,000 in 
VA discretionary spending in the budget agreement, VA medical 
programs were afforded the highest priority in order to ensure 
quality care to all veterans currently being served by the VA 
and to ensure a smooth transition to the new organizational 
structure and its emphasis on managed care.
    For the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the 
Committee's recommendation totals $25,505,255,000, and 
continues policy and programmatic reforms enacted last year. 
The Committee strongly supports enactment of comprehensive 
reform legislation under the jurisdiction of the authorizing 
committee, including an overhaul of the public and assisted 
housing programs as well as other program, management, and 
fiscal reforms designed to address the many and substantial 
program and administrative deficiencies facing the Department. 
This appropriations bill, however, contains temporary 
extensions of provisions needed to halt the ever-increasing 
cost of housing subsidy commitments.
    In addition, this appropriations bill includes the 
multifamily housing restructuring proposals now under 
consideration by the authorizing committee as part of the 
reconciliation process. The excessive section 8 subsidies 
necessary to sustain this inventory of nearly 1 million units 
of low-income housing cannot be continued within the 
constraints of a balanced budget plan for discretionary 
spending. Unless Congress acts to provide a process to deal 
with the excessive debt of this housing inventory, there could 
be massive defaults and substantial resident displacement.
    The Committee-reported bill also restores funding for the 
Community Development Block Grants Program [CDBG] at the full 
current fiscal year 1997 funding level of $4,600,000,000, and 
restores full funding to elderly and disabled housing 
($365,000,000 over the President's request). In addition, the 
HOME program is also maintained at it current $1,400,000,000 
level.
    For the Environmental Protection Agency, the Committee 
recommendation totals $6,975,920,000, an increase of 
$176,527,000 over the current fiscal year, with increases in 
such areas as State revolving funds. While the Committee's 
recommendation represents a significant increase over the 
enacted level for EPA's operating programs, the President's 
full request was not possible owing to the constraints imposed 
by the 602(b) allocation and the necessity of adequately 
funding veterans medical care. In addition, overriding policy 
concerns coupled with budget constraints prevented the 
Committee from recommending an increase for Superfund.
    The Committee's recommendation does not include any so-
called riders for EPA in order to minimize the potential for 
controversy or extended disputes.
    The bill provides the President's full request of 
$788,588,000 for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The 
Committee continues to have grave concerns with the 
skyrocketing costs of FEMA's disaster relief program--for which 
more than $10,000,000,000 has been appropriated in fiscal years 
1995-97--as well as FEMA's stewardship of this multibillion-
dollar program. Therefore, a limitation on spending has been 
included in the ``Disaster relief'' account, consistent with 
FEMA's recent legislative proposal, as a first step to 
reforming the disaster relief program.
    The Committee recommendation for National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration totals $13,500,000,000, the same as the 
President's request. The Committee recommends full funding for 
the Mission to Planet Earth Program. For the National Science 
Foundation, the Committee recommends $3,377,000,000. While a 
modest increase of $107,000,000 over the 1997 level, it does 
reflect the Committee's commitment to support of high-priority 
basic research and technology development activities, 
notwithstanding our growing budgetary constraints.

              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.
    Further, the Committee expects each department and agency 
within the jurisdiction of the VA-HUD Appropriations 
Subcommittee to meet fully the requirements, including all 
consultations and reporting requirements, of the Government 
Performance and Results Act. This process is critical to a 
successful dialog between the Congress and the executive branch 
on the funding and implementation of all Federal agencies, 
programs, and activities.
    The Committee also expects that 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, and the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission, will submit operating 
plans, signed by the respective secretary, administrator, 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 them consistent with prior year policy.

                 Government Performance and Results Act

    The Committee urges each agency and department to comply 
with both the spirit and the letter of the law of the 
Government Performance and Results Act [Results Act]. The 
Results Act is intended to rationalize the agency budget 
process by requiring each agency and department to develop a 
strategic plan, including a comprehensive mission statement 
based on the agency's statutory authority, a set of outcome-
related strategic goals, and a description on how the agency 
will accomplish these goals. Nevertheless, certain deadlines of 
the Results Act are rapidly approaching. For example, each 
Federal agency must develop a strategic plan that covers at 
least 5 years and must submit the plan to Congress and the 
Office of Management and Budget no later than September 30, 
1997.
    The Committee remains concerned over the status of the 
strategic plans of most of the agencies covered by the VA-HUD 
Appropriations Subcommittee. While NASA has made real progress 
in developing its strategic plan, most of the other agencies 
have had mixed success. The Committee advises that it takes the 
requirements of the Results Act very seriously, including the 
requirement to consult with Congress, and expects each agency 
and department fully to meet all requirements of the Results 
Act.

                TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Appropriations, 1997

                                                         $40,086,493,000

Budget estimate, 1998

                                                          40,216,150,000

Committee recommendation

                                                          40,309,070,000

                          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 System, 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 173 medical centers, 448 outpatient 
clinics, 135 nursing homes, and 40 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 System provides for the interment in 
any national cemetery with available grave space the remains of 
eligible deceased servicepersons and discharged veterans; 
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 
System includes 149 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 Director of the National Cemetery System.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $40,309,070,000 for the Department 
of Veterans Affairs, including $21,542,804,000 in mandatory 
spending and $18,766,266,000 in discretionary spending. The 
amount provided for discretionary activities represents an 
increase of $92,926,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee has rejected the budget agreement 
recommendation to reduce VA discretionary funding by 
$273,000,000 below the President's fiscal year 1998 request. 
Such a reduction would result in fewer eligible veterans 
receiving comprehensive medical care, reductions to basic 
maintenance and repair of medical facilities, and additional 
delays in the processing of benefits claims. The Committee 
believes the outcome of such budget reductions would be 
completely unacceptable.

                    Veterans Benefits Administration

                       compensation and pensions

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997.................................... $19,599,259,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................  19,932,997,000
Committee recommendation................................  19,932,997,000

                          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 has provided $19,932,997,000 for compensation 
and pensions. This is an increase of $333,738,000 over the 
current budget and the same as the budget estimate.
    The estimated caseload and cost by program follows:

                                            COMPENSATION AND PENSIONS                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                1997               1998            Difference   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caseload:                                                                                                       
    Compensation:                                                                                               
        Veterans.......................................         2,256,672          2,278,900            +22,228 
        Survivors......................................           305,188            304,900               -288 
        Children.......................................  .................             2,000             +2,000 
        (Clothing allowance)...........................           (74,540)           (74,300)             (-240)
    Pensions:                                                                                                   
        Veterans.......................................           409,309            407,600             -1,709 
        Survivors......................................           319,234            303,500            -15,734 
        Minimum income for widows (nonadd).............              (800)              (793)               (-7)
        Vocational training (nonadd)...................              (110)               (85)              (-25)
    Burial allowances..................................            97,800             97,700               -100 
                                                        ========================================================
Funds:                                                                                                          
    Compensation:                                                                                               
        Veterans.......................................   $13,016,590,000    $13,259,558,000      +$242,968,000 
        Survivors......................................     3,240,100,000      3,273,892,000        +33,792,000 
        Children.......................................  .................        21,100,000        +21,100,000 
        Clothing allowance.............................        38,760,000         38,471,000           -289,000 
    Payment to GOE (Public Laws 101-508 and 102-568)...         2,198,000          2,083,000           -115,000 
    Medical exams pilot program........................         7,574,000         15,905,000         +8,331,000 
Pensions:                                                                                                       
    Veterans...........................................     2,354,276,000      2,401,380,000        +47,104,000 
    Survivors..........................................       788,380,000        774,453,000        -13,927,000 
    Minimum income for widows..........................         1,389,000          5,657,000         +4,268,000 
Vocational training....................................           300,000            236,000            -64,000 
Payment to GOE (Public Laws 101-508, 102-568, and 103-                                                          
 446)..................................................        10,078,000          9,201,000           -877,000 
Payment to Medical Care (Public Laws 101-508 and 102-                                                           
 568)..................................................        14,241,000         15,096,000           +855,000 
Payment to Medical Facilities..........................         2,254,000          2,322,000            +68,000 
Burial benefits........................................       115,436,000        117,534,000         +2,098,000 
Other assistance.......................................         1,764,000          1,766,000             +2,000 
Contingency............................................        15,228,000   .................       -15,228,000 
Unobligated balance and transfers......................        -9,309,000         -5,657,000         +3,652,000 
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total appropriation..............................    19,599,259,000     19,932,997,000       +333,738,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The appropriation includes $26,380,000 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, and the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994. 
The amount provided includes funds for a proposed cost-of-
living increase of 2.7 percent for pension recipients.
    Also, the bill includes language permitting this 
appropriation to reimburse such sums as may be necessary, 
estimated at $2,322,000, to the medical facilities revolving 
fund to help defray the operating expenses of individual 
medical facilities for nursing home care provided to pensioners 
as authorized by the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1992.
    The Committee has not included language proposed by the 
administration that would provide indefinite 1998 supplemental 
appropriations for compensation and pension payments. The 
Committee has also rejected proposed bill language to split 
this account into three separate appropriation accounts.

                         readjustment benefits

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $1,377,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   1,366,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,366,000,000

                          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 has recommended the budget estimate of 
$1,366,000,000 for readjustment benefits. The amount 
recommended is a decrease of $11,000,000 below the enacted 
level.
    The estimated caseload and cost for this account follows:

                                              READJUSTMENT BENEFITS                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                1997               1998            Difference   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of trainees:                                                                                             
    Education and training: Dependents.................            43,952             47,500             +3,548 
    All-Volunteer Force educational assistance:                                                                 
        Veterans and servicepersons....................           299,560            291,190             -8,370 
        Reservists.....................................            77,350             80,300             +2,950 
    Vocational rehabilitation..........................            56,265             55,140             -1,125 
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................           477,127            474,130             -2,997 
                                                        ========================================================
Funds:                                                                                                          
    Education and training: Dependents.................      $108,900,000       $117,539,000        +$8,639,000 
    All-Volunteer Force educational assistance:                                                                 
        Veterans and servicepersons....................       742,806,000        769,093,000        +26,287,000 
        Reservists.....................................        97,800,000         99,119,000         +1,319,000 
    Vocational rehabilitation..........................       416,400,000        419,175,000         +2,775,000 
    Housing grants.....................................        16,100,000         16,100,000   .................
    Automobiles and other conveyances..................         4,700,000          4,700,000   .................
    Adaptive equipment.................................        22,900,000         23,100,000           +200,000 
    Work-study.........................................        29,900,000         31,493,000         +1,593,000 
    Payment to States..................................        13,000,000         13,000,000   .................
    Jobs training (Public Law 102-484).................  .................  .................  .................
    Unobligated balance and other adjustments..........       -75,506,000       -127,319,000        -51,813,000 
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
        Total appropriation............................     1,377,000,000      1,366,000,000        -11,000,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   veterans insurance and indemnities

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $38,970,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      51,360,000
Committee recommendation................................      51,360,000

                          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 has provided $51,360,000 for veterans 
insurance and indemnities, as requested by the administration. 
This is an increase of $12,390,000 above the current budget. 
The Department estimates there will be 4,946,144 policies in 
force in fiscal year 1998 with a total value of $511,597,000.

                 VETERANS HOUSING BENEFIT PROGRAM FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997....................    $364,640,000    $139,116,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................     192,447,000     160,437,000
Committee recommendation................     192,447,000     160,437,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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 the direct and guaranteed 
loans programs, which may be transferred to and merged with the 
general operating expenses appropriation.
    The purpose of the VA Home Loan Guaranty Program is to 
facilitate the extension of mortgage credit on favorable terms 
by private lenders to eligible veterans. This account 
represents a new fund established this year to consolidate the 
guaranty and indemnity fund, loan guaranty fund, and direct 
loan fund. This consolidation merges 11 accounts into 4 
accounts under the new veterans housing benefit program fund 
[VHBPF] to achieve administrative efficiencies. All 
appropriations and income formerly received from the old 
accounts will be deposited in this new fund. No program or 
scoring changes result as an effect of this presentation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends such sums as may be necessary for 
funding subsidy payments, estimated to total $192,447,000, and 
$160,437,000 for administrative expenses. The administrative 
expenses may be transferred to the ``General operating 
expenses'' account. Bill language authorizes not to exceed 
$300,000 in gross obligations for direct loans for specially 
adapted housing loans.

                      education loan fund program

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997....................          $1,000        $195,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................           1,000         200,000
Committee recommendation................           1,000         200,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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 bill includes $1,000 for program costs and $200,000 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 $3,000.

                 vocational rehabilitation loan program

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997....................         $49,000        $377,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................          44,000         388,000
Committee recommendation................          44,000         388,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This appropriation covers the 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 $815.42 
(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 bill includes the requested $44,000 for program costs 
and $388,000 for administrative expenses for the vocational 
Rehabilitation Loan Program. The administrative expenses may be 
transferred to and merged with the ``General operating 
expenses'' account. Bill language is included limiting program 
direct loans to $2,278,000. It is estimated that VA will make 
4,952 loans in fiscal year 1998, with an average amount of 
$460.

              native american veteran housing loan program

                     (including transfer of funds)

                                                          Administrative
                                                                expenses

Appropriations, 1997 \1\................................        $205,000
Budget estimate, 1998 \1\...............................         515,000
Committee recommendation................................         515,000

\1\ Subsidy amounts necessary to support this program were appropriated 
in fiscal year 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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.

                        committee recommendation

    The bill includes the budget estimate of $515,000 for 
administrative expenses associated with this program in fiscal 
year 1998. These funds may be transferred to the ``General 
operating expenses'' account.

                     Veterans Health Administration

                              MEDICAL CARE

Appropriations, 1997.................................... $17,013,447,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................  16,958,846,000
Committee recommendation................................  17,026,846,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] operates the 
largest Federal medical care delivery system in the country, 
with 173 hospitals, 40 domiciliaries, 135 nursing homes, and 
448 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 $17,026,846,000 for VA medical 
care, an increase of $68,000,000 over the budget request. In 
addition, the Committee recommends bill language, as proposed 
by the administration, authorizing VA to retain third-party 
collections estimated to total $604,000,000. Therefore, the 
Committee's recommendation represents total discretionary 
resources for medical care of $17,630,846,000, an increase of 
$617,399,000 over the current fiscal year.
    Beginning in fiscal year 1998 VA will have authority to 
retain collections from third-party payers and copayments from 
certain non-service-connected veterans. The Committee 
anticipates that VA will take all appropriate and necessary 
steps to ensure collections meet or exceed targets, and that 
incentives are provided to medical facilities to effectuate 
this goal. The Committee notes that the estimated collections 
are a critical component of VA's fiscal year 1998 medical care 
budget.
    The Committee commends VHA for the aggressive steps it has 
begun to take to improve the quality and cost effectiveness of 
VA health care services. The administration's fiscal year 1998 
budget proposal is predicated on achieving increased 
efficiencies and improvements, with an ambitious 5-year goal of 
achieving a 30-percent decrease in the cost of care on a per-
patient basis, a 20-percent increase in the numbers of veterans 
served, and a 10-percent increase in revenues from 
nonappropriated sources. The Committee supports these goals and 
expects the Department will continue to implement all 
appropriate measures to improve the quality of care while 
maximizing the use of available resources through such 
initiatives as shifting care to ambulatory settings wherever 
appropriate; national contracts for purchasing of supplies, 
pharmaceuticals, and nursing home care; and merging the 
management of closely located facilities.
    The Committee remains highly supportive of VHA's 
restructuring efforts, including the implementation of the 
veterans integrated service networks [VISN's] and the new 
allocation methodology, veterans equitable resource allocation 
[VERA]. While minor adjustments may be needed in the future, 
VERA is a significant improvement over previous resource 
allocation schemes. The Committee opposes efforts to thwart 
this new, more equitable system.
    The Committee notes that the delegation of decisionmaking 
authority to the networks requires increased efforts on the 
part of headquarters to ensure adequate guidance and monitoring 
of VISN activities so that systemwide goals for quality and 
accessibility of care are met and the highest standards upheld 
in all facilities. According to the General Accounting Office, 
``The challenge is to ensure that the networks have a common 
understanding of VA-wide goals and legislative requirements 
while permitting them flexibility in how to achieve the goals. 
The challenge in monitoring network performance is to have 
reliable, appropriate, and timely indicators to ensure that 
problems are identified and corrected.'' The Committee is 
concerned that current levels of headquarters oversight may be 
inadequate, and directs VHA to report within 60 days of 
enactment of this act on its plans for improving monitoring and 
guidance of the networks, and respond to the issues raised by 
the General Accounting Office on this matter.
    The Committee is concerned that VHA has yet to develop a 
nationwide plan for community-based outpatient clinics [CBOC's] 
to ensure equitable access to medical care for veterans 
nationwide. While the Committee supports the concept of CBOC's 
to facilitate the transition of VA to a more cost-effective, 
customer-focused, and outpatient-based health care system, 
concerns remain that VHA has not developed a national strategy 
including the number of additional CBOC's which may be needed 
to meet these goals and ensure equity of access, and the 
appropriate timeframe in which to do so. In addition, there are 
concerns as to whether VA is planning effectively for new 
CBOC's and ensuring their efficient and effective operation 
once established. The General Accounting Office has a review 
underway regarding these issues. The Committee directs VHA to 
provide a report to the Committee by February 15, 1998, to 
address the need for a national plan for access points and to 
respond to GAO's findings and recommendations.
    The Committee is aware of the need for a community-based 
outpatient clinic in Bennington, VT, and urges the Department 
to consider such a clinic through the normal agency approval 
process for community-based outpatient clinics. In addition, 
the Committee is aware of the need for a community-based 
outpatient clinic in Charleston, WV, to improve service to more 
than 27,000 veterans in Kanawha and surrounding counties, 
including Boone, Putnam, Lincoln, and Logan. The Committee 
urges VA to accelerate efforts by the Huntington VAMC to 
promote this valuable initiative. Finally, the Committee is 
aware that a need may exist to expand the Meadville, PA, 
satellite clinic, which was established to improve access to 
care for patients in rural Crawford and Venango Counties, and 
urges VHA to consider such an expansion.
    The Committee encourages the VA to establish outpatient 
clinics in southern and western Maryland, through the normal 
agency approval process. The Committee hopes that such clinics 
will become operational as quickly as possible once approved. 
The Committee also wants to ensure that both the Cambridge and 
Cumberland clinics in Maryland maintain their high level of 
service to veterans. The Committee requests an update within 60 
days of enactment of this legislation outlining the future 
plans of the Cumberland and Cambridge clinics.
    As part of a demonstration project funded by VA and the 
Department of Energy, installation of a coal-fired incinerator 
at the Lebanon VAMC is complete, but additional funds are 
needed to begin startup and testing of the unit. VA is urged to 
provide necessary funding to complete the demonstration 
project, which may have far-reaching applications in hospitals 
across the Nation.
    The Committee also urges VA to consider providing funds 
necessary to procure and operate a mobile clinic to be operated 
from the Wilkes-Barre VAMC which would assist VA in providing 
primary care services to veterans in rural and isolated areas.
    The Committee recognizes the merits of the State Veterans 
Home Program which is the largest provider of long-term nursing 
care to veterans in the United States. The Committee directs VA 
to ensure that the per diem for this program is adequate and 
appropriate, with a goal of achieving a one-third Federal share 
over the next few years. VA is directed to provide to the 
Committee within 60 days of enactment of this act its plans for 
achieving this goal.
    The Committee is concerned that the rates of serious liver 
disease, liver cancer, and liver transplants related to 
hepatitis C infection are expected to rise rapidly among 
veteran populations over the next decade. Veterans health care 
facilities will bear a large part of the treatment cost. Those 
costs can be reduced with early screening and treatment of 
veterans infected with hepatitis C. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Department to determine rates of hepatitis C 
infection among veterans receiving health services from the VA 
health care system, and to provide counseling and access to 
treatment for eligible veterans who test positive for hepatitis 
C. The Department should pay special attention to rates of 
hepatitis C among veterans of Vietnam and subsequent 
deployments. Finally, the Committee encourages the Department 
to coordinate with the Department of Defense on approaches to 
screen and treat active duty personnel.
    The Committee applauds VA's decision in recent years to 
expand the psychology internship program to address the 
behavioral and mental health needs of veterans and urges VA to 
continue to strengthen the psychology training (predoctoral and 
postdoctoral) programs.
    The Committee is supportive of a joint DOD-VA effort 
through the Joslin Diabetes Center to apply methods to improve 
detection capability for those prone to diabetes; improve 
diabetes prevention and care; enhance the quality of life and 
productivity for diabetics; and lower health care costs for VA 
beneficiaries.
    The Committee encourages VA to continue the VA/DOD Distance 
Learning Pilot Program to transition clinical nurse specialists 
to the role of nurse practitioners. This collaborative program 
with the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences 
Graduate School of Nursing will add to the number of primary 
care providers required to care for the projected increase in 
the numbers of aging and female veterans.
    The Committee urges the Department to continue the 
demonstration project involving the Clarksburg VAMC and the 
Ruby Memorial Hospital at West Virginia University, with 
funding of up to $2,000,000.
    The Committee urges VA to provide adequate support for the 
National Center for Post-Traumatic-Stress Disorder, a seven 
site consortium dedicated to providing leadership in the 
research, treatment, education, and evaluation activities for 
PTSD.
    The Committee has included bill language delaying the 
availability until September 30, 1998, of $550,000,000 in the 
equipment, lands, and structures object classifications.
    The Committee has not recommended bill language proposed by 
the administration to make available through September 30, 
1999, up to 8.3 percent of the amounts made available for 
medical care. The Committee has also rejected bill language 
regarding compensation and pension exams directly funded from 
Veterans Benefits Administration resources. The Committee 
believes it is premature to authorize the funding of C&P exams 
from VBA resources given that a planned fiscal year 1997 pilot 
has yet to be initiated.

                    medical and prosthetic research

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $262,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     234,374,000
Committee recommendation................................     267,000,000

                          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 $267,000,000 for medical and 
prosthetic research. This is an increase of $5,000,000 above 
the current budget and $32,626,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee believes the administration's proposal to 
reduce drastically funds for this program would have 
devastating consequences on the veterans health care system. 
Therefore, the Committee has recommended a significant increase 
over the President's request.
    The Committee supports the Department's proposals to create 
an overarching research strategy and establish an R&D program 
oversight body to advise the program leadership, to revitalize 
the career development program, and to increase collaboration 
with the Department of Defense research.
    The Committee continues to support the establishment of a 
partnership with a private, not-for-profit research and 
treatment center, that could deliver new cancer therapy to 
veterans through radioimmunodetection and radioimmunotherapy, 
and directs VA to expedite efforts to establish such a 
partnership. The Garden State Cancer Center is recognized 
internationally in this field.
    The Committee is aware that the Veterans Affairs Research 
Realignment Advisory Committee has reported its recommendations 
for realigning the VA research efforts. The major 
recommendation to create designated research areas [DRA's] 
which target the needs of the majority of the VA population has 
great merit. The use of DRA's would enhance VA's ability to 
prioritize its research efforts. The Committee encourages the 
Department to employ the methodology of DRA's during 
preparation of the fiscal year 1999 budget request for this 
account. Furthermore, while the report delineates nine major 
areas to target as DRA's, the Committee encourages VA to 
broaden those categories to include mental health and mental 
disorders.
    The Committee is concerned that VA's efforts to reduce the 
number of management positions is having an adverse impact on 
Ph.D. research scientists at the GS 14/15 level. Given the 
deleterious effect such reductions likely will have on the 
research program, VA is strongly urged to exempt these research 
personnel from reductions intended to reduce managerial staff.
    The Committee supports funding for research on bone disease 
in men, including the magnitude and character of the problem of 
osteoporosis and other bone diseases among the male veteran 
population including what causes bone loss among veterans, and 
the incidence of fractures and reduced bone mass in this 
population; appropriate therapies for the treatment of 
osteoporosis and other bone diseases in men; and the role of 
androgens in osteoporosis and other bone diseases in men. VA is 
urged to provide adequate funding for this important research.
    The Committee urges VA to provide support for a cooperative 
program with the Diabetes Institute of Norfolk, VA, to develop 
protocols for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic 
neuropathy. The Committee notes that Diabetes Mellitus is a 
critical problem confronting the Nation's veteran population, 
as approximately 25 percent of all VA patients have this 
disease.
    The Committee is encouraged by VA's decision to increase 
funding available for prostate cancer research. VA estimated 
that it spent $9,200,000 in fiscal year 1996 and that it will 
spend $12,800,000 in fiscal years 1997-98 on this major health 
problem for aging males. Because prostate cancer research is 
one of the leading causes of death among veterans, VA is 
encouraged to increase funding for prostate cancer research.
    The Committee is aware of the successful use of proton 
therapy in treating a number of cancers, including prostate 
cancer, and other life-threatening diseases. Because of the 
heightened incidence of prostate cancer and other cancers in 
the veteran population, the Committee urges the Department to 
prioritize clinical research into proton therapy as a treatment 
option for these conditions.

      medical administration and miscellaneous operating expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $61,207,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      60,160,000
Committee recommendation................................      60,160,000

                          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 $60,160,000 for medical 
administration and miscellaneous operating expenses, the same 
as the budget request and $1,047,000 below the current budget.

                   GENERAL POST FUND, NATIONAL HOMES

                     (Including Transfer of Funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Program      Limitation on  Administrative
                                                                      account      direct loans      expenses   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997............................................          $7,000         $70,000         $54,000
Budget estimate, 1998...........................................           7,000          70,000          54,000
Committee recommendation........................................           7,000          70,000          54,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This program provides loans to nonprofit organizations to 
assist them in leasing housing units exclusively for use as a 
transitional group residence for veterans who are in (or have 
recently been in) a program for the treatment of substance 
abuse. The amount of the loan cannot exceed $4,500 for any 
single residential unit and each loan must be repaid within 2 
years through monthly installments. The amount of loans 
outstanding at any time may not exceed $100,000.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $7,000 for 
the estimated cost of providing loans, $54,000 for 
administrative expenses, and a $70,000 limitation on direct 
loans. The administrative expenses may be transferred to and 
merged with the general post fund.

                      Departmental Administration

                       general operating expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $827,584,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     846,385,000
Committee recommendation................................     786,385,000

                          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 $786,385,000 for general operating 
expenses, a reduction of $41,199,000 below the current budget, 
and $60,000,000 below the budget request. In addition to this 
appropriation, additional resources are made available to 
general operating expenses through reimbursements totaling 
$312,516,000, with total estimated obligations of approximately 
$1,099,000,000.
    The Committee has made the following changes to the budget 
request:
  -$68,000,000 for the cost of compensation and pension exams. 
        This activity will continue to be funded from the 
        ``Medical care'' account in fiscal year 1998.
  +$5,000,000 for activities necessary to ensure compliance 
        with year 2000 computer requirements. The Committee is 
        extremely concerned about the year 2000 problem within 
        the VBA's benefits payments system. If the problem is 
        not corrected, the result could be inaccurate and late 
        benefit payments to millions of veterans. The General 
        Accounting Office recently reported that while VBA has 
        begun to take action to address the problem, many 
        deficiencies remain. Addressing this problem should be 
        VBA's highest priority.
  +$5,000,000 for development and implementation of 
        departmental capacities that will enable effective 
        strategic planning and management, including actuarial 
        analysis, program evaluation, continued development of 
        a veteran-focused information technology architecture 
        integrated with VA's business lines, and related 
        activities. A plan for the expenditure of these funds 
        is expected in the operating plan. No funds are to be 
        allocated prior to review and approval by the 
        Committees on Appropriations.
  +$3,000,000 for information technology priorities delineated 
        by the National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA] 
        in its recent report, subject to review and approval in 
        the operating plan.
  -$5,000,000 from VETSNET, a new computer system to replace 
        the current payment system, consistent with NAPA's 
        recommendation.
    The Committee has been very concerned with VA's failure to 
address comprehensively fundamental, systemic shortcomings in 
its service delivery to veterans in the compensation and 
pension program. These shortcomings include long lead times for 
decisions on original and reopened compensation claims, long 
delays in appeals, and the lack of a comprehensive, systemic 
approach to adjudication quality. Because of its concerns, the 
Committee provided for the National Academy of Public 
Administration to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the 
claims adjudication process and appeals process to make 
specific recommendations for comprehensive, strategic 
improvements.
    The key Academy panel conclusion is the VA has not met the 
challenge of achieving long-term improvement in services for 
veterans because it has not had the consistent leadership and 
the strategic planning and management capacities needed to plan 
and rigorously implement such improvement. The Academy panel 
also concluded that recent improvements by the Board of 
Veterans Appeals provide a good chance of eliminating appeals 
backlogs by the year 2000. The Committee notes that, with 
vacancies in the positions of Secretary, the Under Secretary 
for Benefits and the Chair of the Board, the administration has 
a unique opportunity to hire the skilled executives needed to 
provide this leadership and management expertise.
    The Academy panel calls for the VA to develop a 
comprehensive reform plan and identifies the specific areas 
that this plan needs to address. This plan should: (1) identify 
how VBA leadership will be revamped and accountability for 
performance improved, including giving line authority to the 
directors of the business lines over the field; (2) create a 
strategic management process within VBA; (3) specify steps 
necessary to fix the year 2000 computer problem; (4) layout 
steps to be taken to improve the business process reengineering 
plan; (5) develop a computer modernization get-well plan; (6) 
develop a 5-year field restructuring plan. Consideration should 
be given to eliminating the area offices; and (7) establish a 
goal of reducing the Board of Veterans Appeals backlog to 
acceptable levels by the year 2000. In each of these areas the 
Academy lays out in detail the kinds of actions that the 
Secretary and Under Secretary for Benefits need to take.
    The Committee directs the VA to present a formal plan to 
Congress by March 31, 1998, and expects that this plan, and its 
component pieces, will be accompanied by detailed and 
integrated implementation milestones and the resources the VA 
has allocated to achieve them. A detailed report on progress 
against these milestones should be provided to the Committee by 
September 30, 1998, and every 6 months thereafter. The Academy 
panel strongly recommends that VBA reach out actively to its 
stakeholders including the veterans service organizations, 
Congress, and others. The Committee is in full agreement with 
this and directs the VA to consult with these stakeholders 
throughout the process of preparing this comprehensive reform 
plan.
    In addition, the Academy panel recommends that VBA seek 
expertise and best practices from outside of the agency in 
developing its reform plans and implementing them on an ongoing 
basis. The agency should consider borrowing for a limited time 
executives and experts from Federal agencies and from leading 
companies in the private sector. In addition, the Committee 
will support reasonable VBA efforts to engage private 
consulting expertise necessary to assist in upgrading its 
leadership and strategic management capacities.
    The Committee directs the Department to report back within 
90 days of enactment of this act on a plan to increase the 
utilization rate of education benefits, including an analysis 
of why utilization rates are relatively low and what might be 
done to increase utilization, including extending the time 
limit on using these benefits.
    The Committee has not recommended bill language authorizing 
funds from this account to be used to conduct compensation and 
pension medical examinations. The pilot program planned for the 
current fiscal year to contract out C&P examinations has not 
yet been initiated. Therefore, the authorization proposed for 
fiscal year 1998 is premature.

                        national cemetery system

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $76,864,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      84,183,000
Committee recommendation................................      84,183,000

                          program description

    The National Cemetery System 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 to permanently 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 149 cemeterial installations in 39 
States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The 
Committee's recommendation for the National Cemetery System 
provides funds for all of these cemeterial installations, 
including the Tahoma National Military Cemetery, which would be 
the first of its kind for Washington State veterans.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $84,183,000 
for the National Cemetery System. This is an increase of 
$7,319,000 over the enacted level. The amount provided will 
enable the Department to increase its FTE's in the National 
Cemetery System by 52, for a total of 1,375. The budget also 
includes funding for additional supplies and materials to 
address the growth in cemeterial workloads in 1998.

                    office of the inspector general

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $30,900,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      31,013,000
Committee recommendation................................      31,013,000

                          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 $31,013,000 
for the inspector general. This is an increase of $113,000 
above the current budget.

                      construction, major projects

                    (Including Rescission of Funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $250,858,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      79,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      92,800,000

                          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, and 
site acquisition where the estimated cost of a project is 
$4,000,000 or more.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $92,800,000 
for construction, major projects, an increase of $13,300,000 
above the budget request. In addition to the projects proposed 
in the budget, the Committee recommends $12,400,000 for the 
Pittsburgh renovations project, which was partially funded in 
the fiscal year 1997 appropriation, and $900,000 for the 
National Veterans Cemetery in Oklahoma.
    The following table compares the Committee recommendation 
with the budget request.

                      CONSTRUCTION, MAJOR PROJECTS                      
                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Available                              
   Location and description       through        1998        Committee  
                                    1997       request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical Program:                                                        
    Replacement and                                                     
     modernization: Memphis,                                            
     TN, seismic corrections..       73,000       34,600         34,600 
                               =========================================
    Patient privacy/                                                    
     environmental: Pittsburgh                                          
     (UD), PA, environmental                                            
     improvements.............        5,000  ...........         12,400 
                               =========================================
        Advance planning fund:                                          
         Various stations.....  ...........        4,933          4,933 
        Design fund: Various                                            
         stations.............  ...........        3,500          3,500 
        Asbestos abatement:                                             
         Various stations.....  ...........        4,000          4,000 
        Seismic vulnerability                                           
         studies: Various                                               
         stations.............  ...........        1,000          1,000 
                               =========================================
          Subtotal, medical                                             
           programs...........       78,000       48,033         60,433 
                               =========================================
National Cemetery Program:                                              
    Cleveland, OH, new                                                  
     cemetery, phase I                                                  
     development..............        1,958       12,642         12,642 
    Fort Sam Houston, TX,                                               
     burial area expansion....  ...........        9,400          9,400 
    Oklahoma City, OK, new                                              
     cemetery.................          500  ...........            900 
    National Memorial Cemetery                                          
     of Arizona, gravesite                                              
     development..............  ...........        9,100          9,100 
    Advance planning fund:                                              
     Various stations.........  ...........          750            750 
    Less: Design fund.........  ...........         -925           -925 
                               -----------------------------------------
      Subtotal, National                                                
       Cemetery Program.......        2,458       30,967         31,867 
                               =========================================
Claims analyses: Various                                                
 stations.....................  ...........          500            500 
                               -----------------------------------------
      Total construction,                                               
       major projects.........       80,458       79,500         92,800 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee notes that expansion of the Jefferson 
Barracks National Cemetery in St. Louis, MO, has been 
identified by the Department of Veterans Affairs as a national 
priority. The Committee directs the Department to proceed 
expeditiously with this expansion, noting that land has been 
identified and purchased for the project.
    The Committee has included bill language prohibiting 
$32,100,000 in prior-year funds from being obligated for a new 
hospital at Travis Air Force Base in Fairfield, CA, consistent 
with a General Accounting Office conclusion that such a project 
was not justified. However, the provision allows these funds to 
be used to implement the decisions reached as a result of the 
recommendations contained in a final report entitled 
``Assessment of Veterans' Health Care Needs in Northern 
California.'' The Committee expects that veterans in the Sierra 
Pacific network will be given full access to VA medical 
services.

                      CONSTRUCTION, MINOR PROJECTS

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $175,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     166,300,000
Committee recommendation................................     166,300,000

                          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, architectural and engineering services, and 
site acquisition, where the estimated cost of a project is less 
than $4,000,000.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends the budget request of 
$166,300,000, a decrease of $8,700,000 below the current 
budget.
    The administration's budget proposed an increase in the 
minor construction project cost limitation to $5,000,000. The 
Committee has changed the current limitation to $4,000,000 
consistent with authorizing legislation.
    The Committee has not recommended bill language requested 
by the administration authorizing the expenditure of minor 
construction funding for enhanced use projects. The Committee 
does not believe this authorization is justifiable at this 
time.
    The Committee is aware that the Department has deferred the 
completion of the third floor of the Jackson, MS, regional 
office owing to the recent reorganization of the Veterans 
Health Administration and planned reengineering efforts within 
the Veterans Benefits Administration. The Committee directs the 
Department to move expeditiously in resolving organizational 
issues so as to complete the Jackson office as soon as 
possible, if consistent with restructuring and staffing plans. 
Sufficient funds are included in this appropriation for the 
completion of the third floor should the Department be ready to 
proceed in fiscal year 1998.
    The Committee notes the need for expanding the columbarium 
at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific, and urges VA 
to allocate necessary funds, estimated at $1,500,000 for this 
project.

                         parking revolving fund

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $12,300,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
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 by the administration 
or provided for fiscal year 1998.

       grants for construction of state extended care facilities

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $47,397,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      41,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      80,000,000

                          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.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $80,000,000 for grants for the 
construction of State extended care facilities. The amount 
provided represents an increase of $39,000,000 above the budget 
request and $32,603,000 over the enacted level. The Committee 
notes there is a backlog of 57 priority one projects. The 
amount recommended will significantly reduce this substantial 
backlog. This program is a cost-effective means of meeting the 
long-term health care needs of veterans.
    The Committee notes applications for construction funding 
for veterans homes to be located in Cameron and Warrensburg, 
MO. There is a proven need and substantial State and local 
support for these projects, which are on track to begin 
quickly. Federal funding of $13,200,000 and $13,600,000, 
respectively, will leverage a total of more than $14,000,000 in 
State assistance, and enable the projects to proceed to 
completion swiftly. The Committee urges favorable and 
expeditious review of the construction applications for State 
veterans homes in Cameron and Warrensburg, MO.
    The Committee is aware of the health and safety concerns of 
the residents of the Southeastern Veterans Center in Spring 
City, PA, which is in dire need of a new dietary complex and 
boilerplant. The Committee directs VA to accord this 
construction project priority consideration.

       grants for the construction of state veterans' cemeteries

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      10,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      10,000,000

                          program description

    Public Law 95-476, as codified in title 38 U.S.C. 2408, 
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. A grant may not exceed 50 percent of the total value of 
the land and the cost of improvements.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $10,000,000 
for grants for construction of State veterans' cemeteries in 
fiscal year 1998.
    The Committee notes that substantial State and local 
resources have been committed to efforts to establish veterans 
cemeteries in Springfield and Higginsville, MO. The Committee 
notes that the State of Missouri has committed $2,020,000 and 
$1,760,000 to these respective projects contingent on matching 
funds from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Sites have been 
located and these projects are on track for construction in 
Spring 1998, with projected completion in late Spring 1999, if 
the Federal funds are committed to leverage other funding. The 
Committee asks the Department to thoroughly and expeditiously 
consider applications for cemetery sites in Springfield and 
Higginsville, MO.

                       administrative provisions

    The Committee has included seven administrative provisions 
carried in earlier bills. Included is a provision enabling 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 
$36,000,000 will be reimbursed to the ``General operating 
expenses'' account as a result of this provision.

         TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 1997.................................... $19,453,809,442
Budget estimate, 1998...................................  25,563,255,000
Committee recommendation................................  25,505,255,000

                          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 an appropriation of 
$25,505,255,000 for the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development. This is an increase of $6,051,445,558 above the 
1997 enacted level and a decrease of $58,000,000 below the 
budget estimate.
    Consistent with reforms begun over the last several years 
regarding HUD, the Committee recommends a new account structure 
for HUD, consistent with steps taken by the Congress and the 
Department to consolidate HUD's activities and programs. The 
new housing voucher fund would include activities related to 
the section 8 programs, including the renewal of section 8 
contracts, funding for section 8 contract amendments and 
section 8 relocation assistance. The new public housing 
operating fund would fund the operating costs of the public 
housing program and the new public housing capital fund would 
address the capital needs of public housing, including the 
public housing modernization program. The ``Native American 
housing block grants'' account consolidates most of the funding 
for native American housing activities under a single account, 
consistent with the requirements of the Native American Housing 
Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. Finally, a new 
``Housing for special populations'' account would provide the 
necessary funding for section 202 elderly and section 811 
disabled housing.
    The Committee is concerned about HUD's repeated gestures of 
reinvention. Recently, the Department issued its new management 
plan and its goal of consolidating and eliminating programs. 
The Committee directs the Department to report within 120 days 
of enactment of this legislation on how many programs the 
Department plans to eliminate, what cost savings may be 
associated with the eliminations, and what increased efficiency 
the Department anticipates will be gained by the program 
consolidations (including staff reassignments and reductions).
    The Committee also urges HUD to meet all the requirements 
of the Government Performance and Results Act. The Committee 
advises HUD that consultation with Congress is critical to the 
success of the Results Act and the success of HUD.

                        housing certificate fund

                     (Including Transfer of Funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998................................... $10,676,000,000
Committee recommendation................................  10,693,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The housing voucher fund is a new account designed to fund 
the section 8 programs, including vouchers, certificates, and 
project-based assistance. Section 8 assistance is the principal 
appropriation for Federal housing assistance, with almost 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. For fiscal year 
1998, the House bill provides funding for the renewal of 
expiring section 8 contracts, for section 8 contract 
amendments, and section 8 relocation assistance (including 
sticky vouchers for preservation projects.)

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$10,693,000,000, of which $9,200,000,000 shall be used to fund 
expiring section 8 contracts, $1,150,000,000 shall be used to 
fund contract amendments, and $343,000,000 shall be used to 
fund section 8 relocation assistance, including the costs of 
sticky 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. 
The $9,200,000,000 is the funding fenced under the budget 
agreement to fund fully all expiring section 8 contracts (some 
1.7 million contracts) for fiscal year 1998. This account 
provides $1,150,000,000 for section 8 contract amendments to 
cover funding shortfalls in existing contracts. Finally, this 
account includes funds for new section 8 certificates and 
vouchers to assist residents that are facing displacement due 
to prepayment of subsidized mortgages under sections 236 and 
221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act (the Preservation 
Program) or because of demolition and redevelopment activities 
of public housing agencies under HOPE VI.
    In particular, for projects facing displacement because of 
prepayment, HUD is authorized to provide sticky vouchers which 
permit current residents of such a project to be subsidized 
based on the market rent for a dwelling unit in the project. 
Other eligible funding for this account includes funding for 
the conversion of section 23 projects to assistance under 
section 8, funding to carry out the family unification program, 
and funding for the relocation of witnesses in connection with 
efforts to fight crime in public and assisted housing pursuant 
to a law enforcement or prosecution agency.
    In addition, the Committee believes that section 8 tenant-
based assistance provides a unique opportunity for disabled 
families to have a more diverse housing choice with an 
opportunity to mainstream into a community of choice. In cases 
where elderly public housing and assisted housing projects are 
designated as elderly-only, it is expected that funds under 
this heading be used to provide needed section 8 tenant-based 
housing assistance for disabled families that would otherwise 
be served by public and assisted housing.
    Finally, the Committee reiterates its continuing concern 
over HUD's inability to provide adequate accounting procedures 
for identifying excess section 8 contract reserves. While the 
Department identified on April 17, 1997, some $5,800,000,000 in 
excess section 8 contract reserves, it currently continues to 
express uncertainty over the accuracy of this accounting and 
has contracted with Price Waterhouse for an audit of these 
reserves. The Committee reminds HUD that an accurate fiscal 
forecast of the funding in all HUD programs is critical to 
HUD's credibility and is a requirement to a sound relationship 
with this Committee.

                      PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998...................................  $2,500,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,500,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding for modernization and capital 
needs of public housing authorities (except Indian housing 
authorities), including supportive service activities as well 
as technical assistance. Eligible activities include congregate 
services for the elderly and disabled, service coordinators, 
and other supportive services.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,500,000,000 
for the public housing capital fund. Of the amounts provided 
under this account, $60,000,000 shall be for a public and self-
sufficiency program previously funded under the CDBG program. 
In addition, $10,000,000 of the $60,000,000 is designated for 
the moving-to-work demonstration for public housing families 
and $5,000,000 for the tenant opportunity program. The funding 
for these programs has been transferred from the ``CDBG 
program'' account to the more appropriate ``Public housing 
capital'' account.
    In addition, the Committee commends HUD's work with the 
National Center for Appropriate Technology [NCAT] in assisting 
HUD and public and assisted housing managers to make 
improvements in energy efficiency. Energy efficiency remains an 
important issue as this housing stock gets older and has 
increased repair needs and costs. The Committee urges HUD to 
continue its efforts in ensuring the energy efficiency of the 
public and assisted housing stock.

                     PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998...................................  $2,900,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,900,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This account provides funding for the payment of operating 
subsidies to public housing authorities (except Indian housing 
authorities) to augment rent payments by residents in order to 
provide sufficient revenues to meet reasonable operating costs 
as determined through the performance funding system.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,900,000,000 
for the public housing operating fund. The Committee requests 
GAO to conduct a study on the adequacy of the performance 
funding system and public housing operating funds for the 
management of public housing agencies, including a comparison 
of public housing operating costs with acceptable management 
costs associated with the operation of private rental housing.

             Drug Elimination Grants for Low-Income Housing

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $290,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     290,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     290,000,000

                          Program Description

    Drug elimination grants are provided to public and Indian 
housing agencies to combat drug-related crime in and around 
public housing developments.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $290,000,000 
for drug elimination grants for low-income housing, of which 
$10,000,000 shall be awarded for technical assistance grants, 
$10,000,000 shall be appropriated to fund Operation Safe House 
which is administered by the HUD inspector general, and 
$5,000,000 for administrative cost of the HUD inspector general 
associated with Operation Safe House.

     Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing [HOPE VI]

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $550,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     524,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     550,000,000

                          Program Description

    The ``Revitalization of severely distressed public 
housing'' account is intended to make awards to public housing 
authorities on a competitive basis to demolish obsolete 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 not 
possible to manage in a reasonable manner due to multiple 
deficiencies.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $550,000,000 
for the ``HOPE VI'' account. The Committee urges the Department 
to review the cost of projects under this program, including 
the high cost of replacing units throughout the Nation. HUD 
must administer this program in a manner that is both fiscally 
responsible and responsive to local needs and conditions 
associated with the demolition and reconstruction of the 
housing.
    The Committee has set-aside $50,000,000 for a new 
demonstration within the HOPE VI program which provides for the 
demolition of obsolete elderly public housing projects and the 
replacement, where appropriate, and revitalization of elderly 
public housing as new communities for the elderly designed to 
meet the special needs and physical requirements of the 
elderly. The Committee urges HUD to fund unique and important 
elderly housing projects that provide a link with services, 
health care, and transportation, while emphasizing continued 
independence and self-sufficiency. For example, Heritage House 
in Kansas City offers a unique opportunity to maximum the 
ability of these senior residents to make the transition from a 
deteriorating housing infrastructure to new housing and a new 
and positive environment in a community outside the downtown 
business and commercial district.
    In addition, the Committee wants to ensure that the HOPE VI 
program provides not only physical improvements for 
neighborhoods, but helps to build human and social capital also 
by emphasizing the assets of residents and how to build on 
them. The Committee notes that a February 1997 GAO report 
indicates that housing authorities had budgeted an average of 
13 percent of their HOPE VI money to provide community and 
supportive services, with 81 percent of HOPE VI sites providing 
supportive services. The Committee directs the GAO to continue 
its analysis of the HOPE VI program and report on what 
percentage of HOPE VI grant money is used specifically to 
provide supportive services, and to focus on the effectiveness 
of supportive services offered in helping residents obtain and 
retain employment. The GAO should also comment on the 
effectiveness of HOPE VI grantees in leveraging their money in 
providing support services.

                  NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998...................................    $485,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     485,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This new 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. 
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. In addition, all obligated and unobligated 
balances for Indian tribes from the annual contributions, 
development of additional new subsidized housing, preserving 
existing housing investment, HOME investment partnerships 
program, emergency shelter grants, and homeless assistance 
grants are transferred to this account.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $485,000,000 for the native 
American housing block grant, of which $5,000,000 is set aside 
for a credit subsidy for a demonstration of the section 601 
Loan Guarantee Program. The Senate recommendation is the same 
as the budget request.
    The Committee remains concerned that the administration's 
request may be inadequate for the native American housing block 
grant and may not match up with prior year funding in some 
cases, placing successful programs at risk of failure. The 
Committee requests that HUD report to the Appropriations 
Committee every 6 months with an evaluation, including 
recommendations, of the status of the native American housing 
block grant.

           INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       3,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       6,000,000

                          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 $6,000,000 in program subsidies to 
support a loan guarantee level of $73,800,000. This is 
$3,000,000 more than the fiscal year 1997 appropriation and the 
fiscal year 1998 budget request. This increase emphasizes the 
commitment of the Committee to encourage the use of private 
capital on tribal land.

           CAPITAL GRANTS/CAPITAL LOANS PRESERVATION ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

                          Program Description

    This account provides a structure for continuing a modified 
capital grant/capital loan program for housing preservation 
activities under the Low-Income Housing Preservation and 
Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 [Preservation Program or 
LIHPRHA]. There are currently some 275 projects eligible for 
the Preservation Program with total preservation costs of 
$1,000,000,000.

                        Committee Recommendation

    This account provides funding only to the extent that 
amounts recaptured from interest reduction payments from 
section 236 contracts exceed $250,000,000 in fiscal year 1998. 
Since this funding is unlikely, this account primarily is 
intended to keep the dialog alive on strategies to preserve 
certain affordable low-income housing which otherwise could be 
lost to the available low-income housing stock. Unfortunately, 
the Preservation Program has been sharply criticized recently 
for high sale costs, high rehabilitation costs, and several 
instances of fraud and abuse. The July 1997 GAO report on 
``Housing Preservation: Policies and Administrative Problems 
Increase Costs and Hinder Program Operations'' (GAO/RCED-97-
169) emphasizes these concerns.
    The Committee believes a preservation policy designed to 
maintain this housing for low-income use is necessary to 
preserve this scarce resource. While the administration opposes 
the continuation of the Preservation Program or, in general, 
any preservation program, the new program requirements in this 
account are intended to restrict inflated appraisals and 
rehabilitation costs and address the pressing and serious 
concerns raised by GAO.

                   Community Planning and Development

                      community development grants

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $4,600,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   4,600,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   4,600,000,000

                          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. Pursuant to the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
Housing Act, Indian tribes are eligible to receive 1 percent of 
the total CDBG appropriation, on a competitive basis.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,600,000,000 
for the Community Development Block Grant [CDBG] Program in 
fiscal year 1998. This amount is the same as the 1997 enacted 
level. The Committee has included brownfields cleanup as an 
eligible activity under CDBG and urges communities to work with 
the EPA to maximize the cleanup of brownfields and the return 
of these areas to productive use.
    Set-asides under CDBG include $67,000,000 for native 
Americans; $60,000,000 for the Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
Reduction Program; $2,100,000 for the Housing Assistance 
Council; $1,500,000 for the Native American Indian Housing 
Council; $20,000,000 for the National Community Development 
Initiative, with $10,000,000 targeted to rural and tribal 
areas; $35,000,000 for Youthbuild; $7,000,000 for insular 
areas; $6,500,000 for community development work study; 
$2,000,000 for revitalizing areas of Los Angeles, as provided 
under section 107(b)(7); $7,500,000 for historically black 
colleges and universities, including $1,000,000 for Morgan 
State in Baltimore, MD, for studies related to the fields of 
science and mathematics; and $6,500,000 for community 
development work study, with a $3,000,000 set-aside for 
Hispanic-serving institutions. The Community Outreach Program 
also is funded at $12,000,000, with $2,000,000 for the 
expansion and startup costs associated with the expansion of 
Hofstra University's Business Development Center, $1,000,000 
for St. Louis University for community development activities 
at LeClede Town in St. Louis, and $1,000,000 for the University 
of Colorado with its Health Sciences Center.
    In addition, this legislation includes a $40,000,000 set-
aside within the CDBG program for the economic development 
initiative 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 Program: 
$2,500,000 for enlarging and updating the Scarborough Library 
at Shepherd College in Shepherdstown, WV; $2,000,000 for the 
State of Maryland for brownfields activities in the Baltimore, 
MD, metropolitan region; $2,000,000 for the economic 
redevelopment of downtown Ogden, UT; $2,000,000 for the 
renovation of the Albright-Knox Art Gallery in Buffalo, NY; 
$400,000 for the completion of a regional landfill in Charles 
Mix County, SD; $2,500,000 for the construction of a building 
related to the Bushnell Theater in Hartford, CT; $2,500,000 for 
exhibit and program development at Discovery Place in 
Charlotte, NC; $600,000 for the development of the West Maui 
Community Resource Center in West Maui, HI; $1,500,000 for the 
renovation of the Paramount Theater in Rutland, VT; $1,000,000 
for the Lake Champlain Science Center in Burlington, VT; 
$2,000,000 for the renovation of the Tapley Street Operations 
Center in Springfield, MA; $2,000,000 to develop abandoned 
industrial sites in the city of Perth Amboy, NJ; $2,500,000 to 
the New Mexico Office of Cultural Affairs for the New Mexico 
Hispanic Cultural Center; $400,000 for the Riverbend Research 
and Training Park in Post Falls, ID; $2,500,000 in total 
funding at the University of Missouri including $2,000,000 for 
the plant genetics research unit and $500,000 for the Delta 
Research Telecommunications Resource Center; $2,000,000 for the 
Cleveland Avenue YMCA in Montgomery, AL, to build a cultural 
arts center; and $1,000,000 for Covenant House in Anchorage, 
AK.
    In addition, HUD is required to report on all projects 
funded under EDI, identifying the purpose of a project, the 
economic impact and social utility of a project, and the 
lessons learned from a project that can be applied as a model 
throughout the country.
    The Committee notes that a project at the University of San 
Francisco, related to international business and environmental 
management, is eligible for funding under the EDI program.
    This legislation includes a new rural housing and rural 
economic development demonstration of $42,000,000 within the 
CDBG program. Under this demonstration, HUD is to select 
various sites in rural and tribal areas, including at least one 
tribal area in Alaska, to test out comprehensive approaches to 
leverage additional private and public capital, develop a job 
base through economic revitalization and develop affordable 
low- and moderate-income housing. The Committee especially is 
concerned over the lack of private capital and the 
unaffordability of housing in rural areas. There have been 
reports that the cost of building housing exceeds the appraised 
value of the housing.
    The Committee provides a set-aside of $30,000,000 for 
competitive grants to entities that manage public housing, 
federally assisted multifamily housing, and other low-income 
multifamily housing to reimburse local law enforcement entities 
for increased presence around such housing developments; to 
provide or augment security services; to assist in the 
investigation and/or prosecution of drug-related criminal 
activity in or around such housing; and to provide assistance 
for the development of capital improvements at such housing 
directly relating to the security of such housing.
    In addition, $29,000,000 is provided for the cost of 
guaranteed loans, as authorized under section 108 of the 
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, to subsidize a 
total loan principal not to exceed $1,261,000,000.
    Finally, the President has requested $100,000,000 for 
empowerment zones and communities and $25,000,000 for the 
redevelopment of brownfields. The Committee recommends against 
the empowerment zone funding request because there is no 
authorizing legislation for a second round of empowerment zones 
and enterprise communities. There also are many outstanding 
concerns about the merits of the first competition, as well as 
outstanding concerns about the success of the designated 
empowerment zones, including questions of disorganization, lack 
of effective planning, and questionable use and nonuse of 
funds.
    The Committee also believes that HUD does not have the 
technical or management capacity to administer a brownfields 
program. Nevertheless, brownfields problems plague many cities 
and the Committee believes that it is appropriate that States 
and cities have the flexibility to use their CDBG funds for 
brownfields redevelopment. The Committee urges States and 
cities to consult with the EPA on the technical issues 
associated with brownfields. In addition, the Committee 
recommends against any funding for the bridges to work 
demonstration and advises that the program is considered 
terminated.
    In addition, the Committee remains very concerned about 
HUD's administration of the Church Arson Prevention Act. While 
this act is designed for HUD to guarantee reconstruction loans 
for churches which have been targeted by arson or acts of 
terrorism, the Committee believes that HUD has provided little 
oversight of the loans and the loan activities. The Committee 
directs HUD to provide the Committee within 60 days with a list 
of all requirements and program criteria under the act, a list 
of all loan applicants, and the reason for each funding 
request. Further, the Committee requests a list of all projects 
funded, the amount of each loan guaranteed, and a report on the 
decisionmaking process for the funding decision, including 
which loans were guaranteed on the basis of known arson or hate 
crimes.

                  home investment partnerships program

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $1,400,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   1,309,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,400,000,000

                          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. 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 [CHAS]. 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 $1,400,000,000 
for the HOME Investment Partnership Program. This amount is the 
same level as the 1997 appropriation.

                          homeless assistance

                       HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $823,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     823,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     823,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The ``Homeless Assistance Grants Program'' account is 
intended to fund 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 $823,000,000 for homeless 
assistance grants. The amount recommended is the same amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1997 and the same as the budget 
request for fiscal year 1998.
    The Committee is concerned over questions about the current 
adequacy of funding for the Homeless Assistance Grants Program. 
The Committee expects HUD to provide a full accounting of the 
program, including trends in the costs and activities 
associated with the homeless, with rental costs and the Federal 
share of this cost and strategies for a continuum of care and 
transition to permanent housing.

          Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS [HOPWA]

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $171,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     204,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     204,000,000

                          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 with HIV/
AIDS and their families.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $204,000,000 
for this program, an increase of $33,000,000. The Committee 
remains concerned about the growing costs of this program at a 
time of fiscal constraint. HUD, therefore, is requested to 
submit to the Appropriations Committees no later than January 
15, 1998, a review of the program, including the costs and 
location of each project, including all component costs 
associated with bricks and mortar, supportive services, and 
administrative costs. HUD also is requested to submit 
legislative and administrative reforms designed to cap the 
costs of the program at the current level.

                            Housing Programs

                    Housing for special Populations

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $839,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     474,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     839,000,000

                          Program Description

    This account consolidates the housing for the elderly under 
section 202; housing for the disabled under section 811; and 
public housing for Indian families. Under these programs the 
Department provides capital grants to eligible entities for the 
acquisition, rehabilitation, or construction of housing. 
Twenty-five percent of the funding provided for housing for the 
disabled is available for tenant-based assistance under section 
8.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $839,000,000 
for development of additional new subsidized housing. This is 
an increase of $365,000,000 over the President's request for 
these important programs. Included in this recommendation is 
$645,000,000 for capital advances for housing for the elderly 
and $194,000,000 for capital advances for housing for the 
disabled. These amounts will maintain the current fiscal year 
levels of subsidized housing production for these two programs. 
Up to 25 percent of the funding allocated for housing for the 
disabled can be used to fund section 8 assistance for the 
disabled.
    The Committee is concerned with the state of elderly 
housing, especially in light of departmental requests for 
reduced funding. The Committee directs HUD to report on the 
unmet need for elderly housing in the country, and the physical 
condition of existing elderly housing. HUD's report should also 
include information on what HUD can do to encourage new and 
innovative approaches to providing elderly housing that may 
reduce costs and increase efficiency. This may include 
approaches such as providing continuum of care service at 
residents' housing by facilitating onsite care by service 
providers.

                          MANUFACTURED HOUSING

    The Committee commends the manufactured housing industry 
for its contribution to providing affordable, quality housing 
throughout the Nation. The manufactured housing industry 
contributes over $23,300,000,000 annually to the economy. In 
1995, some 339,000 manufactured homes were built, representing 
an increase of 11.7 percent from 1994. In addition, 
manufactured homes represent over 30 percent of all new homes 
sold in the market today, providing both choice and 
affordability.
    HUD, as regulator for the manufactured housing industry, is 
urged to ensure that it has adequate staffing in the Department 
to meet the needs of this growing industry, especially since 
this program is largely self-funded from industry label fees. 
In addition, the Committee is concerned about possible 
conflicts of interest for companies serving as design approval 
primary inspection agencies [DAPIA's]. The Department is 
directed to review the status of all DAPIA's and comply with 
requirements that prohibit parties from serving as DAPIA's if 
they have a potential conflict of interest.

                     federal housing administration

             fha--mutual mortgage insurance program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Limitation on       Limitation on      Administrative  
                                                         direct loans      guaranteed loans        expenses     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997................................        $200,000,000    $110,000,000,000        $350,595,000
Budget estimate, 1998...............................         200,000,000     110,000,000,000         333,421,000
Committee recommendation............................         200,000,000     110,000,000,000         333,421,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             fha--general and special risk program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Limitation on      Limitation on    Administrative                
                                               direct loans     guaranteed loans      expenses     Program costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997......................       $120,000,000    $17,400,000,000    $207,470,000     $85,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998.....................        120,000,000     17,400,000,000     222,305,000      81,000,000
Committee recommendation..................        120,000,000     17,400,000,000     222,305,000      81,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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.
    Pursuant to the requirements for direct and guaranteed loan 
programs established in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 
of 1990 [OBRA], the administration is requesting a direct 
appropriation for administrative expenses in the ``MMI/CMHI 
program'' account of $333,421,000. Amounts to fund this direct 
appropriation are to be derived from offsetting receipts 
transferred to a ``CMHI receipt'' account. For the ``GI/SRI 
program'' account a direct appropriation of $222,305,000 is 
requested for administrative expenses, and $81,000,000 is 
requested for a credit subsidy to cover the value of expected 
long-run costs associated with fiscal year 1997 insurance 
commitments.
    The amounts for administrative expenses are to be 
transferred from the FHA program accounts to the HUD ``Salaries 
and expenses'' accounts.
    Language is proposed to provide a commitment limitation 
amounting to $110,000,000,000 in the ``MMI/CMHI'' account and 
$17,400,000,000 in the ``GI/SRI'' account.
    In addition, HUD plans to continue direct loan programs in 
1998 for multifamily bridge loans and single family purchase 
money mortgages to finance the sale of certain properties owned 
by the Department. Temporary financing would 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 would 
enable governmental and nonprofit intermediaries to acquire 
properties for resale to owner-occupants in areas undergoing 
revitalization. For the MMI Program, a loan limitation of 
$200,000,000 is requested. For the GI/SRI Program, $120,000,000 
is requested as a loan limitation.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has included the requested amounts for the 
``Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program'' account: a limitation on 
guaranteed loans of $110,000,000,000, a limitation on direct 
loans of $200,000,000, and an appropriation of $333,421,000 for 
administrative expenses. The administrative expenses 
appropriation will be transferred and merged with the sums in 
the Department's ``Salaries and expenses'' account.

                Government National Mortgage Association

                guarantees of mortgage-backed securities

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                        $130,000,000,000

    Administrative expenses

                                                               9,383,000

Budget estimate, 1998:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                         130,000,000,000

    Administrative expenses

                                                               9,383,000

Committee recommendation:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                         130,000,000,000

    Administrative expenses

                                                               9,383,000

                          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 $9,383,000 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 $130,000,000,000. This amount is 
the same level as proposed by the budget request. The Committee 
also has included $9,383,000 for administrative expenses, the 
same as the budget request.

                    Policy Development and Research

                        research and technology

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $34,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      39,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      34,000,000

                          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, 
studies, testing, and demonstrations 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 focus on 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 $34,000,000 for research and 
technology activities in fiscal year 1998. This amount is the 
same as the 1997 level but is $5,000,000 less than the budget 
request. HUD is requested to implement a demonstration to 
develop a system for tracking tenants and prospective tenants 
for purposes of tenant screening under public housing and 
section 8.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

                        fair housing activities

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      39,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      30,000,000

                          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 $30,000,000, of which 
$20,000,000 is for the fair housing assistance program [FHAP] 
and no more than $10,000,000 is for the fair housing 
initiatives program [FHIP]. The Committee is concerned 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 grow their understanding, expertise, and 
implementation of the law.
    In addition, the Committee remains concerned that the HUD 
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity continues to 
pursue regulatory authority over the property insurance 
industry through the Fair Housing Act. While HUD has indicated 
that it does not intend to focus its regulatory authority on 
property insurance requirements, the Committee reminds the 
Department that the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 explicitly 
states that, unless a Federal law specifically relates to the 
business of insurance, that law shall not apply where it would 
interfere with State insurance regulation. HUD assertion of 
authority regarding property insurance regulation contradicts 
this statutory mandate.
    Moreover, HUD's insurance-related activities duplicate 
State regulation of insurance. Every State and the District of 
Columbia have laws and regulations addressing unfair 
discrimination in property insurance and are actively 
investigating and addressing discrimination where it is found 
to occur. HUD's activities in this area create an unwarranted 
and unnecessary layer of Federal bureaucracy.

                     Management and Administration

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfers of funds)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        FHA funds by    GNMA funds by    CGDB funds by                  
                                                                      Appropriation       transfer         transfer         transfer          Total     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997...............................................     $420,000,000     $546,782,000       $9,383,000         $675,000     $976,840,000
Budget estimate, 1998..............................................      451,000,000      544,443,000        9,383,000        1,000,000    1,005,826,000
Committee recommendation...........................................      400,000,000      544,443,000        9,383,000        1,000,000      954,826,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The recommendation includes a single ``Salaries and 
expenses'' account to finance 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 administration support in areas such 
as accounting, personnel management, contracting and 
procurement, and office services.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $954,826,000 
for salaries and expenses. This amount is $22,014,000 less than 
the 1997 appropriation and $51,000,000 less than the budget 
request. The appropriation includes the requested amount of 
$544,443,000 transferred from various funds from the Federal 
Housing Administration, $9,383,000 transferred from the 
Government National Mortgage Association, and $1,000,000 from 
the community development appropriation.
    The Committee does not intend this reduction in HUD's 
salaries and expenses to result in further deficiencies in 
HUD's ability to administer its programs and financial 
responsibilities. Nor does the Committee expect the Department 
to contemplate RIF's or other draconian measures. Nevertheless, 
HUD recently released its new HUD 2020 management reform plan, 
another document of reinvention, which will need to be reviewed 
fully. The Committee expects HUD, before conference on the VA/
HUD fiscal year 1998 appropriations bill, to identify fully all 
staffing costs, staffing reforms, and staffing changes for 
fiscal year 1998 through 2005, as well as a status report on 
HUD's contracting out, including a discussion of savings. 
Reductions in this account shall not result in RIF's, but need 
to reflect management reform and savings. HUD, however, needs 
to be more forthcoming on its staffing requirements. This 
request is consistent with the Government Performance and 
Results Act.

                      Office of Inspector General

                     (including transfer of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Drug                     
                                                                   FHA funds by     elimination                 
                                                   Appropriation     transfer         grants           Total    
                                                                                     transfer                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997............................     $36,567,000     $11,283,000      $5,000,000     $52,850,000
Budget estimate, 1998...........................      36,567,000      11,283,000      10,000,000      57,850,000
Committee recommendation........................      36,567,000      11,283,000      10,000,000      57,850,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This appropriation would 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 $57,850,000 for 
the Office of Inspector General. This amount is $5,000,000 
above the 1997 level, and the same as the budget request. This 
funding level includes $11,283,000 by transfer from various FHA 
funds and $10,000,000 from drug elimination grants, the same 
level as proposed in the budget request.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $15,500,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      16,312,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,500,000

                          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 GSE's, and 
gave the regulator enhanced authority to enforce those 
standards.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $15,500,000 for the Office of 
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is $812,000 less 
than the budget request. The Committee remains concerned that 
OFHEO continues to balloon as a bureaucracy, especially since 
Congress established this office as a small office intended to 
operate only as an early warning system in cases where the 
GSE's are subject to unacceptable financial risk. The Committee 
also is concerned that OFHEO has yet to develop risk-based 
capital standards for the GSE's, as required in its enabling 
act.

                       Administrative Provisions

    Sec. 201. Extenders. Provides a number of public housing 
and section 8 reforms carried over from the VA/HUD 
appropriations bills for fiscal years 1996 and 1997.
    Sec. 202. Delay reissuance of vouchers and certificates. 
Requires vouchers and certificates to be held by the public 
housing agency for 3 months before reissuance.
    Sec. 203. Financing adjustment factors. Provides an 
incentive for refinancing projects financed with FAF bonds to 
lower the cost of section 8 assistance.
    Sec. 204. Annual adjustment factors. Limits the rent 
adjustment calculation for section 8 projects to operating 
costs.
    Sec. 205. Reprograms $7,100,000 in HUD funds from an 
industrial park to 18th and Vine in Kansas City for a Negro 
Leagues Baseball Museum and a jazz museum.
    Sec. 206. Fair housing and free speech. Prohibits 
prosecution of persons under the Fair Housing Act where person 
is engaged in lawful activity.
    Sec. 207. Account transition. Requires HUD to hold all 
program recaptures subject to reprogramming.
    Sec. 208. HUD public notice and comment rulemaking. 
Requires HUD to maintain public notice and comment rulemaking.
    Sec. 209. Brownfields as eligible CDBG activity. Makes 
activities related to brownfields cleanup an eligible activity 
under CDBG.
    Sec. 210. Partial payment of claims on health care 
facilities. Permits partial payment of claims on hospitals and 
health care facilities.
    Sec. 211. FHA multifamily mortgage credit demonstrations. 
Extends HUD's multifamily mortgage insurance risk-sharing 
programs through fiscal year 1998.
    Sec. 212. Calculation of FHA downpayment. Extends for 
fiscal year 1998 the FHA single family streamlined downpayment 
program for Alaska and Hawaii.
    Sec. 213. Section 8 mark-to-market multifamily reform. 
Incorporates the section 8 mark-to-market reform bill, as 
passed by the Senate on June 25, 1997, as subtitle B of title 
II of S. 947, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. This 
comprehensive program would provide options for restructuring 
mortgages and lowering section 8 costs.
    Sec. 214. HOPE VI NOFA. Provides some flexibility for a 
HOPE VI project in New York.
    Sec. 215. Provides HUD flexibility to make rehabilitation 
grants and loans in disposing of HUD-owned and HUD-held 
properties. Nevertheless, the Committee is concerned about 
accountability in making rehabilitation grants and loans from 
the general and special risk insurance funds. HUD, therefore, 
is directed to report to the Committee on January 15, 1999, and 
August 15, 1999, on all rehabilitation grants and loans made 
under this authority, including a description of the 
requirements and criteria of each grant. It is expected that 
HUD is exercising this authority according to written 
guidelines or regulations in the Federal Register.

                    TITLE III--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  American Battle Monuments Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $22,265,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      23,897,000
Committee recommendation................................      23,897,000

                          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 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 cemetery memorials on foreign soil; 17 monuments and 
memorials not a part of the cemeteries; and 4 bronze tablets. 
In addition, the Commission administers four large memorials on 
U.S. soil. It is presently charged with erecting a Korean and a 
World War II war veterans memorial in the Washington, DC, area.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $23,897,000 
for the American Battle Monuments Commission, as requested by 
the administration. This is an increase of $1,632,000 above the 
enacted level.

             Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................
Budget estimate, 1998...................................
Committee recommendation................................      $4,000,000

                          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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for the Chemical Safety 
and Hazard Investigation Board, an increase of $4,000,000 over 
the fiscal year 1997 level and the budget request.

                       Department of the Treasury

              Community Development Financial Institutions

   Community Development Financial Institutions Fund Program Account

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $50,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     125,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

                          Program Description

    The community development financial institutions [CDFI] 
fund would provide grants, loans, and technical assistance to 
new and existing community development financial institutions 
such as community development banks, community development 
credit unions, revolving loan funds, and microloan funds. 
Recipient institutions would be required to support mortgage, 
small business, and economic development lending in currently 
underserved, distressed neighborhoods.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends no funding for the ``CDFI 
program'' account within the Department of the Treasury. The 
Committee is deeply concerned with this program's track record 
of accountability with respect to previously appropriated 
funds. Until safeguards are implemented, the Committee is 
uncomfortable with recommending additional CDFI funding. The 
Committee also requests GAO to conduct an audit on how CDFI 
makes awards and tracks the use of its funding.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $42,500,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      45,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      45,000,000

                          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 $45,000,000 for the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission, the same as the budget estimate and 
$2,500,000 above the current level.

             Corporation for National and Community Service

                national and community service programs

                           operating expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $400,500,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     546,500,000
Committee recommendation................................     400,500,000

                          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-time national and community service 
programs. National service participants may receive educational 
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 of the Corporation. Board 
members and the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation are 
appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed 
by the Senate.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $400,500,000 
for the Corporation for National and Community Service. Of this 
amount, $59,000,000 is for educational awards; $215,000,000 is 
for grants under the National Service Trust, including the 
AmeriCorps program; $5,500,000 is for the Points of Light 
Foundation; $18,000,000 is for the Civilian Community Corps; 
$43,000,000 is available for school-based and community-based 
service-learning programs; $30,000,000 is for quality and 
innovation activities; $25,000,000 is administrative expenses; 
and $5,000,000 is for audits and other evaluations. The total 
amount appropriated and each of the program earmarks are 
identical to the level appropriated for fiscal year 1997.

                      Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $2,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       2,500,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,000,000

                          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 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 $3,000,000 for 
the Office of Inspector General. This is $1,000,000 more than 
the amount appropriated for this Office in fiscal year 1997 and 
$500,000 more than the budget request.

                     U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $9,229,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       9,380,000
Committee recommendation................................       9,320,000

                          program description

    The Court of Veterans Appeals was established by the 
Veterans' Judicial Review Act. The court has 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 
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 $9,320,000 for the Court of 
Veterans Appeals, a decrease of $60,000 below the budget 
estimate and an increase of $91,000 above the 1997 level. The 
recommendation includes $790,000 for the pro bono 
representation program.
    The Committee's recommendation reflects full funding for 
the court's operations, and the revised estimate for the pro 
bono program, which is $60,000 less than the amount originally 
proposed for fiscal year 1998 but an increase of $90,000 over 
the fiscal year 1997 level. The Committee remains very 
supportive of the pro bono program and urges the Legal Services 
Corporation, which administers the program, to release grant 
funds to the pro bono consortium in an expeditious manner.

                      Department of Defense--Civil

                       Cemeterial Expenses, Army

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $11,600,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      11,815,000
Committee recommendation................................      11,815,000

                          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, 1992, 
Arlington and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemeteries 
contained the remains of 246,023 persons and comprised a total 
of approximately 628 acres. There were 3,353 interments and 
1,662 inurnments in fiscal year 1995; 3,500 interments and 
1,800 inurnments are estimated for the current fiscal year; and 
3,500 interments and 1,900 inurnments are estimated for fiscal 
year 1997.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $11,815,000 
for the Army's cemeterial expenses. This amount is $215,000 
above the 1997 enacted level.

                    Environmental Protection Agency

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $6,799,393,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   7,645,493,000
Committee recommendation................................   6,975,920,000

                          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 [CAA] of 1990 authorize 
a national program of air pollution research, regulation, 
prevention, and enforcement activities.
    Water quality.--The Clean Water Act [CWA], as amended in 
1977, 1981, and 1987, 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 [SDWA] 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 [RCRA] 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.
    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 Federal 
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act [FIFRA] and the 
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [FFDCA] 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 [TSCA] 
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 [CERCLA] 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 [SARA]. 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 [SARA] 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 $6,975,920,000 for EPA. 
This is a decrease of $669,573,000 below the budget request and 
an increase of $176,527,000 above the current budget.
    With the exception of funding for Superfund, the total 
amount recommended for EPA comes close to that suggested by the 
budget agreement. Significant increases are recommended in the 
areas of particulate matter research and monitoring, 
implementation activities associated with the new food quality 
and safe drinking water laws, leaking underground storage tank 
grants, State and tribal environmental assistance grants, and 
State revolving loan funds. Given that the Superfund Program 
remains a troubled program badly in need of reform and 
reauthorization, coupled with the constraints imposed by the 
budget allocation, justification could not be made to increase 
significantly funding for the Superfund Program.
    The agency is directed to notify the Committee prior to 
each reprogramming in excess of $500,000 between programs and 
activities, when those reprogrammings are for different 
purposes. The exceptions to this limitation are as follows: (1) 
for the ``Environmental programs and management'' account, 
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, 1997 \1\................................    $552,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998 \1\...............................     614,269,400
Committee recommendation \1\............................     600,000,000

\1\ Does not include transfer from Superfund account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $600,000,000 for science and 
technology, an increase of $48,000,000 over the enacted level, 
and a decrease of $14,269,400 below the budget request. In 
addition, the Committee recommends the transfer of $35,000,000 
from the Superfund account, for a total of $635,000,000 for 
science and technology.
    The Committee has made the following changes to the budget 
request:
  +$8,000,000 for a comprehensive extramural research 
        initiative on particulate matter [PM], in addition to 
        the $26,600,000 in the budget request for PM research. 
        The funds provided are to be used to create up to five 
        university-based research centers selected through a 
        competitive peer review process. The centers program 
        should seek to address the most pressing unanswered 
        questions involved in the air particulates field. A 
        governing criteria for the selection of the proposed 
        centers should be their ability to bring together 
        public health scientists, environmental engineers, 
        economists, and policy analysts to undertake intensive 
        cost-benefit analysis of various PM control strategies. 
        This initiative is to complement, and be closely 
        coordinated with, the base PM research program.
  +$2,000,000 for the Water Environment Research Foundation 
        cooperative research program.
  +$3,000,000 for the American Water Works Association Research 
        Foundation.
  +$1,750,000 to the National Jewish Medical and Research 
        Center for research on the relationship between indoor 
        and outdoor pollution and the development of 
        respiratory diseases.
  +$2,000,000 for the Lovelace Respiratory Institute to 
        establish a National Environmental Respiratory Center 
        to coordinate research and information transfer 
        concerning health risks of breathing airborne 
        contaminants in the environment.
  +$1,000,000 for the Center for Air Toxic Metals at the Energy 
        and Environmental Research Center.
  +$1,000,000 for the Texas Regional Institute for 
        Environmental Studies to identify and test new cost-
        effective environmental restoration technologies.
  +$1,000,000 for the Institute for Environmental and 
        Industrial Science to develop new technologies for 
        controlling radioactive waste, solid waste, and other 
        emissions.
  +$2,500,000 for EPA's experimental program to stimulate 
        competitive research [EPSCoR].
  +$500,000 for the clean air status and trends network.
  +$1,500,000 for Johns Hopkins University's School of Hygiene 
        and Public Health to establish a National Center for 
        Environmental Toxicology and Epidemiology. The center 
        will advance the Nation's understanding of the effect 
        of urban toxics on human health, and assist in 
        designing cost-effective preventive strategies focused 
        on mitigating their adverse health effects.
  +$1,000,000 to establish the Center for Estuarine and Coastal 
        Ocean Environmental Research to coordinate and further 
        ongoing coastal and environmental research being 
        conducted at the University of South Alabama.
  +$1,500,000 for the Integrated Petroleum Environmental 
        Consortium.
  -$5,000,000 from the climate change action plan program, 
        leaving $17,000,000 in this account for this program, 
        an increase of 7 percent over the fiscal year 1997 
        level.
  -$7,000,000 from the increase requested for graduate academic 
        fellowships, leaving $8,000,000.
  -$8,000,000 from the new Environmental Monitoring for Public 
        Access and Community Tracking Program, leaving 
        $7,000,000 for this new initiative.
  -$21,019,400 as a general reduction.
    The amount provided for Superfund research includes 
$6,000,000 for the Mine Waste Technology Evaluation Program and 
Berkeley pit integrated demonstration activities through the 
National Environmental Waste Technology Testing and Evaluation 
Center, full funding for the Hazardous Substance Research 
Center, $2,500,000 for the Gulf Coast Hazardous Substance 
Research Center, and not less than $7,000,000 for the Superfund 
Innovative Technology Evaluation [SITE] Program. The Committee 
believes the SITE Program has been successful and there 
continues to be a significant need for innovative cleanup 
technologies. According to EPA's Science Advisory Board, the 
program's accomplishments have been impressive.
    The Committee's recommendation includes full funding, 
$36,000,000, for drinking water research, with priority given 
to research on microbial contamination.
    With respect to the $26,600,000 requested by the 
administration and recommended by the Committee for particulate 
matter research, EPA is directed to contract with the National 
Academy of Sciences to develop a research agenda to allocate 
these funds.
    Although EPA will be issuing a revised standard for 
particulate matter, the Administrator has indicated that this 
standard will have no regulatory impact until after the next 
review which would occur in July 2002 under the requirements of 
the Clean Air Act. The Committee understands that substantial 
additional scientific information that would be useful in 
validating or revising the standard can be gathered through 
carefully directed scientific research before that date. 
Therefore, the Committee directs that the National Academy of 
Sciences convene an independent panel of scientists to provide 
recommendations for research priorities. The Administrator is 
to transmit the recommendations of this panel to Congress not 
later than February 1998 and be guided by the recommendations 
of the panel in selecting research projects to support with the 
appropriated funds. The Committee expects that this process 
would also allow comment by other interested parties, including 
appropriate Federal agencies and nongovernmental entities.
    All particulate matter research activities are to be peer-
reviewed, and should be appropriately balanced among extramural 
competitive grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts to 
institutions of higher education, national and private sector 
laboratories, as well as intramural studies and contracts.
    Finally, EPA is directed to report to the Committee on the 
specific plans for the PM research program as the program 
develops.
    The Committee directs EPA to provide adequate resources to 
fund the university portion of the southern oxidants study on 
the formation of ozone pollution, its effects, and alternate 
strategies for its reduction.
    The Committee continues to have concerns with the quality 
of research at EPA. Sound science should be the basis for EPA 
regulatory actions, and strong peer review procedures are a 
critical element of ensuring the best quality research. Within 
the last year the General Accounting Office found that EPA's 
implementation of the Agency's peer review policy was uneven. 
GAO found that in some cases peer review was not conducted at 
all, or aspects of the peer review policy were ignored. GAO 
found inadequate accountability and oversight to ensure that 
all work products which should be peer reviewed were, in fact, 
peer reviewed. GAO recommended that EPA ensure that staff and 
managers are educated as to (1) the need for and benefits of 
peer review, (2) what constitutes proper peer review practices, 
and (3) their peer review responsibilities; and that EPA expand 
the list of products nominated for peer review.
    The Committee strongly supports GAO's recommendations and 
expects EPA will implement them. In response to GAO's report, 
the Deputy Administrator issued a memorandum to clarify and 
strengthen the peer review policy, which was a good first step. 
The Committee expects peer review will be a top priority within 
EPA and that mechanisms will be instituted to ensure that 
managers are held accountable for implementing the peer review 
policy. Within 90 days of enactment of this act, EPA is to 
submit a report addressing how it has responded to GAO's 
recommendations and the steps it has taken to ensure 
accountability for peer review policy implementation.
    As part of its continuing interest in verification of cost-
effective remediation technologies, the Committee is aware of 
the public-private sector effort in Hawaii to demonstrate and 
ultimately commercialize agriculturally based environmental 
remediation technologies. The diverse climatic and biologic 
conditions in this tropical state offer a range of verification 
and demonstration activities not possible in other parts of the 
United States. EPA should give strong consideration to funding 
a proposal by the Hawaii Institute of Tropical Agriculture and 
Human Resources to address this innovative means of 
environmental restoration.
    The Committee is aware of ground water remediation 
technology which has been developed by the International 
Research Center for Groundwater Research. This technology shows 
great potential to reduce the costs of ground water remediation 
significantly. EPA should consider testing this technology 
through the environmental technology verification program.
    The Committee urges EPA to give priority to the soil 
aquifer treatment research program for indirect potable reuse 
of highly treated domestic wastewater being conducted in 
California and Arizona.
    The Committee notes that the use of site-specific or 
precision farming has tremendous potential to improve ground 
water quality by minimizing runoff of excess agricultural 
chemicals. Yet much of the data gathered by global positioning 
satellites for site-specific farming uses has not been verified 
at the field level. EPA is strongly encouraged through the 
advanced measurement initiative to obtain the necessary 
satellite data and undertake a demonstration project at North 
Dakota State University comparing such satellite data to field-
gathered data from the Oakes irrigation test area in southeast 
North Dakota.
    The Committee notes with interest the innovative approach 
to clean air research being developed by the city of Houston in 
its Houston air excellence and leadership [HAXL] program, which 
seeks to identify ways in which air pollution control policy 
can be targeted toward the precise pollutants that cause the 
most serious health impacts in a particular city or region. 
This unique, multipollutant strategy aims to maximize health 
benefits and cost efficiency by focusing on the specific needs 
of each particular area. The Committee notes that the Houston 
area suffers some of the most severe and complex air quality 
problems in the United States. EPA is urged to provide support 
to this innovative program.
    The Committee has not included proposed bill language 
relative to the environmental services fund.

                 environmental programs and management

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $1,752,221,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   1,887,590,900
Committee recommendation................................   1,801,000,000

                          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; compliance assurance; and 
assistance to Federal agencies in complying with environmental 
standards and insuring that their activities have minimal 
environmental impact.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $1,801,000,000 for environmental 
programs and management, an increase of $48,779,000 above the 
1997 level and a decrease of $86,590,900 below the budget 
request.
    The Committee has made the following changes from the 
budget request:
  +$5,025,000 for rural water technical assistance activities, 
        for a total of $13,025,000, including $7,900,000 for 
        the National Rural Water Association; $2,100,000 for 
        the Rural Community Assistance Program; $400,000 for 
        the Groundwater Protection Council; $75,000 for the 
        National Groundwater Foundation; $1,000,000 for the 
        National Environmental Training Center; and $1,550,000 
        for the small flows clearinghouse.
  +$3,000,000 to continue the demonstration project involving 
        leaking fuel tanks in rural Alaska villages.
  +$250,000 for the Nature Conservancy of Alaska for protection 
        of the Kenai River watershed.
  +$1,250,000 to continue the onsite wastewater treatment 
        demonstration program through the small flows 
        clearinghouse, including efforts initiated last year in 
        flood-ravaged areas.
  +$3,000,000 for the Southwest Center for Environmental 
        Research and Policy.
  +$1,000,000 for the Sacramento River Toxic Pollutant Control 
        Program.
  +$500,000 for the continuation of the small water system 
        cooperative initiative at Montana State University.
  +$500,000 for a small public water system technology center 
        at Western Kentucky University.
  +$2,000,000 for the New York City watershed protection 
        program.
  +$750,000 for the Chesapeake Bay program to initiate a small 
        watershed grants program for the implementation of 
        cooperative tributary basic strategies that address the 
        bay's water quality and living resource needs.
  +$1,000,000 for the national decentralized water resources 
        public-private capacity development project.
  +$1,000,000 to continue the sediment decontamination 
        technology in the New York-New Jersey harbor.
  +$500,000 for the Treasure Valley hydrologic project.
  +$2,500,000 for King County, WA, for a molten carbonate fuel 
        cell demonstration project at the Renton wastewater 
        treatment plant.
  +$800,000 for the National Center for Vehicle Emissions 
        Control and Safety to establish an On-Board Diagnostic 
        Research Center.
  +$500,000 to continue the Small Business Pollution Prevention 
        Center at the University of Northern Iowa.
  +$500,000 to continue the Compliance Assistance Center for 
        Painting and Coating Technology.
  +$200,000 to complete the cleanup of Five Island Lake.
  +$500,000 for the Ala Wai Canal watershed improvement 
        project.
  +$400,000 to continue the Maui algal bloom project.
  +$100,000 for the Design for the Environment for Farmers 
        Program to address the unique environmental concerns of 
        the American Pacific and the need to develop and adopt 
        sustainable agricultural practices for these fragile 
        tropical ecosystems.
  +$1,500,000 for the Lake Champlain management plan.
  +$600,000 for the final year of funding for the solar aquatic 
        wastewater treatment demonstration in Burlington, VT, 
        to be cost-shared by the participants. The Committee 
        does not intend to recommend funding for additional 
        solar aquatic wastewater treatment demonstrations in 
        view of EPA's assessment that this technology does not 
        appear to offer any economic advantages over 
        conventional technologies.
  +$1,000,000 for the Alabama Department of Environmental 
        Management to coordinate a model water/wastewater 
        operating training program. This program will not 
        duplicate, but will build upon and coordinate with 
        other similar technical assistance programs.
  +$150,000 to establish a regional training center at the 
        Kentucky Onsite Wastewater Center.
  +$550,000 for the Idaho water initiative.
  +$1,000,000 for Lake Weequahic cleanup efforts.
  +$1,750,000 for the Three Rivers watershed protection 
        demonstration project, to develop an overall master 
        plan to eliminate more than 40 separate sanitary sewer 
        overflows in the Three Rivers area of Allegheny County, 
        PA.
  +$750,000 to continue the Resource and Agricultural Policy 
        Systems Program.
  +$1,250,000 for the design of an innovative granular 
        activated carbon water treatment project in Oahu.
  +$500,000 for a small public water system technology center 
        at the University of Missouri-Columbia.
  +$2,000,000 for the Food and Agricultural Policy Research 
        Institute's Missouri Watershed initiative project to 
        link economic and environmental data with ambient water 
        quality.
  +$1,500,000 for the National Alternative Fuels Training 
        Program.
  +$500,000 for a study of dioxin levels in the Ohio River 
        Basin.
  +$300,000 for the California Urban Environmental Research and 
        Education Center.
  +$1,000,000 to continue the implementation of a wetlands-
        based potable water reuse program for the city of West 
        Palm Beach.
  +$700,000 for the Long Island Sound office.
  +$2,000,000 for the University of Missouri Agroforestry 
        Center to support the agroforestry floodplain 
        initiative. The Committee understands that this is a 
        partnership effort to develop and apply appropriate 
        agroforestry systems to resist and mitigate the impacts 
        of nonpoint source pollution and flooding on lands in 
        the Mississippi and Missouri River basins.
  +$300,000 for the Northeast States for coordinated air use 
        management.
  -$10,000,000 from the increase requested for sustainable 
        development challenge grants, leaving $5,000,000 for 
        this program.
  -$9,000,000 from the Montreal Protocol Facilitation Fund, 
        leaving $12,000,000.
  -$52,300,000 from the climate change action plan, leaving 
        $75,000,000 for this program, an increase of 7 percent 
        above fiscal year 1997. The Committee notes that in a 
        recent report, the General Accounting Office raised 
        questions as to the accuracy of the reported reductions 
        associated with certain of the climate change action 
        plan programs, including the Green Lights Program. With 
        respect to Green Lights, GAO found that the projected 
        reductions are based on an assumption that the 
        participants will upgrade a larger proportion of their 
        space than they have thus far. The Committee continues 
        to believe these programs do not merit the significant 
        increases requested by the administration and that the 
        outcomes of these programs to date have fallen very 
        short of agency goals. In addition, a report conducted 
        by Resources for the Future on voluntary programs 
        intended to reduce pollution found that such Federal 
        programs ``do not address most of the important 
        problems with the pollution control system nor do they 
        appear to contribute significantly to improving 
        environmental quality or safety.''
  -$10,000,000 from the new environmental monitoring for public 
        access and community tracking program.
  -$2,000,000 from rental costs, to reflect latest agency 
        estimates.
  -$1,000,000 from GLOBE.
  -$44,915,900 as a general reduction.
    The Committee continues to support all efforts to implement 
recommendations contained in the National Academy of Public 
Administration's 1995 report, ``Setting Priorities, Getting 
Results: A New Direction for EPA.'' While supportive of EPA's 
new planning, budgeting, and accountability system--which was 
put in place to meet NAPA's recommendations as well as the 
requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act 
[GPRA]--the Committee is concerned that EPA's fiscal year 1998 
budget submission did not seem to reflect a new disciplined 
budget system. Further, much remains to be done to develop a 
meaningful, performance-oriented system of planning, budgeting, 
and accountability for agency programs and activities. In 
addition, at present there are many concerns with EPA's draft 
strategic plan as it relates to GPRA requirements.
    According to the General Accounting Office, ``EPA faces 
long-term challenges to obtain the scientific and environmental 
information needed to support its new system fully. Although 
much scientific and environmental information has already been 
collected, many gaps exist, and the data are often difficult to 
compile because different data collection methods have been 
used. Likewise, much effort is still needed to identify, 
develop, and reach agreement on a comprehensive set of 
environmental measures to link the agency's activities to 
changes in human health and environmental conditions.'' EPA has 
tried previously to implement a planning, budgeting, and 
accountability system--without success. It is expected that EPA 
will afford a high priority to addressing these complex issues. 
EPA is directed to submit a report to the Committee within 90 
days of enactment of this act, outlining its strategy, 
benchmarks, and timeline for addressing the system's current 
shortcomings as described by GAO.
    The Committee notes that NAPA will soon be releasing its 
evaluation of the steps EPA has taken to implement the NAPA 
recommendations. The Committee will give close attention to 
this evaluation and to the agency's response, especially 
concerning the recent reorganization of agency planning and 
budgeting functions, reorganization of responsibilities for 
environmental statistics, and progress in providing regulatory 
and management flexibility that facilitate improved 
environmental performance. The Committee also directed the 
agency to begin work on draft legislation that would integrate 
its various statutory responsibilities. The Committee looks 
forward to receiving the Academy's recommendations and those of 
the agency on this important issue.
    The Committee is concerned with the proliferation of new 
initiatives at EPA over the past several years, which makes it 
increasingly difficult to focus on the highest priority areas. 
The Committee concurs with recommendations contained in an EPA 
management review that EPA should develop goals and objectives 
for agency initiatives and define measures of success for 
tracking progress. Any new initiatives should be considered 
through a risk-based planning, budgeting, and accountability 
system which affords as the highest priorities those activities 
offering the largest opportunity to reduce risk to human health 
and the environment.
    The Committee is disappointed with EPA's recent decision to 
create a new Center for Environmental Information and 
Statistics within the Office of Policy, Planning, and 
Evaluation. NAPA recommended the creation of an independent 
office for environmental information and statistics to ensure 
that it be a neutral and credible data source. EPA's decision 
to place a center within OPPE is inconsistent with NAPA's 
recommendation. The Committee believes EPA should place the new 
Center for Environmental Information and Statistics directly 
and solely under the chief information officer to integrate and 
improve the quality of environmental statistics provided by the 
agency's various information systems and to be an authoritative 
source, independent of policy and regulatory activities, of 
credible statistics about environmental conditions.
    The Committee continues to support a true partnership 
between EPA and the States in implementing the Nation's 
environmental management system. There are serious concerns 
with various actions taken by EPA recently which would suggest 
that EPA is not willing to recognize the States fully as 
partners. Since most of the implementation and enforcement of 
environmental programs occurs at the State level, the Committee 
expects EPA leadership will take decisive steps to devolve 
responsibility to the States, reduce oversight, provide 
flexibility, and treat States as equal partners.
    The Committee believes EPA should play a stronger role in 
enhancing opportunities for industry to export environmental 
technologies to other countries. The Committee urges EPA to 
develop a strategy to coordinate and promote the export of 
environmental technology and services and coordinate such 
efforts with other Federal agencies. The Committee intends to 
track EPA's activities on this front.
    The Committee is aware that EPA is in the process of 
dramatically expanding access to information it has collected 
across many of its program offices. The Agency is achieving 
this goal by enhancing its information systems to communicate 
information using computer networks, such as the Internet. 
These networks have provided EPA with an easy means of placing 
very large quantities of data into readily accessible open-
source public data bases. The Committee recognizes that 
increased access to regulatory information can promote public 
awareness regrading the Nation's economy and environmental 
conditions. A more informed public may also be in a better 
position to evaluate Government programs. However, public data 
bases can be subject to abuses which could facilitate economic 
espionage, thereby eroding U.S. competitiveness in the global 
marketplace. To obtain a better understanding of how individual 
data elements can be collected from multiple data bases, in a 
way that allows foreign competitors to successfully reverse 
engineer technologies and processes that would otherwise 
provide a competitive advantage to U.S. firms, the Committee 
directs GAO to undertake a study to:
    (1) Assess the extent to which EPA currently makes 
accessible (and plans to make accessible) to the public, 
information that is valuable to competitive intelligence agents 
who conduct reverse engineering or other means of economic 
espionage;
    (2) Identify the types of data that are of greatest value 
to competitive intelligence agents, and identify EPA's public 
data bases, if any, that contain these type of data;
    (3) Describe the processes employed by competitive 
intelligence agents who compile open-source data for 
competitive profiling, and estimate the costs associated with 
these processes;
    (4) Evaluate the threat to U.S. competitiveness, if any, 
posed by EPA's current and proposed public data bases;
    (5) Identify the scope of EPA's current protections of 
sensitive business information, and assess the adequacy of 
those protections; and
    (6) Recommend options for preventing the loss of sensitive 
economic and proprietary information of U.S. businesses through 
EPA's public data bases.
    The Committee is aware of a unique proposal developed by 
Fort Scott, KS, for providing additional tertiary wastewater 
treatment via a constructed wetland which will improve the 
quality of the Marmaton River. EPA is directed to consider 
strongly funding such a proposal under section 104(b)(3) of the 
Clean Water Act.
    The Committee strongly encourages EPA to promulgate the 
Cluster Rule for the pulp and paper industry. The pulp and 
paper industry has waited almost 4 years for this rule to be 
issued. The need for this rule is clear. Further delay will 
harm the environment and prevent industry from proceeding with 
capital planning.
    The Committee urges EPA to form a citizens advisory council 
to address current waste removal plans as well as long-term 
plans for the Dalecarlia Treatment Plant.
    The Committee urges EPA to give careful consideration to 
the establishment of a Small Public Water Systems Technology 
Assistance Center at West Virginia University and at the 
University of New Hampshire pursuant to provision of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act Amendments.
    The Committee is aware that the Lake Champlain Basin 
Program has begun a sister lake partnership with Lake Orchid in 
the former Soviet Union. This initiative shows great promise 
and the Committee urges EPA to look to it as a model for its 
own program.
    The Committee supports the full budget request for south 
Florida (Everglades) restoration activities (with the exception 
of opening a new EPA office in south Florida), the National 
Estuary Program, the Chesapeake Bay Program including a new air 
deposition initiative, and the Great Lakes national program 
office.
    Within the National Estuary Program adequate funding should 
be provided to Sarasota Bay, Buzzards Bay, and Massachusetts 
Bay. The Committee directs EPA to fund the following programs 
at no less than current levels: the environmental finance 
centers, the water quality testing program along the New Jersey 
and New York shorelines, the Great Waters Program, and the 
Environmental Research Laboratory.
    The Committee is concerned that EPA may not be adhering 
carefully to the Environmental Programs Assistance Act with 
respect to making grants or cooperative agreements to utilize 
the talents of older Americans in providing technical 
assistance. The Committee urges EPA to make grants to and enter 
into cooperative agreements with organizations under the 
Environmental Programs Assistance Act if such organizations are 
designated by the Department of Labor under title V of the 
Older Americans Act. The Committee notes that Green Thumb, 
Inc., has an exemplary record of success under title V of the 
Older Americans Act.
    The Committee notes the urgent problems associated with 
zebra mussel infestation in Lake Champlain, which threatens the 
water systems of 25 percent of Vermont's residents. EPA is 
urged to provide support to exploring new ways to control zebra 
mussels in Lake Champlain.
    EPA is urged to provide assistance to the city of 
Gainesville, FL, for an innovative stormwater management 
project to protect the Floridian aquifer from stormwater 
runoff.
    The Committee recognizes the special rigors imposed on 
residents of the Northwest Arctic Borough by harsh arctic 
environmental conditions and the lack of sanitation facilities. 
EPA is directed to conduct a feasibility study, in conjunction 
with the Corps of Engineers, for a potential pilot project 
demonstrating innovative alternatives to the existing haul-
water drinking water and honey bucket human waste disposal 
systems, in consultation with the Public Health Service and the 
Indian Health Service.
    The Committee is concerned that permitting for new oil and 
gas projects in Alaska not be delayed and that permits for 
these projects be processed in a timely and expeditious 
fashion. Given the importance of these new developments to the 
State of Alaska and the Nation, the Committee expects that the 
budget request accounts for the projected increased demand on 
permitting resources. Should the agency not be able to meet 
permit time lines for new developments in a timely and 
expeditious fashion, the Committee expects to receive from the 
agency a report and, if necessary, a reprogramming request to 
make necessary funds available to meet timely permit processing 
milestones.
    The Committee is aware that the EPA continues to suggest 
that emissions from distilled spirits aging warehouses must be 
regulated under the Clean Air Act. The aging of distilled 
spirits is a natural process by which distilled spirit products 
derive their inherent characteristics, including color, taste, 
and aroma. Altering this aging process by imposing emission 
control technology on aging warehouses would inflict an 
unreasonable adverse effect on the maturation process for these 
products and thereby jeopardize the desired quality and 
uniqueness of each distilled spirits brand. Therefore, the 
Committee directs EPA to reevaluate their present position and 
work with the distilled spirits industry to assure that the 
quality of their products is not jeopardized because of 
unnecessary regulation and lack of flexibility on the part of 
the Agency.
    The Committee notes that the Coordinated Tribal Water 
Quality Program in Washington is a model for demonstrating how 
tribes can solve their water quality protection problems by 
coordinating with local, State, and Federal Government 
agencies. EPA is strongly urged to continue providing 
assistance to this model program.
    The Committee urges EPA to continue to support within 
available funds the Sokaogon Chippewa community's efforts to 
assess the environmental impacts of a proposed sulfide mine 
project and contribute adequate and up-to-date information to 
Federal agencies reviewing the mine proposal.
    The Committee has not included proposed bill language 
relative to the environmental services fund.

                      office of inspector general

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $28,500,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      28,500,000
Committee recommendation................................      28,500,000

                          program description

    The Office of Inspector General provides EPA audit and 
investigative functions to identify and recommend corrective 
actions of management, program, and administrative deficiencies 
which create conditions for existing or potential instances of 
fraud, waste, and mismanagement.
    Trust fund resources are transferred to this account 
directly from the hazardous substance Superfund.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $40,141,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General, the same as the budget request. The 
appropriation includes $28,500,000 from the general fund in 
this account and $11,641,000 from the Superfund trust fund. The 
trust fund resources will be transferred to the inspector 
general ``General fund'' account with an expenditure transfer.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $87,220,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     141,420,000
Committee recommendation................................      19,420,000

                          program description

    The appropriation for buildings and facilities at EPA 
covers the necessary 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 $19,420,000 for buildings and 
facilities. The decrease of $122,000,000 below the request 
reflects the Committee's recommendation not to provide 
additional funds for the new Research Triangle Park [RTP] 
laboratory project at this time.
    The Committee notes there are significant space and safety 
concerns associated with EPA's Edison Laboratory, which houses 
the national headquarters of the environmental response team as 
well as supporting EPA's region II routine analytic 
requirements. EPA is directed to assess whether this facility 
should be replaced, based on an overall assessment of EPA 
laboratory facility requirements nationwide and cost-benefit 
analyses of maintaining, replacing, or consolidating 
facilities. If appropriate, EPA should propose funding for this 
project in the fiscal year 1999 budget submission.
    The Committee is aware of and interested in a recent 
proposal to construct a solid oxide fuel cell/gas turbine power 
system demonstration plant at EPA's new Fort Meade research 
facility. Such systems show great promise in producing and 
providing efficient, low polluting power resources. The 
Committee would, therefore, entertain a future budget request 
by the Agency to construct such a facility.

                     hazardous substance superfund

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $1,394,245,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   2,094,245,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,400,000,000

                          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.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $1,400,000,000 for Superfund. This 
represents an increase of $5,755,000 above the current budget. 
The amount provided includes $250,000,000 from general 
revenues, as authorized, and the balance from the trust fund.
    The amount recommended includes the following:
  --$903,000,000 for the response program. This includes the 
        President's full request for brownfields.
  --$174,000,000 for enforcement.
  --$35,000,000 for research and development.
  --$125,000,000 for management and support.
  --$68,000,000 for the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
        Registry, including $2,500,000 for the Great Lakes fish 
        consumption study. In addition, ATSDR should provide 
        adequate funds to continue the Dover Township, NJ, 
        cancer cluster studies.
  --$55,500,000 for the National Institute of Environmental 
        Health Sciences, including $23,000,000 for worker 
        training grants and $32,500,000 for research.
  --$39,500,000 for other Federal agencies.
    The amount provided is the same as that originally 
projected for fiscal year 1998 in the President's fiscal year 
1997 budget. No sound explanation has been provided as to why 
this program became the administration's highest EPA priority 
for fiscal year 1998 and merits a 50-percent increase in 
funding. It has generally been recognized that funds invested 
in this program yield relatively little reduction in risk to 
human health and the environment compared to investments 
targeted at addressing other environmental problems.
    The Committee has numerous concerns with the Superfund 
budget request in addition to the fact that on a risk 
continuum, the program ranks relatively low. First, there are 
many questions with whether EPA could allocate effectively and 
appropriately the 50-percent increase it has requested. The 
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management 
Officials stated: ``We don't know whether there is enough 
pending work for the full $700,000,000 in additional funds 
requested in fiscal year 1998, nor that the infrastructure 
exists to spend it effectively.'' Indeed, EPA's budget request 
for Superfund was premised on a resource methodology--not 
actual site data--which was developed to support a goal of 
achieving 900 site completions by the year 2000. The 
methodology uses inflated pricing factors, according to 
Congressional Budget Office analysis, and has other significant 
flaws raising serious questions about its usefulness.
    The Committee is also troubled by recent findings of the 
General Accounting Office relative to Superfund administrative 
reforms. GAO found that EPA has not yet demonstrated 
accomplishments for most reforms despite EPA's claims that the 
reforms have resulted in significant, fundamental and 
demonstrable changes in the program. GAO also found that the 
implementation of the administrative reforms was inconsistent.
    GAO has also reported that approximately $250,000,000 is 
available in unspent obligated funds in the Superfund Program 
to be recovered from over 6,000 completed work orders and 
assistance agreements. EPA is directed to provide necessary 
resources and incentives to enhance its deobligation efforts, 
so as to increase resources available for site cleanups.
    While the Committee is supportive of the goal of 
accelerating site cleanups and completion rates, it cannot 
support a major funding hike in the Superfund Program prior to 
the enactment of reauthorization legislation and the correction 
of serious program deficiencies which have lead to the General 
Accounting Office's designation of Superfund as a high risk 
program. The chairman of the Environment and Public Works 
Committee has stated that: ``It would be unwise and 
irresponsible for Congress to appropriate significantly 
increased funding for Superfund until we complete the task of 
reauthorization and can be sure that the money will be used to 
accelerate the pace of cleanup and protect our citizens.'' The 
Committee concurs with this recommendation. Upon enactment of 
legislation reauthorizing Superfund, the Committee will 
promptly consider increasing funds for this program.
    The Committee expects EPA will continue using a risk-based 
approach to allocating funds within this program, ensuring 
those sites posing the most significant threats to human health 
and the environment are addressed first and as expeditiously as 
possible. EPA is directed to provide its risk-based ranking of 
remedial and removal actions within 30 days of enactment of 
this act.
    The Committee has included bill language delaying the 
availability of $100,000,000 until September 1, 1998. This 
language was included in the fiscal year 1997 Superfund 
appropriation and is not anticipated to have a programmatic 
impact.

              leaking underground storage tank trust fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $60,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      71,210,700
Committee recommendation................................      65,000,000

                          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 a budget of $65,000,000 for the 
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program, an increase of 
$5,000,000 over the 1997 enacted level.
    The Committee has recommended an increase for this program 
in view of the December 1998 deadline for compliance with 
underground storage tank upgrade requirements, and the 
attendant increase in enforcement and other responsibilities on 
the part of the States. This program has resulted in important 
environmental progress in cleaning up leaking underground 
storage tanks, one of the major sources of ground water 
contamination. The Committee directs that not less than 85 
percent of the funds provided be allocated to the States.
    The Committee opposes suggestions by EPA to utilize LUST 
fund moneys for other EPA programs such as the Underground 
Storage Tank Program, Underground Injection Control Program, 
and the Groundwater Protection Program, unless there is prior 
authorization for such use. While protecting the Nation's 
ground water supplies from contamination is vitally important, 
it is not appropriate to tap the LUST trust fund for the 
purposes proposed. Given the approaching compliance deadlines 
and the need for greater State assistance, it is the intent of 
the Committee to make every effort to give States the maximum 
amount of money possible for this program.
    The Committee recommends bill language which limits 
administrative expenses to $7,500,000.

                           oilspill response

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      15,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      15,000,000

                          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 for preventing and responding to 
releases of oil and other petroleum products in navigable 
waterways. EPA is responsible for: directing all cleanup and 
removal activities posing a threat to public health and the 
environment; conducting 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 are 
provided through the oilspill liability trust fund established 
by the Oil Pollution Act and managed by the Coast Guard.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the oilspill 
response trust fund, the same as the budget request and the 
current level. The Committee included bill language limiting 
administrative expenses to $8,500,000.

                   state and tribal ASSISTANCE grants

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $2,910,207,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   2,793,257,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,047,000,000

                          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.
    This account funds the following infrastructure grant 
programs: State revolving funds; United States-Mexico Border 
Program; colonias projects; and Alaska Native villages.
    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, local, and 
tribal governments (sec. 105 of the Clean Air Act); (5) radon 
State grants; (6) water pollution control agency resource 
supplementation (sec. 106 of the FWPCA); (7) wetlands program 
implementation; (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 enforcement grants; (15) Indians general assistance 
grants; and, (16) underground storage tanks. The funds provided 
in this account, exclusive of the funds for the SRF and the 
special water and waste water treatment projects, may be used 
by the Agency to enter into performance partnerships with 
States and tribes rather than media-specific categorical 
program grants, if requested by the States and tribes.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,047,000,000 
for State and tribal assistance grants, an increase of 
$253,743,000 over the budget request and $136,793,000 over the 
enacted level.
    The Committee's recommendation includes the following:
  --$725,000,000 for performance partnership/categorical grants 
        and associated program support. The increase of 
        $10,000,000 over the request is to be allocated for air 
        grants in view of the critical and increasing 
        responsibilities of State air quality agencies, 
        including monitoring for fine particles and data 
        collection activities. Funding for these activities 
        should be awarded under section 103 of the Clean Air 
        Act.
  --$725,000,000, the budget request, for drinking water State 
        revolving funds.
  --$1,350,000,000 for clean water State revolving funds, an 
        increase of $275,000,000 above the budget request.
  --$150,000,000 for water and wastewater projects on the 
        United States-Mexico border, including $50,000,000 for 
        colonias in Texas. Funds for the colonias shall be 
        matched by State funds from State resources at 20 
        percent of the Federal appropriation.
  --$15,000,000 for rural and Alaskan Native villages to 
        address the special water and wastewater treatment 
        needs of thousands of households that lack basic 
        sanitation.
  --$82,000,000 for special needs infrastructure grants, as 
        follows:
    --$7,000,000 for wastewater facility and sanitary system 
            improvements in Burlington, IA.
    --$7,150,000 for export pipeline replacement for protection 
            of Lake Tahoe, CA.
    --$5,000,000 to implement combined sewer overflow [CSO] 
            projects in Richmond ($2,500,000) and Lynchburg, 
            VA, ($2,500,000).
    --$7,000,000 for the Ashley Valley, UT, sewer management 
            board for wastewater improvements.
    --$1,000,000 to rehabilitate water and sewer systems in 
            Ogden, UT.
    --$4,000,000 for Jackson County, MS, water supply system 
            improvements.
    --$50,000 for water and sewer improvements for the city of 
            Kinloch, MO.
    --$1,200,000 for water and wastewater improvements in the 
            areas of east Mesa and west Mesa in Las Cruces, NM.
    --$5,000,000 for water system improvements in the Virgin 
            Valley Water District, NV.
    --$2,000,000 for the town of Epping, NH, for wastewater 
            treatment upgrades.
    --$4,300,000 for wastewater improvements in Queen Annes 
            County, MD, ($2,300,000) and biological nutrient 
            removal of sewage on the Pocomoke River, MD, 
            ($2,000,000).
    --$6,000,000 for water/wastewater improvements in the 
            Moreland/Riverside area of Bingham County 
            ($3,000,000); the city of Rupert ($2,000,000); and 
            the Rosewell and Homedale areas ($1,000,000) of 
            Idaho.
    --$5,000,000 for Missoula, MT, sewer system improvements.
    --$1,700,000 for Essex County, MA, water/sewer 
            improvements.
    --$3,000,000 for the Milton, VT, wastewater treatment plant 
            project.
    --$5,000,000 for sewage infrastructure improvements for 
            Connellsville and Bullskin Townships in Fayette, 
            PA, ($2,500,000) and Fallowfield Township, PA, 
            ($2,500,000).
    --$6,300,000 for wastewater treatment improvements in 
            Pulaski County ($5,000,000) and Kingdom City 
            ($1,300,000), MO.
    --$8,000,000 for the Upper Savannah Council of Governments 
            for wastewater facility improvements for the 
            Savannah Valley regional sewer project in 
            Abbeville, McCormick, and Edgefield Counties, SC.
    --$3,300,000 for water system improvements in Jackson 
            County ($800,000), Washington County ($2,000,000), 
            and Cleburne County ($500,000), AL.
    EPA is to work with the grant recipients on appropriate 
cost-share arrangements consistent with past practice.
    The Committee notes that the amounts provided for the 
drinking water State revolving funds are available for national 
set-asides outlined in section 1452; however, health effects 
research is funded in the ``Science and technology'' account as 
proposed by the Administration.
    The Committee recognizes the continuing importance of 
addressing the substandard health conditions of 350,000 legal 
residents of colonias, border-region rural subdivisions that 
lack adequate drinking water and wastewater service. In order 
to continue ongoing efforts to meet the residents' needs, 
$50,000,000 is recommended for grants to the State of Texas, 
which shall be matched by State funds from State resources at 
20 percent of the Federal appropriation. The match requirement 
may be fulfilled through the commitment of State funds for 
either loans or grants for construction of wastewater or water 
systems serving colonias and the match may also consist of 
payment on bond interest associated with loans or grants for 
construction of wastewater and water systems. These terms of 
the match requirement shall also apply to all prior 
appropriated funds for colonias.
    The Committee understands that the primary environmental 
and public health problem in the El Paso, TX, region is the 
rapid depletion of the ground water aquifer because of a lack 
of year-round surface water supply. El Paso, in concert with 
the Texas-New Mexico Water Commission and in conjunction with 
Mexico, is working to resolve this problem. To support this 
effort, the Committee urges that $3,000,000 from the border 
infrastructure fund be allocated to El Paso for use in its Rio 
Grande environmental monitoring program and $2,000,000 be 
allocated for the Federal share for construction of the 
Jonathan Rogers plant.
    The Committee has included bill language allowing States to 
cross-collateralize their clean water and drinking water State 
revolving funds. This language makes explicit that funds 
appropriated to the SRF's may be used as common security in a 
bond issue for both SRF's, ensuring maximum opportunity for 
leveraging these funds.

                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND

    The Committee has included bill language, as proposed by 
the administration, which makes permanent EPA's working capital 
fund authority to institutionalize fee-for-service as the 
mechanism to fund certain administrative services and 
strengthen customer office accountability for administrative 
support in carrying out the agency's mission.

                   Executive Office of the President

                Office of Science and Technology Policy

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $4,932,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       4,932,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,932,000

                          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 an appropriation of $4,932,000 for 
the Office of Science and Technology Policy. This amount is the 
same as the budget request and the current level.

  Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental Quality

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $2,436,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       3,020,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,436,000

                          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 $2,436,000 for the Council on 
Environmental Quality, the same as the current level.
    The Committee has not included proposed bill language 
regarding the number of CEQ council members. This matter should 
be addressed by the authorizing committee.

                 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

                      Office of Inspector General

                          (Transfer of Funds)

Appropriations, 1997....................................................
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     $34,365,000
Committee recommendation................................      34,365,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Fiscal year 1998 is the first year the Committee has 
received a funding request for the Office of Inspector General 
[OIG], Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation [FDIC]. 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 
ensure the independence of the OIG.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $34,365,000 
for the FDIC inspector general, which are to be derived from 
the bank insurance fund, the savings association insurance 
fund, and the FSLIC resolution fund.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

Appropriations, 1997..................................\1\ $5,103,556,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     788,588,000
Committee recommendation................................     788,588,000

\1\ Includes $3,300,000,000 in supplemental appropriations for disaster 
relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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 the budget request of $788,588,000 
for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. This is a decrease 
of $4,314,998,000 below the enacted level owing largely to the 
disaster relief supplemental appropriation of fiscal year 1997.

                            disaster relief

Appropriations, 1997..................................\1\ $4,620,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     320,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     320,000,000

\1\ Includes $3,300,000,000 in supplemental appropriations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    Federal disaster assistance is a nationwide program 
operated pursuant to the Stafford Act. FEMA is authorized to 
provide Federal assistance to supplement the efforts and 
resources of State and local governments in response to major 
disasters and emergencies. Funds may be made available directly 
to a State or to other Federal agencies as reimbursement of 
expenditures in disaster relief work performed under this 
authority. Funds and other assistance may also be made 
available to individuals, families, and businesses for disaster 
related needs and expenses. In addition, a variety of other 
Federal assistance is coordinated under this program.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $320,000,000 
for FEMA disaster relief.
    The Committee continues to be deeply troubled by the 
escalating cost of FEMA disaster relief. Since fiscal year 
1995, the VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies Subcommittee has 
been forced to rescind or reduce funds totaling more than 
$10,000,000,000 to accommodate the burgeoning requirements in 
the FEMA disaster relief program. Yet there remains little 
accountability for expenditures, inadequate financial controls, 
and far too much awarded to low-priority projects such as the 
refurbishment of golf courses and stadiums.
    While FEMA did not meet its commitment to propose 
legislation codifying objective disaster criteria, the 
Committee commends FEMA for finally submitting a legislative 
proposal to begin curbing disaster relief expenditures. 
Consistent with FEMA's proposal and to begin to control 
disaster relief expenditures, bill language has been included 
prohibiting the expenditure of funds for trees and other 
natural features belonging to State and local governments that 
are located within parks and recreational areas, as well as on 
the grounds of other publicly owned property; parks, 
recreational areas, marinas, golf courses, stadiums, arenas, or 
other similar facilities which generate any portion of their 
operational revenue through user fees, rents, admission 
charges, or similar fees; or beaches. These restrictions are 
intended to serve as an interim measure in the anticipation of 
enactment of comprehensive amendments to the Stafford Act. The 
Committee urges the legislative committees to take prompt 
action on the proposed Stafford Act amendments.
    The Committee notes that the FEMA inspector general is 
finalizing a review of FEMA's seismic hazard mitigation pilot 
for hospitals [SHMPH], implemented administratively by FEMA 
following the Northridge earthquake. The Committee is extremely 
troubled that almost $900,000,000 in excess of what would have 
been approved through FEMA's normal damage survey report 
process has been approved through this program, without 
adequate justification. In addition, it appears that section 
404 funding provided to SHMPH grantees may duplicate funding 
grantees are already receiving through the SHMPH. Also, 
eligibility criteria appear to have been inconsistently 
applied. The Committee directs FEMA to respond expeditiously to 
the inspector general's review, and to submit its plan for 
implementing the inspector general's recommendations to the 
Committee within 30 days of the issuance of the final report.
    The Committee is concerned that FEMA has not updated the 
standard it uses to determine when to increase the Federal 
share of disaster costs since 1985. Moreover, the per capita 
threshold currently used to determine whether to increase the 
Federal share is not in formal FEMA regulations. The Committee 
expects FEMA to take action on this matter and report to the 
Committee within 90 days on actions taken.
    The Committee is concerned about the Agency's practice at 
times of approving damage survey reports without adequately 
taking into consideration insurance coverage, as was the case 
in the county of Kauai, following Hurricane Iniki. Further, 
FEMA's policies should do everything to encourage, not 
discourage, States' efforts to minimize future losses and 
reduce the expenditure of Federal funds, such as strong 
insurance requirements. The Committee directs FEMA to provide a 
full report within 30 days of enactment of this act outlining 
and justifying its actions relative to the county of Kauai and 
the steps it will take to improve the DSR process to ensure 
insurance coverage is appropriately accounted for when the DSR 
is approved.
    The Committee notes that FEMA has recently proposed 
legislation authorizing a new program which would provide 
predisaster mitigation funds to communities. The proposed 
program is intended to leverage additional Federal, State, 
local, and private sector resources to address the full range 
of vulnerabilities of the public and private sectors in high-
risk areas. The Committee strongly supports this concept, and 
urges the authorizing committees to take action promptly on the 
proposed legislation.
    The Committee recognizes the work that FEMA has done with 
the State of Maryland's western Maryland flood task force. The 
Committee recommends FEMA consider using the task force as a 
model for work in other States in identifying disaster 
mitigation opportunities. In addition, upon enactment of and 
when appropriations are made available for, the predisaster 
mitigation legislation, FEMA should work with the State of 
Maryland to fund mitigation measures which were identified by 
the western Maryland flood task force.
    The Committee recognizes the need for better coordination 
among Federal agencies and departments during the long-term 
recovery process following a natural disaster. The current lack 
of formal coordination of long-term recovery efforts stands in 
contrast to the recent experience of effective short-term 
coordination by FEMA. Accordingly, the administration is 
requested to submit a plan to Congress to provide for the 
designation of a single agency with the responsibility and 
authority to coordinate all long-term recovery efforts among 
the various participating Federal agencies. In addition, the 
Committee encourages the legislative committees to examine this 
important issue.
    The Committee commends FEMA for its efforts to cooperate 
with State disaster service agencies and the success of its 
State assessment pilot project in northern Idaho, where State 
assessments replaced lengthy Federal environmental assessments. 
Such task-sharing could result in significantly reducing both 
recovery time and costs. Accordingly, the Committee directs 
FEMA to continue, and to expand this program of relying on 
State assessments wherever possible.

            disaster assistance direct loan program account

                      (limitation on direct loans)

                            STATE SHARE LOAN

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997....................      $1,385,000        $548,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................       1,495,000         341,000
Committee recommendation................       1,495,000         341,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Under the State Share Loan Program, FEMA may lend or 
advance to an eligible applicant or State the portion of 
assistance for which the applicant is responsible under cost-
sharing provisions of the Stafford Act. To be deemed eligible, 
the Governor must demonstrate, where damage is overwhelming and 
severe, that the State is unable to assume its financial 
responsibility to meet the cost share.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    For the State Share Loan Program, the Committee has 
provided $25,000,000 in loan authority and $341,000 in 
administrative expenses. For the cost of subsidizing the 
appropriation, the bill includes $1,495,000.

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $170,500,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     171,773,000
Committee recommendation................................     171,773,000

                          program description

    The salaries and expenses appropriation comprises two 
activities:
    Program support.--This activity provides for staff and 
supporting resources to administer the Agency's various 
programs at the headquarters, field, and regional levels. The 
salaries and expenses for flood plain management under 
mitigation programs and flood insurance operations are provided 
by transfer from the national flood insurance fund.
    Executive direction.--This activity provides staff and 
supporting resources for the general management and 
administration of the Agency in legal affairs, congressional 
and public affairs, personnel, and financial management.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request, $171,773,000, 
for FEMA salaries and expenses. This is $1,273,000 above the 
current level.

                    office of the inspector general

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $4,673,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       4,803,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,803,000

                          program description

    The Office of the Inspector General [OIG] conducts, 
supervises, and coordinates all audits, inspections, and 
investigations. The OIG supervises and coordinates other 
activities in the Agency and between the Agency and other 
Federal, State, and local government agencies whose purposes 
are to: (a) promote economy and efficiency; (b) prevent and 
detect fraud and mismanagement; and (c) identify and prosecute 
people involved in fraud or mismanagement.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $4,803,000 
for the Office of the Inspector General an increase of $130,000 
above the enacted level.

              emergency management planning and assistance

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $218,701,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     202,146,000
Committee recommendation................................     202,146,000

                          program description

    The emergency management planning and assistance 
appropriation provides resources for the following activities 
which were described previously: Response and recovery; 
preparedness, training, and exercises; fire prevention and 
training; operations support; mitigation programs; and 
executive direction. Flood plain management activity and flood 
insurance operations are funded by transfer from the national 
flood insurance fund in fiscal year 1994.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $202,146,000 
for emergency management planning and assistance. This is a 
reduction of $16,555,000 below the 1997 level.
    The reduction below the fiscal year 1997 level is due to 
the conclusion of several initiatives such as the national 
arson prevention initiative.
    The Committee has made the following changes to the budget 
request:
  +$2,900,000 above the budget request for implementation of 
        the dam safety program including $1,000,000 for 
        incentive grants to States to upgrade their dam safety 
        program; $500,000 for training programs for State dam 
        safety inspectors; $1,000,000 for research in dam 
        safety; and $400,000 for administration of the program, 
        as authorized by the National Dam Safety Program Act of 
        1996.
  +$3,000,000 above the budget request for State and local 
        assistance through comprehensive cooperative 
        agreements.
  -$5,900,000 as a general reduction.
    The Committee remains concerned with the Chemical Stockpile 
Emergency Preparedness Program [CSEPP]. In yet another critical 
review of this program, GAO has found that after 9 years and 
funding of $431,400,000, States and local communities 
surrounding the chemical stockpile storage sites still lack 
some items critical to responding to a chemical stockpile 
emergency. The program has had a history of management 
weaknesses, including fragmented and ill-defined roles and 
responsibilities between the Army and FEMA, imprecise planning 
guidance, poor coordination and communications, and inadequate 
financial data and internal controls. To address the long-
standing management problems with this program, several 
proposals currently are under consideration. The Committee 
expects a proposal for resolution of the concerns cited by GAO 
will be submitted prior to the House-Senate conference on this 
legislation.
    FEMA in cooperation with the National Institute of Building 
Sciences sponsored a comprehensive effort to establish a 
universal methodology capable of predicting damages and loss of 
life caused by natural hazards. This effort resulted in a 
computer program called HAZUS. The Committee is aware of the 
tremendous value of this product and urges FEMA to continue 
efforts to develop HAZUS, including sponsoring projects to 
build accurate data bases to be used in the HAZUS program. The 
University of South Alabama has proposed such a project. In 
addition, FEMA should consider supporting a project to 
demonstrate how the general loss information presented by HAZUS 
could be used to create regional earthquake planning scenarios 
for response and recovery planning.
    The Committee believes the strategic plan for research 
submitted to FEMA by the National Association of Homebuilders 
Research Center can play an important role in assisting FEMA to 
understand better the application of structural engineering 
standards to the construction of housing and the performance of 
housing under natural hazard conditions. The Committee applauds 
the work of the research center in securing industry support 
for 50 percent of this 5-year $4,000,000 research plan and 
urges FEMA to include this plan as part of its ongoing 
predisaster mitigation efforts.
    The Committee understands that FEMA has not offered support 
for the Pittsford, VT, Fire Academy effort to expand training 
to rail and toxic material accidents. The Committee recommended 
support for this project in fiscal year 1996 and urges FEMA to 
follow through on that recommendation in fiscal year 1998.
    FEMA is encouraged to support the Coastal Region 
Development Center's efforts to develop a new model plan for 
southeast Georgia and other coastal States for hurricane 
evacuation mitigation preparedness.
    The Committee supports the full budget request for the U.S. 
Fire Administration and National Fire Academy.

                       emergency food and shelter

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $100,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     100,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     100,000,000

                          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 2 percent of the funding received for administrative 
costs. The administrative ceiling was increased to 5 percent 
under the McKinney Act. However, subsequent appropriation acts 
limited administrative expenses to 3.5 percent.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $100,000,000 
for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program. This is the same as 
the fiscal year 1997 level.

                     national flood insurance fund

                          (transfers 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 1994, 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. Coverage is 
available on virtually all types of buildings and their 
contents.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has included bill language, providing up to 
$21,610,000 for administrative costs from the Flood Insurance 
Program for salaries and expenses. The Committee has also 
included bill language providing up to $78,464,000 for flood 
mitigation activities including up to $20,000,000 for expenses 
under section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance Act.
    The Committee is very concerned about the status of the 
flood insurance program. The current level of borrowing from 
Treasury is approaching $900,000,000. It is noted that despite 
substantial FIA marketing efforts in the upper Midwest prior to 
the spring floods, fewer than 12 percent of the homeowners who 
sustained flood damage in the Grand Fork area had flood 
insurance. FEMA is directed to submit to the Committee within 
90 days of enactment of this act its plans for increasing the 
number of flood insurance policyholders and improving the 
solvency of the program, including a plan for repaying the 
current Treasury debt.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

    The Committee recommends bill language, as in previous VA-
HUD appropriation legislation, authorizing the collection of 
user fees for the Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program. 
These fees offset the cost of this program, totaling 
$12,000,000 in fiscal year 1998.

                    General Services Administration

                      consumer information center

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $2,260,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       2,119,000
Committee recommendation................................       2,419,000

                          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.
    The CIC promotes greater public awareness of existing 
Federal publications through wide dissemination to the general 
public of the Consumer Information Catalog. The catalog lists 
both sales and free publications available from the Government 
Printing Office [GPO] distribution facility in Pueblo, CO. In 
fiscal year 1993, the CIC distributed a total of 11.7 million 
publications. Distribution costs of the free publications are 
financed by reimbursements from the Federal agencies to the 
Consumer Information Center.
    Public Law 98-63, enacted July 30, 1983, established a 
revolving fund for the CIC. Under this fund, CIC 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 CIC activities. All 
are available as authorized in appropriation acts without 
regard to fiscal year limitations.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $2,419,000 for the Consumer 
Information Center, an increase of $300,000 above the budget 
estimate and $159,000 above the enacted level. Additional funds 
are provided to enable CIC to undertake responsibility for 
production of the Consumer Resource Handbook.

                Department of Health and Human Services

                    u.s. office of consumer affairs

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $1,500,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       1,800,000
Committee recommendation................................................

                          program description

    In accordance with Executive Order 11583 of February 24, 
1971, the role of the U.S. Office of Consumer Affairs is to 
assure that consumer needs and viewpoints are presented in the 
Federal Government; foster consideration of consumer viewpoints 
by other Government agencies, voluntary groups, and business; 
and seek to inform and educate individual citizens to deal more 
effectively in the marketplace.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the termination of the Office of 
Consumer Affairs, and the transfer of responsibility for the 
Consumer Resource Handbook to the Consumer Information Center. 
The Committee's action is intended to eliminate duplicative and 
unnecessary activities within the Federal Government.

             National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Appropriations, 1997

                                                         $13,709,200,000

Budget estimate, 1998

                                                          13,500,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                          13,500,000,000

                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

    The National Aeronautics and Space Administration 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. These activities are 
designed to continue the Nation's premier program of space 
exploration and to invest in the development of new 
technologies to improve the competitive position of the United 
States. The NASA program provides for a vigorous national 
program ensuring leadership in world aviation and as the 
preeminent spacefaring nation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $13,500,000,000 for the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration for fiscal year 1998. This 
amount is the same as the budget request.
    The Committee recognizes and continues its strong support 
of NASA's commitment to a balanced space and aeronautics 
program, including human exploration and development of space, 
space science, Mission to Planet Earth, and aeronautics and 
space transportation technology. The Committee also recognizes 
the inherent riskiness of activities in space, and urges NASA 
to continue to make safety its highest priority, while at the 
same time encouraging the development of world-class programs 
and cutting edge technology. Finally, the Committee reminds 
NASA that the survival of its major programs may depend on its 
continuing efforts to downsize and increase the efficiency of 
its operations. The constraints imposed by the budget demand 
continued attention to these efforts.
    With respect to these concerns, the Committee expects NASA 
to adhere to the consolidated space operations contract [CSOC] 
proposal submission date of mid-January 1998 and award 
selection by the end of next June. For CSOC to achieve the cost 
saving targets, NASA must ensure that the contract's content 
includes commonality of functions, as defined in the RFP, 
across all NASA flight centers, without exception. While 
attempts have been made at some field centers to keep certain 
functions out of CSOC because of an attempt to protect so-
called core competencies, this has led to an imbalance in scope 
between various centers. Given that there is minimal variation 
in the fundamental skills needed from center to center for 
these functions, any attempt to carve out exceptions to common 
functionality diminishes the cost effectiveness and value of 
moving forward with CSOC. Therefore, the Committee directs NASA 
to expand the scope of work in CSOC to ensure inclusion of 
commonality of functions at all centers, including those 
activities in systems architecture, development, and execution 
involving flight missions that have been previously excluded. 
The Committee also expects all existing functions identified 
for inclusion by the CSOC RFP to remain so designated.

                           HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $5,362,900,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   5,326,500,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,326,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The objective of the human space flight appropriation is to 
provide the on-orbit infrastructure and transportation 
capability to enable people to live and work in the space 
environment. The appropriations request would provide funding 
for the continued development of the space station and 
activities which support utilization of the space station, the 
flight activities in support of the joint missions involving 
the space shuttle and the Russian Mir space station, all the 
activities required for the continuing safe operation of the 
space shuttle, and funding for the support of payloads flying 
on the shuttle and spacelab as well as advanced technology 
projects and engineering technical base support for the field 
centers supporting human space flight activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee has provided the full request, 
$5,326,500,000, for the ``Human space flight'' account, 
including full funding for the space shuttle and the space 
station. The full request does not include additional funds 
which may be needed for space station contingencies, due to the 
Russian partners, the United States contractor, or other 
unforeseen contingencies. The Committee agreed to reallocate 
$200,000,000 from other programs in this account in fiscal year 
1997 funds to cover the impacts from Russian contingencies and 
some of these funds are expected to remain available as 
reserves for fiscal year 1998. The Committee expects NASA to 
communicate all potential problems as early as possible and to 
provide possible options for the Committee to consider to deal 
with all possible contingencies.
    Contingency planning for the International Space Station 
Program is critical at this point in time. Given the severe 
budget constraints expected for NASA over the next years, the 
success of any program development effort will depend on 
resiliency and flexibility as well as merit and priority. 
However, the Committee also expects that the international 
space station will deliver the maximum scientific and 
technological return, and that this goal will remain central to 
NASA's management of the program.
    The Committee believes that NASA's efforts to identify 
commercial opportunities relating to the international space 
station are important for the ongoing success of the program, 
and expects the agency to evaluate potential cost savings from 
commercialization of utilization and operations of the 
international space station in the post-2002 (assembly 
complete) time frame. The Committee requests that NASA submit a 
report outlining progress in identifying commercialization 
opportunities for the International Space Station in the post-
2002 time frame with the agency's fiscal year 1999 budget 
request.
    In addition, the Committee commends the Administration's 
national space policy, and is particularly pleased with the 
commercial space guidelines that support and enhance U.S. 
economic competitiveness in space activities while protecting 
U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. The 
Committee expects that NASA will adhere to the proscription 
against conducting activities with commercial application that 
preclude or deter commercial space activities, except for 
reasons of national security and public safety. The Committee 
urges NASA to continue privatization and commercial 
applications regarding space activities, including conducting 
life and microgravity science missions on the space shuttle 
using commercial carriers.
    The Committee fully supports deployment of the space 
station but recognizes the funds appropriated by this act for 
the development of the space station may not be adequate to 
cover all potential contractual commitments should the program 
be terminated for the convenience of the Government. 
Accordingly, if the space station is terminated for the 
convenience of the Government, additional appropriated funds 
may be necessary to cover such contractual commitments. In the 
event of such termination, it would be the intent of the 
Committee to provide such additional appropriations as may be 
necessary to provide fully for termination payments in a manner 
which avoids impacting the conduct of other ongoing NASA 
programs.

                  SCIENCE, AERONAUTICS, and TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $5,767,100,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   5,642,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   5,642,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The objectives of the NASA program of research and 
development are to extend knowledge of the Earth, its space 
environment, and the universe; to expand the practical 
applications of space technology; to provide technology for 
improving the performance of aeronautical vehicles while 
minimizing their environmental effects and energy consumption; 
and to assure continued development of the aeronautics and 
space technology and education of future generations necessary 
to accomplish national goals.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,642,000,000 
for science, aeronautics, and technology activities. This 
amount is the same as the President's budget request.
    The Committee recommendation supports funding of 
$2,043,800,000 for space science activities in fiscal year 
1998, the same as the President's budget request. This level 
includes the President's request for the space infrared 
telescope facility [SIRTF] and for gravity probe-B [GP-B], and 
$6,000,000 for solar terrestrial probes of which $3,000,000 is 
for the solar-B mission and $3,000,000 is for solar stereo. The 
Committee expects that NASA will propose adjustment of program 
funding levels consistent with appropriate management of 
uncosted carryovers.
    The Committee is concerned about the absence of competition 
in the selection of funding recipients for the new millennium, 
advanced space technology, and portions of the supporting 
research and technology program elements. The Committee 
believes that these funds, whether awarded intramurally or 
extramurally, must be fully competed through broad 
announcements of opportunity with selection by external peer 
review panels, rather than at the discretion of agency program 
managers. For this reason, the Committee directs NASA to 
develop and submit to the Committee a plan, concurrent with the 
1998 operating plan, that lays out a specific strategy to 
implement this competitive framework, including the allocation 
of fiscal year 1998 funds, so that approximately one-half of 
these funds are made available to extramural academic 
institutions or private industry, with selection by external 
peer review panels.
    The Committee has provided an additional $10,000,000 for 
Origins ATD, for additional optical astronomy test beds that 
contain significant investment by U.S. institutions. Selection 
of those extra sites should guarantee that one site permits 
search from the southern hemisphere for candidate stars which 
show clear evidence of planetary systems, and a second site 
using a large ground-based interferometer that demonstrates new 
adaptive optics and nulling interferometry technologies 
essential for the direct detection of Earth-like planets of 
other stars.
    Because of Origins' interdisciplinary nature, the Committee 
expects NASA to outline its science plan and mission management 
strategy for each of the upcoming Origins missions now assumed 
in the budget runout. NASA is also strongly encouraged to 
consider establishing one or more academically based Origins 
institutes that would function as interdisciplinary centers of 
excellence, independent of mission management, to advance the 
collective research and educational value of Origins. The 
agency should report to the Committee on both items by December 
15, 1997.
    The Committee commends NASA for efforts in developing 
strategic plans, both agencywide and for each of its 
enterprises. In addition, the Committee commends the agency for 
its continued emphasis on new ways of doing business, 
particularly in small spacecraft programs such as discovery, 
explorer, earth systems science pathfinder, and new millennium 
technology within the Space Science and Mission to Planet Earth 
enterprises. The Committee is concerned, however, that these 
various programs be properly coordinated within each 
enterprise. Therefore, the Committee requests that the Space 
Science and Mission to Planet Earth enterprises include with 
the fiscal year 1999 budget request, an explanation of how the 
programs are selected, managed, and coordinated within each 
enterprise and what performance measures will be used to ensure 
that the programs are succeeding.
    The Committee strongly believes that the Mission to Planet 
Earth provides a critical opportunity to obtain new and needed 
data on information related to the weather, the environment, 
agriculture, and natural disasters, among others. These data 
may someday help to ensure adequate food supplies for the world 
through new understanding of our environment, as well as help 
predict the timing of and damage from floods and earthquakes. 
This Committee supports the President's full budget request 
($1,417,300,000) for Mission to Planet Earth, and includes an 
additional $5,000,000 for the lightning mapper sensor. The 
Committee also commends the efforts of the commercial remote 
sensing activities at Stennis Space Center, particularly in 
managing the purchase of Earth science data from private 
industry, and encourages that these activities continue.
    Nevertheless, the Earth observing system [EOS], the 
centerpiece of Mission to Planet Earth, and the Earth observing 
system data and information system [EOSDIS] today face 
continuous technical challenges. The Committee believes that 
the EOSDIS ground system should be viewed as a long-term effort 
that must have both the program stability and core capability 
to achieve significant results over this long-term period.D61/
    Since EOS was approved as a new start in fiscal year 1991, 
the Committee has directed NASA to resist efforts continually 
to change the architecture and program baseline of EOSDIS. To 
guarantee this occurs as EOS nears the AM-1 launch, the 
Committee directs NASA to maintain the EOSDIS focus on the 
critical schedule milestones to minimize any adverse effect on 
the launch schedule. This emphasis should continue until EOSDIS 
version B.1 becomes operational in early 1999. NASA should 
strongly resist any effort to add requirements to those 
milestones between now and delivery of version B.1 operational 
software, including efforts to make the upcoming demo a full-
scale system test of all functions. Assuming the successful 
delivery of version B.1 software, the Committee fully expects 
the ECS contract to continue in its current structure for the 
development of EOSDIS version C/D.
    The Committee is also concerned with the proposed federated 
management system for EOS. The Committee, therefore, directs 
NASA to provide not more than $10,000,000 from any source in 
fiscal year 1998 for federated management and related prototype 
activities. The Committee is highly skeptical of the inherent 
value of evolving EOSDIS to a federated system run by the 
program's principal investigators without a systemwide 
developer or software integrator. NASA should also issue 
guidelines within 90 days to eliminate the appearance of any 
potential financial conflicts between federated management 
funding and membership on an EOSDIS advisory panel. Finally, 
the Committee expects a report on any plans for EOSDIS 
federated management, including detailed budget, technical 
content, and schedule plans, submitted with the fiscal year 
1999 budget.
    The Committee also supports a broad user community for EOS 
data. To promote public-private partnerships on the use of EOS 
data, NASA is directed to use $15,000,000 to fund up to five 
competitively selected consortia to develop specific regional 
applications with the use of EOS data. Each consortium must 
include academic institutions and end users as partners, and 
demonstrate a value-added application of EOS data to a regional 
problem of significant economic consequence.
    The midcourse experiment spacecraft [MSX] has obtained 
hyperspectral image data which may be useful to some areas in 
the space sciences and Mission to Planet Earth. The Committee 
urges NASA to examine the potential utility of the MSX data, 
and to report on the potential uses to the Committee by 
November 30, 1997.
    The Committee supports the President's request of 
$1,469,500,000 for the development of aeronautics and space 
transportation technology. This Committee supports the full 
budget request for the X-33 program, the Advanced Space 
Transportation Program, the independent verification and 
validation facility, and the National Technology Transfer 
Center. The Committee also includes an increase of $20,000,000 
for the bantam flight demonstrator, and $1,500,000 for MSE-
Technology Applications, Western Environmental Technology 
Office, to allow the continuation of ongoing research and 
development projects on high priority aerospace technology. The 
Committee recognizes the need for further research into the 
development of strong, heat-resistant, light-weight materials. 
The advanced materials and processes discipline has been 
identified as critical in driving technological change and 
economic advances into the next century. Accordingly, the 
Committee urges NASA to consider receiving proposals for 
multidisciplinary research to discover and produce new 
materials, and to enhance the chemical and physical 
characteristics of traditional materials.
    The Committee recognizes the positive contributions of the 
commercial space centers. NASA is urged to continue support for 
these activities.
    The Committee directs NASA to use $10,000,000 to 
participate in the next generation internet initiative. The 
Committee urges NASA to develop new technologies to improve 
internet interconnection to areas, such as Alaska and Hawaii, 
which, due to remoteness and a corresponding lack of 
telecommunications infrastructure, are unable to access 
emerging internet technologies fully. The Committee also 
recommends Montana as an appropriate participant area in the 
next generation internet initiative.
    The Committee recommendation includes $96,400,000 for 
science education under this account, with program impacts 
minimized by improved management of uncosted carryover 
balances. The recommendation includes $2,500,000 for a science 
learning center in Kenai, AK; $500,000 for the Discovery 
Science Center, Santa Ana, CA; the full request for the 
Classroom of the Future; and an increase of $2,000,000, for a 
total of $15,300,000 for the National Space Grant College and 
fellowship program.
    The Committee provides $2,000,000 for continuing 
development of a national prototype space education curriculum 
by the Center for Space Education at the Bishop Museum, 
Honolulu, HI. The center has worked closely with NASA on the 
first phase of this program, which is designed to utilize 
NASA's education and technology base and the Nation's science 
museum and planetarium network to heighten student interest and 
involvement in science, technology, and space programs. The 
second phase will develop innovative exhibits, interactive 
internet resources, teacher workshops, and student materials.
    The Committee has included funding for the NASA 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
[EPSCoR]. The Committee believes that NASA needs to focus more 
of its own efforts and resources on this program. The Committee 
intends that NASA will conduct a new grant competition and that 
it will undertake new efforts to help participating States form 
linkages and collaborations with NASA centers and research 
programs.
    The Committee recommendation deletes $1,000,000 proposed in 
the NASA budget for a joint program with the Department of 
Defense.

                            MISSION SUPPORT

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $2,562,200,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   2,513,200,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,513,200,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides for mission support including 
safety, reliability, and mission assurance activities 
supporting agency programs; space communication services for 
NASA programs; salaries and related expenses in support of 
research in NASA field installations; design, repair, 
rehabilitation and modification of institutional facilities, 
and construction of new institutional facilities; and other 
operations activities supporting conduct of agency programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,513,200,000 for mission 
support. This amount is the same as the President's budget 
request. The Committee urges NASA to identify and use any 
uncosted carryover balances within this account to meet any 
additional, unintended costs associated with this account for 
fiscal year 1998.
    The Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 for 
facilities enhancement at Stennis Space Center.
    The Committee commends NASA for its recently completed 
Wallops Mission 2000 plan which outlines workforce and workload 
responsibilities for the NASA Wallops flight facility into the 
21st century, and directs NASA to proceed with implementation 
of the plan. As part of the plan, the Committee understands 
that, after planned decommissioning, aircraft based at Wallops 
include one NASA-supported research aircraft, one NASA 
administrative aircraft, one range support aircraft jointly 
funded by NASA and the Navy; it is understood that NASA is 
pursuing transfer of the range support aircraft to the Navy, 
given the Navy's predominant utilization of that aircraft. 
Furthermore, it is the Committee's understanding that Wallops 
will remain a deployment site for Mission to Planet Earth 
science missions using various NASA research aircraft, 
including those based at other locations. With respect to 
aircraft consolidation, it is the Committee's understanding 
that NASA has no plans to relocate aircraft based east of the 
Mississippi River to the Dryden Flight Research Center for 
purposes of consolidation. Finally, the Committee understands 
that NASA is proceeding to decommission aircraft across the 
agency which are no longer programmatically required, and that 
NASA will regularly reassess programmatic requirements for all 
NASA research aircraft to ensure that NASA is using its 
resources in the most efficient manner.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $17,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      18,300,000
Committee recommendation................................      18,300,000

                          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 $18,300,000 for fiscal year 1998, 
an increase of $1,300,000 over the fiscal year 1997 
appropriation level and the same as the President's budget 
request.

                       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 in prior-year appropriation 
acts.

                  National Credit Union Administration

                       central liquidity facility

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Direct loan       Administrative 
                                        limitation          expenses    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1997..............       $600,000,000           $560,000
Budget estimate, 1998.............        600,000,000            203,000
Committee recommendation..........        600,000,000            203,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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) as a 
mixed-ownership Government corporation within the National 
Credit Union Administration. It is managed by the National 
Credit Union Administration Board and is 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 facility, 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 facility are the stock subscriptions 
from credit unions and borrowings.
    The facility may borrow funds from any source, with the 
amount of borrowing limited by Public Law 95-630 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 
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 administration's proposed 
limitation of $600,000,000 in loans from the central liquidity 
facility for fiscal year 1998. The Committee also recommends 
the budget request of limiting administrative expenses for the 
CLF to $203,000 in fiscal year 1998.

                      National Science Foundation

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $3,270,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   3,367,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,377,000,000

                          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 basic and 
applied research, science and technology policy research, and 
science and engineering education programs to promote the 
progress of science and engineering in the United States.
    The Foundation supports fundamental and applied research in 
all major scientific and engineering disciplines, through 
grants, contracts, and other forms of assistance, such as 
cooperative agreements, awarded to more than 2,000 colleges and 
universities, and to nonprofit organizations and other research 
organizations in all parts of the United States. The Foundation 
also supports major national and international programs and 
research facilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $3,377,000,000 for the National 
Science Foundation for fiscal year 1998. This amount is 
$107,000,000 more than the 1997 level and $10,000,000 more than 
the budget request.

                    RESEARCH AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 1997....................................  $2,432,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................   2,514,700,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,524,700,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The research and related activities appropriation addresses 
Foundation goals to enable the United States to uphold world 
leadership in all aspects of science and engineering, and to 
promote the discovery, integration, dissemination, and 
employment of new knowledge in service to society. Research 
activities will contribute to the achievement of these goals 
through expansion of the knowledge base; integration of 
research and education; stimulation of knowledge transfer among 
academia and the public and private sectors; and bringing 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, U.S. 
antarctic logistical support activities, and the Critical 
Technologies Institute.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,524,700,000 
for research and related activities. This amount is $92,700,000 
above the fiscal year 1997 level and $10,000,000 more than the 
budget request.
    The Committee recognizes the importance that the agency 
places on its two new initiatives, knowledge and distributed 
intelligence in the information age, and life in extreme 
environments, and also understands the difficulty of 
establishing milestones and goals for basic research. However, 
the Committee also believes that the agency must have a plan 
for the investment of nearly $500,000,000 for the two new 
initiatives. Therefore, the Committee will not make the new 
funding for these two initiatives available until the agency 
submits appropriate milestones and guideposts, to be 
accomplished in fiscal year 1998, and against which the agency 
can be measured in determining funding for fiscal year 1999.
    The Committee is aware of the work of the interagency 
working group on plant genomes convened by the National Science 
and Technology Council, and supports the group's 
recommendations for a plant genome initiative. The Committee, 
therefore, directs the National Science Foundation to 
accelerate the mapping of Arabidopsis and to move beyond the 
work it currently supports toward more economically important 
plant genome projects such as corn, wheat, rice, and soybeans. 
It is the Committee's view that the corn genome is of 
particular importance to the health and well-being of the 
Nation--particularly with respect to agricultural productivity, 
environmental protection, and food and fiber interests. The 
Committee is encouraged by the interagency efforts and 
recognizes the importance of not only a coordinated Federal 
effort but also the possibilities of a meaningful public/
private partnership and international cooperation. To support 
these efforts, the Committee directs NSF to spend $40,000,000 
in fiscal year 1998 to support a competitive, merit-based 
initiative, which may include one or more university-based 
research centers, that will enable the development of a U.S. 
led public/private research initiative supporting research into 
plant genomes. This NSF effort should be closely coordinated 
with related efforts being supported by other Federal agencies.
    The Committee is aware that the agency recently revised the 
criteria for merit review of proposals submitted to the agency 
for funding, and that the criteria now include consideration of 
the broader applications of the research to be supported. The 
Committee encourages NSF to examine how the changes in the 
merit review criteria have affected the types of research the 
agency supports, and directs the agency to support a review of 
the new criteria by the National Academy of Public 
Administration, to be initiated after the new criteria have 
been in place for 1 year. In addition, the NAPA study should 
address the overall criteria-setting process within the agency, 
including how the agency identifies areas for new initiatives 
and measures progress in existing initiatives.
    In previous years the NSF budget request contained valuable 
information on interdisciplinary research and education 
initiatives of broad national interest. Three of these 
initiatives were biotechnology, environment and global change, 
and high performance computing and communications. This 
information was very useful to the Committee as part of the 
process for setting priorities and understanding outcomes that 
flow from these efforts. Therefore the Committee requests that, 
in the future, the Foundation once again include funding 
information on these initiatives along with a discussion of key 
priorities and outcomes that occur within each area.
    The Committee is aware that two existing supercomputer 
centers are to be phased out over a period of up to 2 years, 
and urges that NSF and the two centers reach an expeditious 
solution to the phase out. The transition should take into 
account the needs of the users and also the appropriate 
transition period and costs. Absent an agreement between NSF 
and the centers, the Committee may be compelled to provide 
guidance to the agency concerning what constitutes an 
appropriate transition. It has been suggested that object 
classification 21 could provide adequate transition funding.
    The Committee expects that the agency will comply with all 
aspects of the Government Performance and Results Act.
    The Committee strongly supports the next generation 
internet initiative, and stresses the importance of equal 
access to the Internet for students, teachers, and researchers 
in the rural areas of this country. In addition, the Committee 
continues to be concerned about representation from all 
geographical areas on panels and advisory committees, 
especially those relating to networking and telecommunications. 
Advanced computing and communications are vital to rural areas. 
Rural States should participate fully in the connections, 
computing, and related programs, including new initiatives. The 
Committee requests a report by December 31, 1997, on 
participation in current computing and communications programs 
by States in the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive 
Research [EPSCoR]. The report should clarify NSF's role and 
activities within the next generation internet initiative; 
describe how the agency plans to address equal access, 
particularly to rural areas; and include the plans for the role 
of EPSCoR States.
    The Committee continues to support strongly NSF's 
directorate in the behavioral and social sciences, which has 
made impressive strides since its establishment. These include 
the development of the human capital initiative, which guides 
funding priorities by tying basic research to national concerns 
which have behavior at their core. The Committee understands 
that the Foundation sponsored a workshop on basic research in 
psychology that should guide human capital support in cognitive 
science, social, and developmental psychology, and 
multidisciplinary research that crosscuts with biology, 
engineering, education, physics, and others. The Committee 
applauds this effort and looks forward to hearing about 
accomplishments of the human capital initiative in the fiscal 
year 1999 appropriations cycle.
    The Committee notes the important role that the National 
Science Foundation should be playing in the multidisciplinary, 
multiagency origins program, to understand the origin and 
evolution of galaxies and planetary systems, and the origin and 
distribution of life in the universe. The Committee urges NSF 
to work with NASA and other agencies to develop complementary 
programs, and to report to the Committee on these activities by 
December 31, 1997.

                        MAJOR RESEARCH EQUIPMENT

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $80,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      85,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      85,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The major research equipment activity will support the 
construction and procurement of unique national research 
platforms and major research equipment. Projects supported by 
this appropriation will push the boundaries of technological 
design and will offer significant expansion of opportunities, 
often in new directions, for the science and engineering 
community.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $85,000,000 
for major research equipment. This amount is $5,000,000 above 
the fiscal year 1997 level and the same as the budget request.
    The Committee commends the report prepared by the U.S. 
Antarctic Program external panel in recommending a scaled-down 
version of a new station to be built at the South Pole. In 
fiscal year 1998, the Committee directs that $25,000,000 from 
this account be used to initiate this endeavor. The Committee 
intends to provide additional funding over the next 4 fiscal 
years, totaling $90,000,000, from this account to complete the 
South Pole station.
    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for the Gemini project, 
$2,800,000 above the request, but has included these funds in 
the ``Major research equipment'' account instead of ``Research 
and related activities,'' because they are for final 
construction contingencies and instrumentation enhancements, 
more appropriately an activity in this account. Funds for 
Gemini should be derived from reducing the amount available for 
the millimeter array project.
    The Committee recommends the President's request for the 
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory [LIGO].
    The Committee notes that the Foundation has a significant 
number of major projects involving construction and acquisition 
of new and unique research facilities. In light of the current 
ongoing projects as well as those being planned, the Committee 
believes the Foundation should provide regular updates to the 
Committee on developments associated with its large-scale 
facilities and equipment projects. The Committee requests that 
such updates, which should be submitted as part of the annual 
budget request and then updated by July 1 each year, include a 
full description of the status of each ongoing large-scale 
construction or acquisition effort with an estimated cost of 
$10,000,000 or more. The status report should include both 
original and current cost estimates for construction and 
operations, as well as changes or developments that may impact 
the final construction or operational costs of the project. In 
addition to ongoing projects, the report should cover projects 
which are actively being considered for future budget requests.
    The Department of Defense has developed a facility which 
can serve as a center of excellence for ionospheric research. 
This facility will allow the Federal Government to complete 
essential research on characterizing the ionosphere, 
determining the effects of ionospheric activity on 
communications systems, and evaluating the opportunity to use 
the properties of the ionosphere to image underground and 
underwater objects and to transmit data over great distances. 
The DOD facility requires an incoherent scatter radar to 
support measurements of the ionosphere's properties and 
behavior.
    The National Science Foundation has budgeted for the 
purchase of an incoherent scatter radar; however, this system 
was to be located at a site outside of the United States which 
did not consider the opportunity to collocate the NSF radar 
with the existing ionospheric research capability. The 
Committee recommendation provides $25,000,000 for an incoherent 
scatter radar. However, the Committee directs that those funds 
shall be available only to construct an incoherent scatter 
radar collocated with the Defense Department's ionospheric 
research site. Locating the incoherent scatter radar at this 
site will allow all agencies of the Federal Government to 
accomplish polar and ionospheric research without wasteful 
duplicate investments.

                     EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $619,000,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     625,500,000
Committee recommendation................................     625,500,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Education and human resources activities provide a 
comprehensive set of programs across all levels of education in 
science, mathematics, and technology. At the precollege level, 
the appropriation provides for new instructional material and 
techniques, and enrichment activities for teachers and 
students. Undergraduate initiatives support curriculum 
improvement, facility enhancement, and advanced technological 
education. Graduate level support is directed primarily to 
research fellowships and traineeships. Emphasis is given to 
systemic reform through components that address urban, rural, 
and statewide efforts in precollege education, and programs 
which seek to broaden the participation of States and regions 
in science and engineering.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $625,500,000 
for education and human resources. This amount is $6,500,000 
more than the fiscal year 1997 level and the same as the budget 
request.
    The Committee has included the budget request of 
$20,000,000 for the new Integrative Graduate Education and 
Research Training [IGERT] Program. However, the Committee is 
concerned with the lack of evaluation of previous traineeship 
programs, and requests that the agency provide, prior to making 
awards for this program, an evaluation of previous traineeship 
programs, the problems with those programs that IGERT is 
designed to fix, and the criteria by which IGERT programs will 
be funded.
    The Committee has included the budget request for the 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
[EPSCoR]. The Committee notes that both the budget 
justification and testimony indicate that $8,000,000 to 
$10,000,000 of funding for the program will be available 
through the research directorates. Since this represents a new 
approach, NSF has a specific responsibility to work with the 
individual States to ensure that the program is successful. 
States should be given full support in making the transition to 
the new approach and provided the types of assistance which 
they identify as needed. Furthermore, funds should not be 
merely shifted from one account to another or replace grants 
which would otherwise be made. The agency should report back to 
the Committee on the progress of this new approach by March 1, 
1998.
    The Committee expects NSF funding of $6,000,000 for an 
underrepresented populations undergraduate reform initiative to 
increase the numbers of underrepresented populations in 
mathematics, engineering, and the biological, computer, and 
physical sciences through grants to historically black colleges 
and universities [HBCU's]. The Committee has included these 
funds because HBCU's have only a small fraction of the minority 
population yet graduate about 20 percent of the number of 
minorities with undergraduate degrees in math, engineering, and 
the biological, computer, and physical sciences. As the Nation 
undertakes sweeping changes in social policy, it is essential 
that resources be focused where there is the most likely chance 
of empowering young people from disadvantaged backgrounds for 
opportunities for meaningful employment in high technology 
backgrounds. Funds should be allocated for up to three HBCU 
institution-based awards, to be awarded competitively and to be 
matched by an equal amount from the NSF's six other program 
directorates, to be used for a combination of faculty support, 
research experiences for undergraduates, and scientific 
instrumentation.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 1997....................................    $134,310,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................     136,950,000
Committee recommendation................................     136,950,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The salaries and expenses appropriation provides for the 
operation, management, and direction of all Foundation programs 
and activities and includes necessary funds to develop and 
coordinate NSF programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $136,950,000 
for salaries and expenses. This amount is $2,640,000 above the 
fiscal year 1997 level and is the same as the amount requested 
in the President's budget. The Committee directs NSF to examine 
the key program area of administration and management, and to 
include costs of salaries and benefits of any person employed 
at the National Science Foundation headquarters, including 
Federal employees, Intergovernmental Personnel Act persons, 
detailees, and contractor personnel in this key program area in 
the fiscal year 1999 budget request.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 1997....................................      $4,690,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................       4,850,000
Committee recommendation................................       4,850,000

                          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 recommends an appropriation of $4,850,000 for 
the Office of Inspector General in fiscal year 1997. This 
amount is $160,000 above the fiscal year 1996 level, and is the 
same as the amount requested in the President's budget.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $49,900,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      50,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      50,000,000

                          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. The partnership-based organizations are independent, 
tax-exempt, nonprofit entities: Neighborhood housing services 
[NHS], mutual housing associations, and apartment improvement 
programs. Collectively, these organizations are known as the 
NeighborWorks network.
    Nationally, the 177 NeighborWorks organizations 
form a solid network in approximately 150 cities effectively 
revitalizing over 348 neighborhoods. Of the neighborhoods, 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 over two decades, 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 
which are placed with private sector social investors.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee proposes the budget request of $50,000,000 
for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation.

                        Selective Service System

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 1997....................................     $22,930,000
Budget estimate, 1998...................................      23,919,000
Committee recommendation................................      23,413,000

                          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 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 $23,413,000 
for the Selective Service System. This amount is $505,000 less 
than the budget request for fiscal year 1998 and an increase of 
$483,000 over the enacted level. The additional funds are not 
needed since the Committee does not believe Selective Service 
should be responsible for promoting the national service 
program.

                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Committee recommends inclusion of 21 general provisions 
previously enacted in the 1997 appropriations act. They are 
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: $10,393,000,000.
    Fair housing activities: $30,000,000.
    HOME Investment Partnerships Program: $1,400,000,000.
    Indian housing loan guarantee fund: $6,009,000.
    Government National Mortgage Association (credit 
limitation): $130,000,000,000.
    Homeless assistance grants: $823,000,000.
    Community development block grants: $4,600,000,000.
    Research and technology: $34,000,000.

                   CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

    Salaries and expenses: $45,000,000.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

    Environmental programs and management: $1,805,000,000.
    Science and technology: $600,000,000.
    Buildings and facilities: $19,420,000.
    State and tribal assistance grants: $3,030,000,000.
    Superfund: $1,400,000,000.

                  FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

    Salaries and expenses: $171,773,000.
    Emergency management planning and assistance: $202,146,000.
    Emergency food and shelter: $100,000,000.

                    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

    Consumer Information Center: $2,419,000.

             NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

    Human space flight: $5,326,500,000.
    Science, aeronautics, and technology: $5,642,000,000.
    Mission support: $2,513,200,000.

                      NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

    Research and related activities: $2,524,700,000.
    Major research equipment: $85,000,000.
    Salaries and expenses: $136,950,000.
    Education and human resources: $625,500,000.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, the Committee 
ordered reported en bloc H.R. 2016, Military Construction 
appropriations bill, 1998, and S. 1033, an original 
Agriculture, Rural Development appropriations bill, 1998, 
subject to amendment and subject to their budget allocations, 
and S. 1034, an original VA-HUD appropriations bill, subject to 
amendment and subject to appropriate scoring, by a recorded 
vote of 28-0, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Stevens
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. Gorton
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Campbell
Mr. Craig
Mr. Faircloth
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Hollings
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Bumpers
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Boxer

 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.''
    As discussed earlier in this report, the dramatic and 
unprecedented constraints on domestic discretionary spending 
has made necessary inclusion of a considerable volume of 
legislative reforms and other changes in existing statutes in 
the Committee recommendation. This is particularly in evidence 
in title II, the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
portion of this bill, in which cost-saving and cost-avoidance 
measures for discretionary housing and community development 
activities require modification of programs governed a large 
body of detailed and complex statutory provisions.
    The Committee has included substantial explanatory material 
in this report which attempts to fully detail both the intent 
and practical effect of these statutory provisions. In view of 
the extensive nature of these changes, however, preparation of 
a comparative print detailing each of these statutory 
amendments would delay prompt availability of this report. In 
the opinion of the Committee, it is necessary to dispense with 
the requirements of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI to expedite the 
business of the Senate.

                                            BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL                                            
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS  
                                                     AMENDED                                                    
                                            [In millions of dollars]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays        
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount  of   Committee    Amount  of
                                                               allocation      bill      allocation      bill   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations                                                    
 to its subcommittees of amounts in the First Concurrent                                                        
 Resolution for 1998: Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and                                                              
 Independent Agencies:                                                                                          
    Defense discretionary...................................          129          128          128      \1\ 128
    Nondefense discretionary................................       60,065       69,263       76,154       79,561
    Violent crime reduction fund............................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Mandatory...............................................       21,332       21,543       20,061       19,711
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:                                                       
    1998....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........   \2\ 51,988
    1999....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        8,815
    2000....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        2,515
    2001....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        1,140
    2002 and future years...................................  ...........  ...........  ...........          659
Financial assistance to State and local governments for 1998                                                    
 in bill....................................................           NA       24,990           NA        4,841
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                                                          
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                                                          
                                                                                                                
NA: Not applicable.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                
Note.--Consistent with the funding recommended in the bill for section 8 housing assistance and in accordance   
  with section 203 of H. Con. Res. 84, the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1998, the        
  Committee anticipates that the Budget Committee will file a revised section 602(a) allocation for the         
  Committee on Appropriations reflecting an upward adjustment of $9,200,000,000 in budget authority and         
  $3,407,000,000 in outlays.                                                                                    


  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL 
                                                                        YEAR 1998                                                                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                      Senate Committee recommendation   
                                                                                                   Committee              compared with (+ or -)        
                        Item                          1997 appropriation    Budget estimate     recommendation   ---------------------------------------
                                                                                                                  1997 appropriation    Budget estimate 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                        
                       TITLE I                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                        
          Veterans Benefits Administration                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                        
Compensation and pensions...........................    $18,671,259,000     $19,932,997,000     $19,932,997,000     +$1,261,738,000   ..................
    Supplemental (Public Law 105-18)................        928,000,000   ..................  ..................       -928,000,000   ..................
Readjustment benefits...............................      1,377,000,000       1,366,000,000       1,366,000,000         -11,000,000   ..................
Veterans insurance and indemnities..................         38,970,000          51,360,000          51,360,000         +12,390,000   ..................
Veterans housing benefit program fund program                                                                                                           
 account (indefinite)...............................  ..................        192,447,000         192,447,000        +192,447,000   ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................  ..................           (300,000)           (300,000)          (+300,000)  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................  ..................        160,437,000         160,437,000        +160,437,000   ..................
Guaranty and indemnity program account (indefinite).        158,643,000   ..................  ..................       -158,643,000   ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................        105,226,000   ..................  ..................       -105,226,000   ..................
Loan guaranty program account (indefinite)..........         14,091,000   ..................  ..................        -14,091,000   ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................         33,810,000   ..................  ..................        -33,810,000   ..................
Direct loan program account (indefinite)............             30,000   ..................  ..................            -30,000   ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................           (300,000)  ..................  ..................          (-300,000)  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................             80,000   ..................  ..................            -80,000   ..................
Education loan fund program account.................              1,000               1,000               1,000   ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................             (3,000)             (3,000)             (3,000)  ..................  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................            195,000             200,000             200,000              +5,000   ..................
Vocational rehabilitation loans program account.....             49,000              44,000              44,000              -5,000   ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................         (2,822,000)         (2,278,000)         (2,278,000)          (-544,000)  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................            377,000             388,000             388,000             +11,000   ..................
Native American Veteran Housing Loan Program Account            205,000             515,000             515,000            +310,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Veterans Benefits Administration.......     21,327,936,000      21,704,389,000      21,704,389,000        +376,453,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
           Veterans Health Administration                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                        
Medical care........................................     16,313,447,000      16,958,846,000      16,476,840,000        +163,393,000       -$482,006,000 
    Delayed equipment obligation....................        700,000,000   ..................        550,000,000        -150,000,000        +550,000,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................................     17,013,447,000      16,958,846,000      17,026,840,000         +13,393,000         +67,994,000 
Medical care cost recovery collections:                                                                                                                 
    Offsetting receipts.............................  ..................       -604,000,000        -604,000,000        -604,000,000   ..................
    Appropriations (indefinite).....................  ..................        604,000,000         604,000,000        +604,000,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total available...............................    (17,013,447,000)    (17,562,846,000)    (17,630,840,000)      (+617,393,000)       (+67,994,000)
Medical and prosthetic research.....................        262,000,000         234,374,000         267,000,000          +5,000,000         +32,626,000 
Medical administration and miscellaneous operating                                                                                                      
 expenses...........................................         61,207,000          60,160,000          60,160,000          -1,047,000   ..................
General Post Fund, National Homes:                                                                                                                      
    Loan program account (by transfer)..............             (7,000)             (7,000)             (7,000)  ..................  ..................
    Administrative expenses (by transfer)...........            (54,000)            (54,000)            (54,000)  ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................            (70,000)            (70,000)            (70,000)  ..................  ..................
General post fund (transfer out)....................           (-61,000)           (-61,000)           (-61,000)  ..................  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Veterans Health Administration.........     17,336,654,000      17,253,380,000      17,354,000,000         +17,346,000        +100,620,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
             Departmental Administration                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                        
General operating expenses..........................        827,584,000         846,385,000         786,385,000         -41,199,000         -60,000,000 
    Offsetting receipts.............................        (32,000,000)        (36,000,000)        (36,000,000)        (+4,000,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Program Level..........................       (859,584,000)       (882,385,000)       (822,385,000)       (-37,199,000)       (-60,000,000)
National Cemetery System............................         76,864,000          84,183,000          84,183,000          +7,319,000   ..................
Office of Inspector General.........................         30,900,000          31,013,000          31,013,000            +113,000   ..................
Construction, major projects........................        250,858,000          79,500,000          92,800,000        -158,058,000         +13,300,000 
Construction, minor projects........................        175,000,000         166,300,000         166,300,000          -8,700,000   ..................
Parking revolving fund..............................         12,300,000   ..................  ..................        -12,300,000   ..................
Grants for construction of State extended care                                                                                                          
 facilities.........................................         47,397,000          41,000,000          80,000,000         +32,603,000         +39,000,000 
Grants for the construction of State veterans                                                                                                           
 cemeteries.........................................          1,000,000          10,000,000          10,000,000          +9,000,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental Administration............      1,421,903,000       1,258,381,000       1,250,681,000        -171,222,000          -7,700,000 
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of Veterans Affairs     40,086,493,000      40,216,150,000      40,309,070,000        +222,577,000         +92,920,000 
              Appropriations........................    (40,086,493,000)    (40,216,150,000)    (40,309,070,000)      (+222,577,000)       (+92,920,000)
              Rescissions...........................  ..................  ..................  ..................  ..................  ..................
          (By transfer).............................            (61,000)            (61,000)            (61,000)  ..................  ..................
          (Limitation on direct loans)..............         (3,195,000)         (2,651,000)         (2,651,000)          (-544,000)  ..................
                                                     ===================================================================================================
          Consisting of:                                                                                                                                
              Mandatory.............................    (21,187,993,000)    (21,542,804,000)    (21,542,804,000)      (+354,811,000)  ..................
              Discretionary.........................    (18,898,500,000)    (18,673,346,000)    (18,766,266,000)      (-132,234,000)       (+92,920,000)
                                                                                                                                                        
                      TITLE II                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                        
     DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                        
              Selected Housing Programs                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                        
Housing Certificate Fund............................  ..................     10,676,000,000      10,693,000,000     +10,693,000,000         +17,000,000 
    Expiring section 8 contracts....................  ..................     (9,232,000,000)     (9,200,000,000)    (+9,200,000,000)       (-32,000,000)
    Section 8 amendments............................  ..................       (850,000,000)     (1,150,000,000)    (+1,150,000,000)      (+300,000,000)
    Section 8 relocation assistance.................  ..................       (594,000,000)       (343,000,000)      (+343,000,000)      (-251,000,000)
Prevention of resident displacement.................      4,640,000,000   ..................  ..................     -4,640,000,000   ..................
        Expiring section 8 contracts................     (3,600,000,000)  ..................  ..................    (-3,600,000,000)  ..................
        Section 8 amendments........................       (850,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-850,000,000)  ..................
        Section 8 relocation assistance.............       (190,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-190,000,000)  ..................
    Transfer from recaptures........................        (50,000,000)  ..................  ..................       (-50,000,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................................     (4,690,000,000)    (10,676,000,000)    (10,693,000,000)    (+6,003,000,000)       (+17,000,000)
Annual contributions (rescission)...................  ..................       -855,000,000   ..................  ..................       +855,000,000 
    Rescission (Public Law 105-18)..................     -3,650,000,000   ..................  ..................     +3,650,000,000   ..................
Public housing capital fund.........................  ..................      2,500,000,000       2,500,000,000      +2,500,000,000   ..................
Public housing operating fund.......................  ..................      2,900,000,000       2,900,000,000      +2,900,000,000   ..................
Preserving existing housing investment..............      5,750,000,000   ..................  ..................     -5,750,000,000   ..................
        Public housing operating subsidies..........     (2,900,000,000)  ..................  ..................    (-2,900,000,000)  ..................
        Public housing modernization................     (2,500,000,000)  ..................  ..................    (-2,500,000,000)  ..................
        Preservation................................       (350,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-350,000,000)  ..................
    Rescission of recaptures........................       -150,000,000   ..................  ..................       +150,000,000   ..................
    Prepayment authority............................          2,000,000   ..................  ..................         -2,000,000   ..................
    Supplemental (Public Law 105-18)................          3,500,000   ..................  ..................         -3,500,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal......................................     (5,605,500,000)     (5,400,000,000)     (5,400,000,000)      (-205,500,000)  ..................
Drug elimination grants for low-income housing......        290,000,000         290,000,000         290,000,000   ..................  ..................
Revitalization of severely distressed public housing                                                                                                    
 (HOPE VI)..........................................        550,000,000         524,000,000         550,000,000   ..................        +26,000,000 
Homeownership and opportunity for people everywhere                                                                                                     
 grants (HOPE grants) (transfer out) (Public Law 105-                                                                                                   
 18)................................................       (-30,200,000)  ..................  ..................       (+30,200,000)  ..................
Native American housing block grant.................  ..................        485,000,000         485,000,000        +485,000,000   ..................
Indian housing loan guarantee fund program account..          3,000,000           3,000,000           6,000,000          +3,000,000          +3,000,000 
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)................        (36,900,000)        (36,900,000)        (73,800,000)       (+36,900,000)       (+36,900,000)
Development of additional new subsidized housing....      1,039,000,000   ..................  ..................     -1,039,000,000   ..................
    Housing for the elderly.........................       (645,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-645,000,000)  ..................
    Housing for the disabled........................       (194,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-194,000,000)  ..................
    Indian housing development......................       (200,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-200,000,000)  ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
   Capacity Building for Community Development and                                                                                                      
                 Affordable Housing                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                        
National community development initiative (by                                                                                                           
 transfer)..........................................        (30,200,000)  ..................  ..................       (-30,200,000)  ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
         Community Planning and Development                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                                        
Housing opportunities for persons with AIDS.........        171,000,000         204,000,000         204,000,000         +33,000,000   ..................
    Transfer from recaptures........................        (25,000,000)  ..................  ..................       (-25,000,000)  ..................
Community development block grants..................      4,600,000,000       4,600,000,000       4,600,000,000   ..................  ..................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105-18)....        250,000,000   ..................  ..................       -250,000,000   ..................
    Emergency appropriations, fiscal year 1998                                                                                                          
     (Public Law 105-18)............................        250,000,000   ..................  ..................       -250,000,000   ..................
Section 108 loan guarantees:                                                                                                                            
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)................     (1,500,000,000)     (1,261,000,000)     (1,261,000,000)      (-239,000,000)  ..................
    Credit subsidy..................................         31,750,000          29,000,000          29,000,000          -2,750,000   ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................            675,000           1,000,000           1,000,000            +325,000   ..................
Brownfields redevelopment...........................  ..................         25,000,000   ..................  ..................        -25,000,000 
HOME investment partnerships program................      1,400,000,000       1,309,000,000       1,400,000,000   ..................        +91,000,000 
Supportive housing program (rescission).............  ..................         -6,000,000          -6,000,000          -6,000,000   ..................
Shelter plus care (rescission)......................  ..................         -4,000,000          -4,000,000          -4,000,000   ..................
Homeless assistance grants..........................        823,000,000         823,000,000         823,000,000   ..................  ..................
Youthbuild..........................................  ..................         30,000,000   ..................  ..................        -30,000,000 
Housing counseling assistance.......................  ..................         23,000,000   ..................  ..................        -23,000,000 
Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities........  ..................        100,000,000   ..................  ..................       -100,000,000 
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Total, Selected housing programs (net)........     16,003,925,000      23,657,000,000      24,471,000,000      +8,467,075,000        +814,000,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
                  Housing Programs                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                        
Housing for special populations.....................  ..................        474,000,000         839,000,000        +839,000,000        +365,000,000 
    Housing for the elderly.........................  ..................       (300,000,000)       (645,000,000)      (+645,000,000)      (+345,000,000)
    Housing for the disabled........................  ..................       (174,000,000)       (194,000,000)      (+194,000,000)       (+20,000,000)
Rental housing assistance:                                                                                                                              
    Rescission of budget authority, indefinite......  ..................       -125,000,000        -125,000,000        -125,000,000   ..................
    (Limitation on annual contract authority,                                                                                                           
     indefinite)....................................        (-2,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (+2,000,000)  ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
           Federal Housing Administration                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                        
FHA--Mutual mortgage insurance program account:                                                                                                         
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)................   (110,000,000,000)   (110,000,000,000)   (110,000,000,000)  ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................       (200,000,000)       (200,000,000)       (200,000,000)  ..................  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................        350,595,000         333,421,000         333,421,000         -17,174,000   ..................
    Offsetting receipts.............................       -350,595,000        -333,421,000        -333,421,000         +17,174,000   ..................
FHA--General and special risk program account:                                                                                                          
    Program costs...................................         85,000,000          81,000,000          81,000,000          -4,000,000   ..................
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)................    (17,400,000,000)    (17,400,000,000)    (17,400,000,000)  ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................       (120,000,000)       (120,000,000)       (120,000,000)  ..................  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................        207,470,000         222,305,000         222,305,000         +14,835,000   ..................
    Subsidy--multifamily............................        -18,000,000         -18,000,000         -18,000,000   ..................  ..................
    Subsidy--single family..........................        -64,000,000         -64,000,000         -64,000,000   ..................  ..................
    Subsidy--Title I................................        -25,000,000         -25,000,000         -25,000,000   ..................  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Housing Administration.........        185,470,000         196,305,000         196,305,000         +10,835,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
      Government National Mortgage Association                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                        
Guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan                                                                                                           
 guarantee program account:                                                                                                                             
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)................   (110,000,000,000)   (130,000,000,000)   (130,000,000,000)   (+20,000,000,000)  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................          9,383,000           9,383,000           9,383,000   ..................  ..................
    Offsetting receipts.............................       -218,000,000        -204,000,000        -204,000,000         +14,000,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
           Policy Development and Research                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                        
Research and technology.............................         34,000,000          39,000,000          34,000,000   ..................         -5,000,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
         Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                                        
Fair housing activities.............................         30,000,000          39,000,000          30,000,000   ..................         -9,000,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
            Management and Administration                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................        420,000,000         451,000,000         400,000,000         -20,000,000         -51,000,000 
    (By transfer, limitation on FHA corporate funds)       (546,782,000)       (544,443,000)       (544,443,000)        (-2,339,000)  ..................
    (By transfer, GNMA).............................         (9,383,000)         (9,383,000)         (9,383,000)  ..................  ..................
    (By transfer, Community Planning and                                                                                                                
     Development)...................................           (675,000)         (1,000,000)         (1,000,000)          (+325,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Salaries and expenses..................       (976,840,000)     (1,005,826,000)       (954,826,000)       (-22,014,000)       (-51,000,000)
Office of Inspector General.........................         36,567,000          36,567,000          36,567,000   ..................  ..................
    (By transfer, limitation on FHA corporate funds)        (11,283,000)        (11,283,000)        (16,283,000)        (+5,000,000)        (+5,000,000)
    (By transfer from Drug Elimination Grants)......         (5,000,000)        (10,000,000)         (5,000,000)  ..................        (-5,000,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Inspector General............        (52,850,000)        (57,850,000)        (57,850,000)        (+5,000,000)  ..................
Office of federal housing enterprise oversight......         15,500,000          16,312,000          15,500,000   ..................           -812,000 
    Offsetting receipts.............................        -15,500,000         -16,312,000         -15,500,000   ..................           +812,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
              Administrative Provisions                                                                                                                 
Six month reissue delay.............................  ..................  ..................  ..................  ..................  ..................
Mark to market legislation..........................  ..................  ..................       -317,000,000        -317,000,000        -317,000,000 
Sec. 203--FHA Assignment Reform, 1997...............       -128,000,000   ..................  ..................       +128,000,000   ..................
Sec. 204--Multifamily property disposition--FHA fund        -80,000,000   ..................  ..................        +80,000,000   ..................
Sec. 210--financing adjustment......................            464,442   ..................  ..................           -464,442   ..................
Sec. 212--demonstration.............................         10,000,000   ..................  ..................        -10,000,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, administrative provisions..............       -197,535,558   ..................       -317,000,000        -119,464,442        -317,000,000 
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department of Housing and                                                                                                        
       Urban Development (net)......................     16,303,809,442      24,573,255,000      25,370,255,000      +9,066,445,558        +797,000,000 
              Appropriations........................    (19,453,809,442)    (25,563,255,000)    (25,505,255,000)    (+6,051,445,558)       (-58,000,000)
              Rescissions...........................    (-3,650,000,000)      (-990,000,000)      (-135,000,000)    (+3,515,000,000)      (+855,000,000)
              Emergency appropriations..............       (250,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-250,000,000)  ..................
              Emergency appropriations, fiscal year                                                                                                     
               1998.................................       (250,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-250,000,000)  ..................
          (Limitation on annual contract authority,                                                                                                     
           indefinite)..............................        (-2,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (+2,000,000)  ..................
          (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..........   (238,900,000,000)   (258,661,000,000)   (258,661,000,000)   (+19,761,000,000)  ..................
          (Limitation on corporate funds)...........       (573,123,000)       (576,109,000)       (576,109,000)        (+2,986,000)  ..................
                                                     ===================================================================================================
                      TITLE III                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                        
                INDEPENDENT AGENCIES                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                        
        American Battle Monuments Commission                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................         22,265,000          23,897,000          23,897,000          +1,632,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
   Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigations Board                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................  ..................  ..................          4,000,000          +4,000,000          +4,000,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
             Department of the Treasury                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                        
    Community Development Financial Institutions                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                        
Community development financial institutions fund                                                                                                       
 program account....................................         50,000,000         125,000,000   ..................        -50,000,000        -125,000,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
         Consumer Product Safety Commission                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................         42,500,000          45,000,000          45,000,000          +2,500,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
   Corporation for National and Community Service                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                        
National and community service programs operating                                                                                                       
 expenses...........................................        400,500,000         546,500,000         400,500,000   ..................       -146,000,000 
Office of Inspector General.........................          2,000,000           2,500,000           3,000,000          +1,000,000            +500,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................................        402,500,000         549,000,000         403,500,000          +1,000,000        -145,500,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
              Court of Veterans Appeals                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................          9,229,000           9,380,000           9,320,000             +91,000             -60,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
            Department of Defense--Civil                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                        
              Cemeterial Expenses, Army                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................         11,600,000          11,815,000          11,815,000            +215,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
           Environmental Protection Agency                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                        
Science and Technology..............................        552,000,000         614,269,400         600,000,000         +48,000,000         -14,269,400 
    Transfer from Hazardous Substance Superfund.....         35,000,000          39,755,900          35,000,000   ..................         -4,755,900 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Science and Technology..............        587,000,000         654,025,300         635,000,000         +48,000,000         -19,025,300 
Environmental Programs and Management...............      1,752,221,000       1,887,590,900       1,801,000,000         +48,779,000         -86,590,900 
Office of Inspector General.........................         28,500,000          28,500,000          28,500,000   ..................  ..................
    Transfer from Hazardous Substance Superfund.....         11,000,000          11,641,300          11,641,000            +641,000                -300 
    Transfer from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks.            577,000   ..................  ..................           -577,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, OIG.................................         40,077,000          40,141,300          40,141,000             +64,000                -300 
Buildings and facilities............................         87,220,000         141,420,000          19,420,000         -67,800,000        -122,000,000 
Hazardous Substance Superfund.......................      1,294,245,000       2,094,245,000       1,300,000,000          +5,755,000        -794,245,000 
    Delay of obligation.............................        100,000,000   ..................        100,000,000   ..................       +100,000,000 
    Transfer to Office of Inspector General.........        -11,000,000         -11,641,300         -11,641,000            -641,000                +300 
    Transfer to Science and Technology..............        -35,000,000         -39,755,900         -35,000,000   ..................         +4,755,900 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Hazardous Substance Superfund.......      1,348,245,000       2,042,847,800       1,353,359,000          +5,114,000        -689,488,800 
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund.........         60,000,000          71,210,700          65,000,000          +5,000,000          -6,210,700 
    Transfer to Office of Inspector General.........           -577,000   ..................  ..................           +577,000   ..................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses).........         (7,000,000)  ..................         (7,500,000)          (+500,000)        (+7,500,000)
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, LUST................................         59,423,000          71,210,700          65,000,000          +5,577,000          -6,210,700 
Oil spill response..................................         15,000,000          15,000,000          15,000,000   ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses).........         (8,000,000)  ..................         (8,500,000)          (+500,000)        (+8,500,000)
State and Tribal Assistance Grants..................      2,236,000,000       2,078,000,000       2,322,000,000         +86,000,000        +244,000,000 
    Categorical grants..............................        674,207,000         715,257,000         725,000,000         +50,793,000          +9,743,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, STAG................................      2,910,207,000       2,793,257,000       3,047,000,000        +136,793,000        +253,743,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, EPA....................................      6,799,393,000       7,645,493,000       6,975,920,000        +176,527,000        -669,573,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
          Executive Office of the President                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                                        
Office of Science and Technology Policy.............          4,932,000           4,932,000           4,932,000   ..................  ..................
Council on Environmental Quality and Office of                                                                                                          
 Environmental Quality..............................          2,436,000           3,020,000           2,436,000   ..................           -584,000 
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................................          7,368,000           7,952,000           7,368,000   ..................           -584,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
        Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                                        
Office of Inspector General (transfer)..............  ..................        (34,365,000)        (34,265,000)       (+34,265,000)          (-100,000)
                                                                                                                                                        
         Federal Emergency Management Agency                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                        
Disaster relief.....................................      1,320,000,000         320,000,000         320,000,000      -1,000,000,000   ..................
    Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105-18)....      3,300,000,000   ..................  ..................     -3,300,000,000   ..................
    Emergency approp (transfer out) (Public Law 105-                                                                                                    
     18)............................................       (-20,000,000)  ..................  ..................       (+20,000,000)  ..................
Disaster assistance direct loan program account:                                                                                                        
    State share loan................................          1,385,000           1,495,000           1,495,000            +110,000   ..................
        (Limitation on direct loans)................        (25,000,000)        (25,000,000)        (25,000,000)  ..................  ..................
    Administrative expenses.........................            548,000             341,000             341,000            -207,000   ..................
    Community disaster loans (by transfer)                                                                                                              
     (emergency)....................................        (20,000,000)  ..................  ..................       (-20,000,000)  ..................
Salaries and expenses...............................        170,500,000         171,773,000         171,773,000          +1,273,000   ..................
Office of Inspector General.........................          4,673,000           4,803,000           4,803,000            +130,000   ..................
Emergency management planning and assistance........        218,701,000         202,146,000         202,146,000         -16,555,000   ..................
Emergency food and shelter program..................        100,000,000         100,000,000         100,000,000   ..................  ..................
National Flood Insurance Fund (limitation on                                                                                                            
 administrative expenses):                                                                                                                              
    Salaries and expenses...........................        (20,981,000)        (21,610,000)        (21,610,000)          (+629,000)  ..................
    Flood mitigation................................        (78,464,000)        (78,464,000)        (78,464,000)  ..................  ..................
Working capital fund................................        (16,816,000)  ..................  ..................       (-16,816,000)  ..................
Administrative provision: REP savings...............        -12,251,000         -12,000,000         -12,000,000            +251,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency....      5,103,556,000         788,558,000         788,558,000      -4,314,998,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
           General Services Administration                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                        
Consumer Information Center Fund....................          2,260,000           2,119,000           2,419,000            +159,000            +300,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
       Department of Health and Human Services                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                        
Office of Consumer Affairs..........................          1,500,000           1,800,000   ..................         -1,500,000          -1,800,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                        
Human space flight..................................      5,362,900,000       5,326,500,000       5,326,500,000         -36,400,000   ..................
Science, aeronautics and technology.................      5,767,100,000       5,642,000,000       5,642,000,000        -125,100,000   ..................
Mission support.....................................      2,562,200,000       2,513,200,000       2,513,200,000         -49,000,000   ..................
Office of Inspector General.........................         17,000,000          18,300,000          18,300,000          +1,300,000   ..................
Administrative provision: Transfer authority........       (177,000,000)  ..................  ..................      (-177,000,000)  ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NASA...................................     13,709,200,000      13,500,000,000      13,500,000,000        -209,200,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
        National Credit Union Administration                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                        
Central liquidity facility:                                                                                                                             
    (Limitation on direct loans)....................       (600,000,000)       (600,000,000)       (600,000,000)  ..................  ..................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses,                                                                                                             
     corporate funds)...............................           (560,000)           (203,000)           (203,000)          (-357,000)  ..................
    Revolving loan program..........................          1,000,000   ..................  ..................         -1,000,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
             National Science Foundation                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                        
Research and related activities.....................      2,432,000,000       2,514,700,000       2,524,700,000         +92,700,000         +10,000,000 
Major research equipment............................         80,000,000          85,000,000          85,000,000          +5,000,000   ..................
Education and human resources.......................        619,000,000         625,500,000         625,500,000          +6,500,000   ..................
Salaries and expenses...............................        134,310,000         136,950,000         136,950,000          +2,640,000   ..................
Office of Inspector General.........................          4,690,000           4,850,000           4,850,000            +160,000   ..................
                                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NSF....................................      3,270,000,000       3,367,000,000       3,377,000,000        +107,000,000         +10,000,000 
                                                                                                                                                        
        Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                                        
Payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation         49,900,000          50,000,000          50,000,000            +100,000   ..................
                                                                                                                                                        
              Selective Service System                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                        
Salaries and expenses...............................         22,930,000          23,919,000          23,413,000            +483,000            -506,000 
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Total, title III, Independent agencies........     29,505,201,000      26,150,933,000      25,222,210,000      -4,282,991,000        -928,723,000 
          (Limitation on administrative expenses)...       (114,445,000)       (100,074,000)       (116,074,000)        (+1,629,000)       (+16,000,000)
          (Limitation on direct loans)..............       (625,000,000)       (625,000,000)       (625,000,000)  ..................  ..................
          (Limitation on corporate funds)...........           (560,000)           (203,000)           (203,000)          (-357,000)  ..................
                                                     ===================================================================================================
      Grand total (net).............................     85,895,503,442      90,940,338,000      90,901,535,000      +5,006,031,558         -38,803,000 
              Appropriations........................    (85,745,503,442)    (91,930,338,000)    (91,036,535,000)    (+5,291,031,558)      (-893,803,000)
              Rescissions...........................    (-3,650,000,000)      (-990,000,000)      (-135,000,000)    (+3,515,000,000)      (+855,000,000)
              Emergency appropriations (net)........     (3,550,000,000)  ..................  ..................    (-3,550,000,000)  ..................
          (By transfer).............................    (82,170,564,442)    (90,974,764,000)    (90,935,861,000)    (+8,765,296,558)       (-38,903,000)
          (Limitation on administrative expenses)...       (114,445,000)       (100,074,000)       (116,074,000)        (+1,629,000)       (+16,000,000)
          (Limitation on annual contract authority,                                                                                                     
           indefinite)..............................        (-2,000,000)  ..................  ..................        (+2,000,000)  ..................
          (Limitation on direct loans)..............       (985,095,000)       (984,551,000)     (1,021,451,000)       (+36,356,000)       (+36,900,000)
          (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..........   (238,900,000,000)   (258,661,000,000)   (258,661,000,000)   (+19,761,000,000)  ..................
          (Limitation on corporate funds)...........       (573,683,000)       (576,312,000)       (576,312,000)        (+2,629,000)  ..................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



